Open Door Policy: The Oklahoma State Budget, Part 1

by Joe Dorman

I have watched with great interest the budget discussions occurring inside the State Capitol.  Not surprisingly, the number of press releases significantly decreased this year since it is not an election year and the news has rarely been good.

The state’s annual budget for appropriations has recently been around $7 billion, but that is decreasing. In January, it was announced the state would face a $611 million budget shortfall and this is expected to grow larger. This is partly a result of the reduced production from the energy sector, layoffs and the decrease of income tax collections, and reduced sales taxes collections since Oklahomans must make necessary cuts to their lifestyles.

Recent tax cuts implemented will also factor into collections.

The legislature capped energy production taxes at a 2 percent rate last year.  The percentage was to ratchet up to 7 percent this upcoming budget year. This passed when prices per barrel were high, so no claim can be made it was done to spur our economy. This economy will also be the argument against delaying or increasing this rate, and it could not be done even if a majority of legislators wanted with the constitutional protections against raising taxes.

Article V, Section 33 of our state constitution requires either a majority vote of the people or three-fourths of legislators voting to pass a tax increase.  That simply will not happen.  No tax hike has been passed since that language became law as State Question 640 in 1992.

An income tax cut trigger was met to implement a permanent reduction of a quarter percent. This translates into roughly $125 less for the annual state budget.  Economists suggest this amount infused back into the economy usually generates spending and allows for other tax collections, so the actual cut is estimated to be 50 percent of that amount in a best case scenario.  This means a cut of $125 million will in reality be roughly $60 million reduced from each future budget.

In contrast, multiple fee increases have passed, providing limited dollars to targeted programs which often cover shortfalls in state agencies. These are essentially targeted tax increases, but by legal definition, fees increases are interpreted as being different than a tax to allow them to occur.

I also find it ironic, and sometimes hypocritical, that many legislators wholeheartedly endorse tax cuts, but support fee increases and tax credits. Tax credits either give taxpayer dollars from the budget to businesses or reduce their tax burden.  In other words, funding state programs which benefit people are bad, but subsidizing pet projects with taxpayer dollars is fine. Some credits do legitimately provide incentives for increasing jobs, but many are simply a form of corporate welfare.

The Oklahoma budget will soon be made public.  With the shortfall, we will see cuts to almost every agency and program.  It is unlikely new monies will be spent on any programs.  I suspect there will be no pay raises for state employees and educators, no cost of living increase for retirees, and no additional repairs for roads or prisons.

In the next column, we will review other budget policy impacts, including matching federal funds, bonding and agency revolving funds.  Until we see responsible reforms to the state budget process, we will not see the improvements in Oklahoma we desire.

A few paragraphs from the story:

For many state parties, the party may soon be over.

State party officials across the country say the explosion of money into super PACs, nonprofit groups and presidential campaigns has made fundraising more difficult. And some of those outside groups are starting to take over the traditional local roles state parties play, spending big on voter contact and outreach operations.

The effect is that candidates can be more beholden to national organizations or single-issue groups rather than state party leaders. That’s leading to a change in candidates and their beliefs and the issues that come up in elections and statehouses.

The GOP takeover of North Carolina in 2010 and 2012, for example, was bankrolled largely by the network founded by GOP megadonors Charles and David Koch and primarily directed through the nonprofit Americans For Prosperity. AFP’s former chairman, Art Pope, now serves as North Carolina budget director.

In Texas, two Democratic outside groups have essentially built a party organization outside the official Texas Democratic Party. Several Obama campaign veterans are running the group Battleground Texas as a field and turnout operation, while the Lone Star Project is doing opposition research and tracking against Republicans.

In New Jersey, labor groups funneled money into legislative elections through a group now called General Majority PAC, a free-spending outside group headed by a former top aide of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

In Wisconsin, it was labor money that drove recall fervor against Gov. Scott Walker and several GOP state senators in 2011. State Democratic officials were quietly hoping tonegotiate with state Republicans — before ultimately backing the labor-driven recall efforts.

Read the full article at Politico.com 

Education dominated the Oklahoma political landscape this year.

Whether the superintendents race or at the state Capitol throughout the legislative session, so many policy debates grabbed headlines across the Sooner State: the repeal of the national Common Core standards, the legislation to expand and bolster the Lindsay Nicole Henry Scholarships, the debate over expanding public charter schools and the reading skills testing for all Oklahoma third-graders.

