POSTED BY ARNOLD HAMILTON
Who would have guessed it?
The House’s mad scientist, Rep. Mike Reynolds, was right.
All session, the south Oklahoma City Republican warned that a tiny cabal would end up crafting the state budget – leaving the vast majority of lawmakers with a single, up or down vote on a nearly $7 billion spending blueprint.
No input. No give and take. It would be take it or leave it – period.
That’s what happened.
Only 54 hours after the package was first made public, a sharply-divided state House voted Wednesday to send the general appropriations bill to the governor, completing a warp-speed legislative “review” of the closed-door agreement.
The Senate went first – and quietly. On Tuesday, it voted in lockstep – all 24 Democrats and all 24 Republicans – to endorse the package.
Some House Democrats weren’t so compliant. They raised hell for three hours Wednesday, knowing all the while it was a fait accompli. The final vote was 84-16.
Even Reynolds rolled over and voted for it. He’s become such a pariah among his GOP colleagues he didn’t even bother to join them in caucus just moments before the bill was taken up.
It was a brilliant Republican budget strategy: Roll everything into one measure. Dare unhappy Democrats to vote against a package that included a sorely-needed $60 million supplemental appropriation for education, as well as pay raises for teachers, state employees and highway patrol troopers.
They all but taunted the Democrats during debate: House Appropriations Committee Chairman Chris Benge, R-Tulsa, and Rep. John Wright, R-Broken Arrow, offered thinly-veiled threats that “no” votes would be used to browbeat offending Democrats at election time.
Of course, Benge insisted he was doing no such thing: “I don’t put this in the form of a political threat.” He also said with a straight face – honest – that “this is the most open process I’ve ever been a part of.”
It’s fair to say this is not the first time in Oklahoma legislative history that the majority party rolled over its minority counterparts on a budget package [which, of course, means it was Democrats doing the “rolling” since they controlled the Legislature most of the 20th Century].
It’s also fair to point out that new House Speaker Lance Cargill launched this session promising that – unlike his hard-headed predecessor, Todd Hiett – both sides would at least be heard.
With the budget hijinks, he missed a golden opportunity to usher in a new day. He ended up with hard-feelings reminiscent of the short-lived Hiett regime. Was it hubris? Was it an overpowering desire to pay back Democrats for past disrespect? Was it a misplayed hand that will come back to haunt?
Cargill no doubt will argue that Democratic voices were at the table. And indeed they were. But they were voices from the Senate, where the 24-24 tie resulted in a power-sharing agreement this session.
The 44 House Democrats – representing about 1.5 million Oklahomans – were shut out.
Of course, so were most House Republicans.
When an emotional Rep. Jerry McPeak, D-Warner, asked for a show of hands from those who felt they had real input in the process, only about a half-dozen were raised – all Republicans.
“In my three years,” McPeak said, “this is by far the most closed I’ve seen it.” And “unfortunately,” he added, “the most adversarial I’ve seen it.”
Most Democrats who rose to speak against the package argued it would be more open and more transparent to separate the supplemental – or emergency – appropriations into separate bills, so lawmakers and the public could know more precisely how the money was being spent.
“At the outset we were promised open government – a brand new day,” said Rep. Al Lindley, D-Oklahoma City. “Either we were misinformed. We were not told the truth. I misinterpreted what was said. Or I missed the second memo.”
Rep. Mike Shelton, D-Oklahoma City, sarcastically welcomed freshman lawmakers to the Oklahoma House, where “stuff [like the nearly $7 billion budget] just kind of falls out of the sky and lands on your desk.”
“It’s supposed to be open government,” he said, “but back door deals were made once again. It’s disappointing.”
There were two key votes on the budget package.
The first – on the Senate amendment that encompassed the spending blueprint – passed 60-40. All 40 “no” votes were Democrats. Four Democrats joined lock-step Republicans in voting for it – Rep. Wallace Collins of Norman, Rep. Scott Inman of Del City, Rep. Eric Proctor of Tulsa and Rep. Purcy Walker of Elk City.
The second – final passage of the budget – was approved 84-16. The warnings about how the vote could be “interpreted” during the next campaign were clearly heeded, as 24 Democrats peeled off and voted for it.