Education has not dominated the policy debate like this in a long time. But it always seemed that folks had their backs in a corner with fingers pointed out. They were playing the blame game and nothing was getting done.

Something occurred to me midway through the session as I was watching a press conference by a local superintendent. The answer, possibly the key, to the education debate which our state has been engaged in for so long was right in front of me: We’re all to blame.We have to accept our results: Everyone is at fault.

It’s not the state superintendent or the district administrators. It’s everyone. It’s groups of past and present: legislatures, teachers, parents, think-tanks and activist groups, the “education associations” more commonly referred to as teachers unions, governors and state superintendents, chambers of commerce and everyone in between.

We’re all to blame and until we agree on a plan to change it, we are destined to repeat the failures and continue limiting our success.

Let’s stop the blame game and focus on helping Oklahoma’s children succeed.

Read the complete story on tulsaworld.com

By Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), Investor’s Business Daily, May 15, 2014

In March 2010, Congress banned the practice of earmarks. Since then, the national debt under President Obama has increased by $4 trillion dollars. Clearly the earmark ban has not been a fruitful solution to fix our debt crisis.

Instead, Congress has ceded spending power to the president and given away its constitutional duty to responsibly prioritize the nation’s fiscal needs.

As one of the most conservative members in Congress, I agree that Washington must stop wasting taxpayer dollars. But our spending addiction isn’t limited to the House and Senate.

In Sean Hannity’s list of 102 wasteful taxpayer projects, each one was an earmark made by the White House — such as the $3.4 million sent to Florida to build an “Eco-Passage” to allow turtles to cross under the roadway.

Let us not forget the $325,000 to study the mating decisions of female cactus bugs.

Read the full article here

The Time to Fix the Capitol is Now

By Governor Mary Fallin

The Oklahoma Capitol was built in 1917. Since then it has been the People’s House – a place where state business is conducted and laws are written and passed. It is also a living museum where school children and other visitors come to learn about the history of their state and the workings of their government. For many who pass through Oklahoma, it is the lasting impression they have of our home.

I am proud of this building. I am proud of the work that has gone into acquiring and preserving the priceless portraits, paintings and murals that showcase our history. When the dome was completed in 2002, I thought the people of Oklahoma finally had the kind of beautiful, functional Capitol building they deserved.

Unfortunately, the Capitol has been allowed to slowly decompose. Scheduled maintenance and repairs have been put off and unfunded for years.

The results have been predictable: the building that should be a source of pride for our state and its citizens has become an embarrassment and a safety hazard.

The exterior is falling apart, to the point where we must actually worry about employees and visitors being hit by falling pieces of the façade.

The yellow barriers outside are an eyesore and an embarrassment. The electrical system is dangerously outdated.

Raw sewage is literally leaking into our basement. As I told the Legislature in my State of the State address this year, on “good” days you can see the disrepair. On bad days, you can smell it.

It is absolutely essential that this kind of deterioration stops, and we begin the process of restoring and repairing this beautiful building.
That means, first and foremost, finding a funding source.

Oklahoma’s Capitol architect believes repairs will cost $160 million. As a state, we have two ways of coming up with that money: we can pass a bond, and pay back the cost of the repairs over time; or we can appropriate cash from our existing revenue.

Some of our legislators have expressed an interest in paying in cash. They are worried about debt and the added cost of interest. They are fiscal conservatives, like I am, and I understand their motivations. In fact, because Oklahoma is such a conservative state, we have one of the lowest debt rates in the nation.

Having low debt is good, but the fact remains that paying in cash for a large, one-time expense like Capitol repairs can be unrealistic and undesirable. Think of a family buying a $160,000 house. For almost every family, paying in cash is impossible. A responsible loan is the most realistic way to cover that cost. Even for a wealthier family, paying in cash might be possible but undesirable. Sure, a well-off family might be able to free up $160,000 in cash, but they might also have to take their children out of college to do so.

That’s the position the state of Oklahoma is in today. We have a $160 million expense on our hands. Diverting $160 million to Capitol repairs means taking money away from education, public safety, and other very real needs. That’s not fiscally conservative; it’s just irresponsible.

The good news is that, like a mortgage, a bond is a common-sense, affordable alternative. Debt payment would amount to about $10.3 million a year. Furthermore, most of the state’s modest debt is soon coming off the books. In 2018, 41 percent of Oklahoma’s debt will be retired, and more than 86 percent will be eliminated in the next 13 years.

That means a bond for Capitol repairs can be added without significantly adding to state debt in the long term.

Pursuing a bond may also help our credit rating. Last year, state Treasurer Ken Miller and I went to New York City to visit with credit rating agencies like Moody’s. One of the first things they told us was that our state would have trouble getting a better credit rating until we invested more in our infrastructure, including the state Capitol.

All of this means that a bond issue is the best, most realistic way of funding Capitol repairs. I am asking our legislators, as well as all the people in Oklahoma, to lend their voices to the chorus of support for responsible repairs and restoration to one of the great jewels of our state: the People’s House at 23rd and Lincoln.

###

This young conservative is a J. C. Watts protégé.

Here’s a name you’ll probably be hearing again: T. W. Shannon.

Only 35 years old, Shannon, a protégé of former congressman J. C. Watts, is serving as speaker of the house in Oklahoma. The charismatic Shannon, who was highlighted as one of ten conservatives under 40 to watch at the Conservative Political Action Conference in February, is working hard to boost the Sooner State.

“If we’re really going to get this nation turned around, No. 1, we can’t wait for the federal government to lead,” Shannon says in an interview. “I believe reform is going to happen in the halls of state government.”

Read the full article at NationalReview.com

Sep 23, 2013

Few Americans support Obamacare, and its continued existence is a burdensome reality that has inspired numerous Republican efforts to dismantle the law. Most recently, the House of Representatives passed a continuing resolution that keeps the government running but prohibits any funding for further implementation of Obamacare.

Since the passage of Obamacare, I have voted for every measure ever put before the House to repeal, delay or alter the law partially or completely, and I will continue to do so. Along with House Republicans, I have continually voiced my opposition. Currently, the House has voted 41 times to repeal the flawed law, and seven of the partial-repeal bills have been signed into law by the president, saving taxpayers $62 billion. I am still confident that we can find similar victories in the coming months, and I will certainly continue to do everything feasible in the House to combat the implementation of Obamacare.

Unfortunately, as long as Democrats control the U.S. Senate and Obama is the president, any measures to deny funding it are unlikely to be signed into law. If the Senate passes a version of a continuing resolution that does not defund Obamacare and the House digs in their heels, it could result in a government shutdown and adversely affect millions of hardworking Americans.

Government shutdown is not the answer; it is a faulty, irresponsible strategy that will have grave consequences if not averted. Such consequences can be found by looking back to the partial government shutdown of 1996 under the Clinton Administration. Upon the expiration of a continuing resolution (CR), President Clinton vetoed a new CR plan submitted by Congress, forcing the government to shut down for five days. During that time, approximately 800,000 federal workers were furloughed. Just a few weeks after that short-term compromise, another shutdown occurred, but this time it lasted a needless 21 days. This led to furlough of 284,000 federal employees while an additional 475,000 exempted federals employees were still required to report to work without pay.

If our government is forced into a shutdown again, our already struggling economy will be weakened due to lost jobs, but not just those held by federal employees. Shutting down the government hurts every American family and individual. Because of delayed federal permits for construction, infrastructure and development projects, many potential and current jobs will be lost. Domestic energy production and growth will be stunted due to permitting, planning and exploration delays. New loans made available by the Small Business Administration will be frozen, preventing many local small businesses from starting up or expanding.

Perhaps the greatest concern is the effect that a shutdown will have on our national security, including our presence abroad and our perceived strength to the rest of the world. Our national security efforts will be at risk because of weakened counterterrorism efforts, aviation security and cyber security. Depending on how long the shutdown lasts, it could put a target on our back as a nation and inhibit our presence at key national security posts, especially in the Middle East. It will hurt the effectiveness of Border Patrol and could lead to more undocumented individuals.

If the government shuts down, our soldiers who volunteered to defend our country won’t receive their salaries, which puts an unnecessary, added strain on military spouses and children (especially if their loved one is deployed). Similarly, our veterans who have honorably served and protected our freedoms won’t receive their well-deserved and hard-earned benefits. Jeopardizing the lives of those who have devoted and sacrificed their lives to protect our country is unacceptable.

Closer to home, areas still recovering from recent disasters, including Oklahoma tornados (particularly in Moore) and Hurricane Sandy, will not receive necessary relief funding. The same is true of federal fire fighters combating wild fires throughout the west.

While I agree with the goal of defunding and eliminating Obamacare, I will not vote for a government shutdown because it will be catastrophic for our economy, troops and veterans, national security and numerous other government-funded organizations and employees.