The 16 who opposed the closed-door process to the bitter end were: Rep. Scott BigHorse of Pawhuska, Rep. Ed Cannaday of Whitefield, Rep. Rebecca Hamilton of Oklahoma City, Rep. Ryan Kiesel of Seminole, Rep. Al Lindley of Oklahoma City, Rep. Jeannie McDaniel of Tulsa, Rep. Ryan McMullen of Burns Flat, Rep. Jerry McPeak of Warner, Rep. Danny Morgan of Prague, Rep. Richard Morrissette of Oklahoma City, Rep. Bill Nations of Norman, Rep. Anastasia Pittman of Oklahoma City, Rep. Brian Renegar of Hartshorne, Rep. Mike Shelton of Oklahoma City, Rep. Jabar Shumate of Tulsa and Rep. Dale Turner of Holdenville.
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
Thursday, March 15, 2007
Pitiful Priorities
POSTED BY ARNOLD HAMILTON
Your state representatives worked extra long hours this week. Three days they started at 9 a.m. and didn’t wrap up the rhetorical festivities until the supper hour.
They engaged in extended, spirited debate before the Republican majority rammed through bills that would:
1] Expand the state’s college scholarship program to home-school graduates;
2] Give lawmakers an option other state employees don’t have [to opt out of the state’s health insurance plan]; and
3] Tighten restrictions on emergency room abortions [even though the author herself conceded there is no evidence current law is being violated].
What lawmakers couldn’t find time to do was resolve the $58 million-$75 million budget crisis paralyzing the state’s public schools, even though they promised nine months ago to fix the problem.
Teachers and staff are being laid off. Class sizes are being increased. Programs are being cut. School boards are tabling next year’s hiring decisions.
All because state lawmakers mandated, but didn’t fully fund, a $3,000 teacher pay raise and related costs last year. They called it an oversight and pledged to cough up the money when the 2007 session opened in February. So far, nothing.
School superintendents are so desperate to keep their districts afloat that more than 100 descended on the state Capitol to plead for the promised money. But they couldn’t get an audience with Republican House Speaker Lance Cargill, whose calendar was booked. Think the State Chamber of Commerce would be treated similarly?
What the supes who filled much of the House gallery got was a front-row seat at the Theater of Misplaced Priorities: They watched lawmakers rasslin’ over the latest incumbent protection act – a scheme that would have prevented would-be sheriff’s candidates from even filing for office unless they already had completed the state’s 375-hour law enforcement training program [at a cost of more than $1,000].
State Rep. Jerry McPeak, D-Warner, tried to persuade GOP leaders to allow a vote on his Honesty in Funding Education Act [HB1935], which would have covered the un-funded mandates. But he was shot down.
[Cargill said Thursday he believes House and Senate negotiators are very close to striking a bi-partisan budget deal that will include a fix for the school funding crisis.]
Meanwhile, school superintendents and school boards, students and patrons worry whether top-notch teachers – afraid they won’t be rehired next year because of budget woes – will accept contract offers from other states.
Educators are left to pondering something else: The House didn’t make time to debate McPeak’s bill, but on Thursday, it did manage a vote – 60-39, mostly along party lines – to speed up $60 million in income tax cuts.
“That amount alone would make our schools whole,” lamented House Minority Leader Danny Morgan, D-Prague.
Only one Republican voted against the tax cuts: Stillwater Rep. Terry Ingmire, who will be leaving office because of term limits after next year.
Five Democrats broke with their caucus to support the tax cuts: Rep. Terry Harrison of McAlester; Rep. Scott Inman of Del City; and Rep. Lucky Lamons, Rep. Eric Proctor and Rep. Jabar Shumate, all of Tulsa.
Priorities, loud and clear.
Your state representatives worked extra long hours this week. Three days they started at 9 a.m. and didn’t wrap up the rhetorical festivities until the supper hour.
They engaged in extended, spirited debate before the Republican majority rammed through bills that would:
1] Expand the state’s college scholarship program to home-school graduates;
2] Give lawmakers an option other state employees don’t have [to opt out of the state’s health insurance plan]; and
3] Tighten restrictions on emergency room abortions [even though the author herself conceded there is no evidence current law is being violated].
What lawmakers couldn’t find time to do was resolve the $58 million-$75 million budget crisis paralyzing the state’s public schools, even though they promised nine months ago to fix the problem.
Teachers and staff are being laid off. Class sizes are being increased. Programs are being cut. School boards are tabling next year’s hiring decisions.
All because state lawmakers mandated, but didn’t fully fund, a $3,000 teacher pay raise and related costs last year. They called it an oversight and pledged to cough up the money when the 2007 session opened in February. So far, nothing.
School superintendents are so desperate to keep their districts afloat that more than 100 descended on the state Capitol to plead for the promised money. But they couldn’t get an audience with Republican House Speaker Lance Cargill, whose calendar was booked. Think the State Chamber of Commerce would be treated similarly?
What the supes who filled much of the House gallery got was a front-row seat at the Theater of Misplaced Priorities: They watched lawmakers rasslin’ over the latest incumbent protection act – a scheme that would have prevented would-be sheriff’s candidates from even filing for office unless they already had completed the state’s 375-hour law enforcement training program [at a cost of more than $1,000].
State Rep. Jerry McPeak, D-Warner, tried to persuade GOP leaders to allow a vote on his Honesty in Funding Education Act [HB1935], which would have covered the un-funded mandates. But he was shot down.
[Cargill said Thursday he believes House and Senate negotiators are very close to striking a bi-partisan budget deal that will include a fix for the school funding crisis.]
Meanwhile, school superintendents and school boards, students and patrons worry whether top-notch teachers – afraid they won’t be rehired next year because of budget woes – will accept contract offers from other states.
Educators are left to pondering something else: The House didn’t make time to debate McPeak’s bill, but on Thursday, it did manage a vote – 60-39, mostly along party lines – to speed up $60 million in income tax cuts.
“That amount alone would make our schools whole,” lamented House Minority Leader Danny Morgan, D-Prague.
Only one Republican voted against the tax cuts: Stillwater Rep. Terry Ingmire, who will be leaving office because of term limits after next year.
Five Democrats broke with their caucus to support the tax cuts: Rep. Terry Harrison of McAlester; Rep. Scott Inman of Del City; and Rep. Lucky Lamons, Rep. Eric Proctor and Rep. Jabar Shumate, all of Tulsa.
Priorities, loud and clear.
Thursday, March 8, 2007
Immigration Reform Folly
POSTED BY ARNOLD HAMILTON
The state House deepened the red in Oklahoma’s neck on Wednesday.
Only nine lawmakers had the gumption to oppose a so-called immigration reform measure so breathtakingly Draconian that it surely will spark a wildfire of legal challenges.
Unless cooler heads prevail in the Senate or Gov. Brad Henry suddenly locates his veto pen, the Lege is on the verge of transforming state and local law officers into full-time immigration enforcement agents.
That ought to be a real comfort to those with a Latino surname or accent -- or those who aren't pearly white.
The commercial television stations rarely show up at the Capitol anymore, what with the demand for wall-to-wall coverage of grass fires, drive-by shootings and spring showers.
When they do make an appearance – as they did Wednesday – the Legislature’s publicity hounds aren’t about to disappoint.
For about 100 minutes, Rep after Rep rose to somberly lament the federal government’s inaction on what they portrayed as a grave matter of national security in this post-9/11 era.
“The President of the United States has been derelict in his duties,” said state Rep. Scott Inman, D-Del City. “So has the Congress.”
The majority view: The dangers posed by 83,000 improperly documented immigrants in Oklahoma cooking meals, busing tables, cutting grass, roofing houses, installing sprinkler systems and working in hog farms can no longer be ignored.
One of the few voices of reason in the protracted debate was state Rep. Glen Bud Smithson, D-Sallisaw. His thick drawl and aw-shucks humility only added to the charm of his common-sense warning that Oklahoma is repeating an all-too-common American mistake: Mistreating people.
Think blacks and slavery and the back-of-the-bus and separate water fountains. Think Indians and broken treaties and conquered land. Think Japanese and World War II internment camps. Think women and a basic right to vote.
“We have a history of treating people bad,” he said, “and regretting it later.”
Immigration is a problem in need of a solution – a comprehensive federal solution. Oklahoma’s approach is like putting a band-aid on a severed hand. It can’t begin to deal with the underlying reason for illegal immigration: poor economic conditions in Mexico, Central America and elsewhere. It can’t secure America’s borders from a steady stream of immigrants desperate for hope, for a better way of life.
Even business leaders are worried about the measure’s effect on the Oklahoma economy. What happens if many immigrants pack up and move elsewhere? Who’s going to fill thousands of hard-labor positions at hog farms in the remote Panhandle?
This wasn’t even a significant issue for most Oklahomans two years ago. Ambitious politicians beat the drums so loudly and so long that it’s now the No. 2 issue, behind only education. It feeds a deep, ever-present strain of nativism that does Oklahoma anything but proud.
The anti-immigrant stampede is on. The 88 votes in favor were far more than the bill’s author, state Rep. Randy Terrill, R-Moore, predicted before Wednesday’s vote.