As of Friday, House Republicans have voted 41 times to either defund or repeal Obamacare. Unfortunately, we are still waiting on the Senate to join us in taking real action. In the meantime, I will continue to look for strategic ways to lessen the blow. But I will certainly not support tactics that sacrifice the livelihood of millions of Americans to do so. It is unwise, creates false hope and will only end in failure.

By Michael C. Carnuccio, Guest Columnist

I’m just returning from Albuquerque, N.M., where I had the privilege of speaking to lawmakers, business leaders and citizen activists about the benefits of becoming a right-to-work state. While not believing the reform is politically viable at the moment, Oklahoma’s border state is looking for big, bold visions to transform its economic competitiveness in the region.

They are watching our better-than-average growth and interested in learning what the experience has been like, which gives us an opportunity to reflect on what bold leadership has done for our state.

People and businesses vote with their feet. For the seven years before becoming a right-to-work state, Oklahoma’s net migration was a loss exceeding 10,000 households and more than $1 billion in income to other states.

Since Oklahoma became the 22nd state to pass right-to-work legislation, we have seen personal income and manufacturing productivity rise, the state has become more competitive throughout our region and, most importantly, the workplace has become a much freer environment.

Right to work has increased Oklahoma’s per capita personal income and private sector compensation. Oklahoma had 55-percent PCPI growth in the nine years after right-to-work passage. The year before right to work, the Sooner State ranked 43rd for states in PCPI; today, the state is 32nd. According to the federal Bureau of Economic Analysis, total private sector employment increased 8.1 percent from 2003-2010. Over the same period, inflation adjusted data show that real private sector compensation expanded at a rate 13 times the non-right-to-work-state average.

Read Michael’s column at journalrecord.com

Sequestration was originally a legal term referring to property being taken by a court and placed in a safe place. But Congress uses the term to describe policy procedure that reduces the federal budget as a result of Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Act of 1985. By the way, Social Security and the Food Stamp program are exempt from the across the board cuts.

Sequestration involves setting a hard cap on the amount of government spending and if Congress appropriates amounts that exceeds these caps, then across-the-board spending cuts, affecting all departments and programs by an equal percentage, go into automatic effect.

President Obama wants Congress to act and vote to stop the automatic cuts from going into effect. He has taken his case directly to the American people with a show stopping performance worthy of an Oscar.

In a meeting with the nation’s Governors on Sunday, the President told them, “This morning you received a report outlining exactly how these cuts will harm middle class families in your states. Thousands of teachers and educators will be laid off; tens of thousands of parents will have to deal with finding childcare for their children. Hundreds of thousands of Americans will lose access to primary care and preventative care like flu vaccinations and cancer screenings.” Louisiana’s Governor Bobby Jindal, a Republican, doesn’t buy it. “I think he’s trying to scare the American people,” Jindal said.

If the President is trying to scare the American people, it appears to be working. In a recent Pew-Washington Post poll, forty five percent of the those polled said that if the cuts go into effect, Republicans are to blame because they control the U.S. House. A third said they would blame the President and thirteen percent said they would blame both parties.

On Saturday evening in Tulsa, four of Oklahoma’s five Congressmen spoke at the Oklahoma Republican Party annual delegation dinner. Based on their statements, it appears sequestration will happen. The Oklahoma delegation- all Republicans- appear to be firm in their resolve to not buckle under the pressure to stop the cuts and to raise taxes.

“They(Obama and the Democrats) are trying to stampede us,” Congressman Frank Lucas said. “Washington doesn’t have a revenue problem- we have a spending problem,”

Congressman James Langford “The debt problem in this country is no longer something that will inpact your children and grandchildren- it’s a real threat to you. This year the federal government will take in more revenue than ever before.”

Congressman Tom Cole said, “Sequestion should be modified, not canceled. It’s not hard to find examples of wasteful government spending. Across the board cuts is not the best way, but it does cut spending.”

Freshman Congressman Jim Bridenstein said, “My concern and I think the concern of a lot of Republicans in Congress, is that once the sequester takes effect, people ware going to be screaming for a deal and that deal ultimately is going to be what the president wants- to raise taxes.”

Congressman Mark Wayne Mullin, who did not attend the dinner, said in a statement, “Reigning in federal spending and balancing our budget isn’t about Republicans or Democrats – it’s about America. Those in Washington are unwilling to make tough decisions so their answer is to cut everyone in an effort to seem fair. That is not good government.”