Terrill hinted ominously that illegal immigrants may be fleecing state taxpayers out of $1 billion. He touts as fact, figures from the Washington-based Federation for American Immigration Reform that illegal immigrants are costing Oklahoma’s taxpayers more than $200 million – even though a representative of the anti-immigrant group told a House committee last fall that its numbers are estimates of estimates.
There was no mention of new studies in Texas and California that indicate illegal immigrants actually put millions more dollars into public coffers than they take out.
The reality is, most improperly documented immigrants spend their time hiding, trying to avoid detection, hoping to keep paychecks rolling in – not trying to scam the system.
[Most, not all. Yes, there are some bad apples taking advantage of the sieve-like southern border to import all manner of criminal activity. This isn’t going to stop them. They’re chasing American dollars.]
What was even more disheartening Wednesday was the number of state representatives who expressed opposition to – or at least reservation about – the measure, yet ended up voting for it.
Smithson, for one, evidently failed to persuade himself, despite his eloquence. He cast a yes vote.
Another lawmaker, state Rep. Jerry McPeak, D-Warner, a Creek who is active in the House Native American Caucus, reminded his colleagues that “most of the rest of you folks were illegal immigrants. Welcome to our country.”
He at first voted against the measure, but before the final vote was declared, switched in favor.
And Rep. Shane Jett, R-Tecumseh, whose wife is from Brazil and working to secure her citizenship, argued passionately against the bill, noting that it served to legitimize racist groups. He pointed as proof to an Oklahoma Ku Klux Klan web site that trumpeted the measure.
Yet, when it came time to vote, Jett’s desk was clear and he was no longer on the House floor. He didn’t vote on what some lawmakers called the most important legislation this session. After the vote was declared official, Jett could be seen standing in the fifth floor hallway outside the House chamber.
An interesting note: Four of the nine “No” votes were term-limited state representatives who aren’t worried about the next election because they can’t run: Rep. David Braddock, D-Altus; Rep. Darrell Gilbert, D-Tulsa; Rep. Al Lindley, D-Oklahoma City; and Rep. Ray McCarter, D-Marlow.
Others who opposed the bill were Rep. Rebecca Hamilton, Rep. Al McAffrey and Rep. Mike Shelton, all Oklahoma City Democrats; Rep. Bill Nations, D-Norman; and Rep. Paul Roan, D-Tishomingo.
Not surprising, House Republicans voted in lock-step on the issue – even House Speaker Pro Tem Gus Blackwell of Goodwell, whose district is home to significant hog operations that rely heavily on immigrant labor.
The Senate’s immigration reform sponsor, Sen. Kenneth Corn, D-Poteau, says he supports the package in its current form, but is open to possible changes. Don’t count on the Senate, however, to significantly alter the blueprint for a state-sponsored crackdown.
At least one group stands to benefit from the folly: lawyers.
State Rep. Richard Morrissette, D-Oklahoma City, said his firm likely will add lawyers in anticipation of a tsunami of wrongful termination lawsuits if the measure becomes law.
“This,” he said, “is the full attorney employment act.”
Not to mention the Pandering Politicians Publicity Act of 2007.
The state House deepened the red in Oklahoma’s neck on Wednesday.
Only nine lawmakers had the gumption to oppose a so-called immigration reform measure so breathtakingly Draconian that it surely will spark a wildfire of legal challenges.
Unless cooler heads prevail in the Senate or Gov. Brad Henry suddenly locates his veto pen, the Lege is on the verge of transforming state and local law officers into full-time immigration enforcement agents.
That ought to be a real comfort to those with a Latino surname or accent -- or those who aren't pearly white.
The commercial television stations rarely show up at the Capitol anymore, what with the demand for wall-to-wall coverage of grass fires, drive-by shootings and spring showers.
When they do make an appearance – as they did Wednesday – the Legislature’s publicity hounds aren’t about to disappoint.
For about 100 minutes, Rep after Rep rose to somberly lament the federal government’s inaction on what they portrayed as a grave matter of national security in this post-9/11 era.
“The President of the United States has been derelict in his duties,” said state Rep. Scott Inman, D-Del City. “So has the Congress.”
The majority view: The dangers posed by 83,000 improperly documented immigrants in Oklahoma cooking meals, busing tables, cutting grass, roofing houses, installing sprinkler systems and working in hog farms can no longer be ignored.
One of the few voices of reason in the protracted debate was state Rep. Glen Bud Smithson, D-Sallisaw. His thick drawl and aw-shucks humility only added to the charm of his common-sense warning that Oklahoma is repeating an all-too-common American mistake: Mistreating people.
Think blacks and slavery and the back-of-the-bus and separate water fountains. Think Indians and broken treaties and conquered land. Think Japanese and World War II internment camps. Think women and a basic right to vote.
“We have a history of treating people bad,” he said, “and regretting it later.”
Immigration is a problem in need of a solution – a comprehensive federal solution. Oklahoma’s approach is like putting a band-aid on a severed hand. It can’t begin to deal with the underlying reason for illegal immigration: poor economic conditions in Mexico, Central America and elsewhere. It can’t secure America’s borders from a steady stream of immigrants desperate for hope, for a better way of life.
Even business leaders are worried about the measure’s effect on the Oklahoma economy. What happens if many immigrants pack up and move elsewhere? Who’s going to fill thousands of hard-labor positions at hog farms in the remote Panhandle?
This wasn’t even a significant issue for most Oklahomans two years ago. Ambitious politicians beat the drums so loudly and so long that it’s now the No. 2 issue, behind only education. It feeds a deep, ever-present strain of nativism that does Oklahoma anything but proud.
The anti-immigrant stampede is on. The 88 votes in favor were far more than the bill’s author, state Rep. Randy Terrill, R-Moore, predicted before Wednesday’s vote.
Terrill hinted ominously that illegal immigrants may be fleecing state taxpayers out of $1 billion. He touts as fact, figures from the Washington-based Federation for American Immigration Reform that illegal immigrants are costing Oklahoma’s taxpayers more than $200 million – even though a representative of the anti-immigrant group told a House committee last fall that its numbers are estimates of estimates.
There was no mention of new studies in Texas and California that indicate illegal immigrants actually put millions more dollars into public coffers than they take out.
The reality is, most improperly documented immigrants spend their time hiding, trying to avoid detection, hoping to keep paychecks rolling in – not trying to scam the system.
[Most, not all. Yes, there are some bad apples taking advantage of the sieve-like southern border to import all manner of criminal activity. This isn’t going to stop them. They’re chasing American dollars.]
What was even more disheartening Wednesday was the number of state representatives who expressed opposition to – or at least reservation about – the measure, yet ended up voting for it.
Smithson, for one, evidently failed to persuade himself, despite his eloquence. He cast a yes vote.
Another lawmaker, state Rep. Jerry McPeak, D-Warner, a Creek who is active in the House Native American Caucus, reminded his colleagues that “most of the rest of you folks were illegal immigrants. Welcome to our country.”
He at first voted against the measure, but before the final vote was declared, switched in favor.
And Rep. Shane Jett, R-Tecumseh, whose wife is from Brazil and working to secure her citizenship, argued passionately against the bill, noting that it served to legitimize racist groups. He pointed as proof to an Oklahoma Ku Klux Klan web site that trumpeted the measure.
Yet, when it came time to vote, Jett’s desk was clear and he was no longer on the House floor. He didn’t vote on what some lawmakers called the most important legislation this session. After the vote was declared official, Jett could be seen standing in the fifth floor hallway outside the House chamber.
An interesting note: Four of the nine “No” votes were term-limited state representatives who aren’t worried about the next election because they can’t run: Rep. David Braddock, D-Altus; Rep. Darrell Gilbert, D-Tulsa; Rep. Al Lindley, D-Oklahoma City; and Rep. Ray McCarter, D-Marlow.
Others who opposed the bill were Rep. Rebecca Hamilton, Rep. Al McAffrey and Rep. Mike Shelton, all Oklahoma City Democrats; Rep. Bill Nations, D-Norman; and Rep. Paul Roan, D-Tishomingo.
Not surprising, House Republicans voted in lock-step on the issue – even House Speaker Pro Tem Gus Blackwell of Goodwell, whose district is home to significant hog operations that rely heavily on immigrant labor.
The Senate’s immigration reform sponsor, Sen. Kenneth Corn, D-Poteau, says he supports the package in its current form, but is open to possible changes. Don’t count on the Senate, however, to significantly alter the blueprint for a state-sponsored crackdown.
At least one group stands to benefit from the folly: lawyers.
State Rep. Richard Morrissette, D-Oklahoma City, said his firm likely will add lawyers in anticipation of a tsunami of wrongful termination lawsuits if the measure becomes law.
“This,” he said, “is the full attorney employment act.”
Not to mention the Pandering Politicians Publicity Act of 2007.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)