Three observations:

First, the automatic cuts that will go into effect March 1st are just 0.5% of U.S. GDP. And remember a cut in a government budget is only the projected increase in spending, not what we are currently spending, so many agencies may actually get more money than they have gotten the previous year. Why can’t the federal government run on less money? We have to. The Congressional Budget Office says the cuts will reduce economic growth in the short run, but it says they will increase economic growth in the long run by cutting the federal government’s debt burdens.

Second, at what point are congressional Democrats going to step up to the plate and admit the federal government has a major problem with spending? The Ds solution is always to raise taxes to higher levels, which has been proven throughout history to destroy nations.

Third, across the board cuts are wrong because they penalize government agencies that do a good job with their resources and reward those who squander our tax dollars. When it comes to cuts, one size doesn’t fit all. Identifying and eliminating waste in government is the right solution.

The bottom line is we better be prepared to make some sacrifices (personally and collectively) if we expect America to survive. Let the weeping and wailing begin!

Steve Fair is a political activist.
He serves as National Committeeman for the Oklahoma Republican Party. He is also Chairman of the 4th Congressional District of the Oklahoma Republican Party. He and his wife Debbie live near Duncan, Oklahoma.

by Chris Forbes

There are two ways to keep yourself from ever having too much faith in humanity. One, going into politics and two, logging on to Facebook.

People often complain that Facebook is a vast wasteland of shallow narcissistic people. But that’s what first attracted me to it…I guess they had me at shallow. Isn’t the planet a vast wasteland of such people anyway?

Seriously, I first joined Facebook for the same reason everyone else does, I’m a parent with a need to stalk my kids. Which, I think, is the same reason politicians should join — for stalking people. What I mean is so they can learn more about the needs of the people in their districts and stay in touch. Besides Facebook being great tool for constituent research and public relations, it can also help you mobilize your most ardent supporters to be your advocates.

Today’s voters assume they will be able to find and access you on Facebook; you really don’t have much of a choice these days. If you are not available on Facebook, another politician will be happy to log-on instead of you. So, stop dragging your mouse — if you are not on Facebook, it’s time to come out of your underground privacy bunker and sign up.

Begin by discerning how Facebook fits into your campaign and official communication strategies. Each level and place of public office has rules of engagement, some written and some unwritten. Also, make sure you know the ethical rules, campaign regulations, and legal issues associated with using social media. Take time to do due diligence. Thinking ahead will help you develop a strategy for using social media.

Hang out with 5,000 of your closest friends!

Some candidates separate their personal Facebook account from their public political page. Their personal page is a closed private account that only a few close friends and family use to connect. They maintain a separate campaign (and sometimes even a third, a separate official) account. Other candidates blur the lines between their personal and official use of social media. It’s up to you. Keep in mind, though, that when you are online nothing is really private. Ask your local shirtless politician for details.

Personal profile Facebook pages limit you to a mere 5,000 friends. How can you, a political social media butterfly, limit yourself to just your 5,000 closest friends? Pages, on the other hand, can have an unlimited number of “Likes.” And who doesn’t like to be liked a lot?

A good practice is to create a Facebook page. Go to http://www.facebook.com/about/pages and follow the directions; it’s simple and you can have a page up and running in no time. Carefully name your page so you can use it in other campaigns. For example, beware of dating your campaign page URL something like, “Facebook.com/Smith4Congress2012” That won’t help you much in the presidential election in 2020. Facebook will only let you change your page username once, so pick a name that can be useful for your entire political career.

Ask your doctor if moderation is right for you.

If your Facebook page is gaining many likes, it won’t be long until you realize your need for community management. You will need to moderate your page. Not all your “fans” will like moderation, but do it anyway. It’s not denying “freedom of speech” if you block people from your page. You are not on Facebook to create a forum for your opposition. If you don’t moderate, your real supporters will avoid coming to your page. Who wants to be a victim of a partisan attack from people who will never really listen to reason anyway? If the opposition needs to talk to you, they can contact you using official channels.

When to moderate your page:

• When you want to keep abusive, rude, or foul people at bay.
• People are making false accusations about you. Shocking, I know!
• A page member is excessively posting or commenting. People who post multiple, long screeds on your Facebook wall really need to get a blog of their own–sheesh!
• People are campaigning for your opposition. Let them buy an ad!
• Other reasons. For example, an organized attack on your page led by a lobby.

10 Best Practices for Your Political Facebook Page

1. Don’t give your Facebook account to an intern or staff person to manage; stay involved. You need to learn from your community. Facebook helps you stay in touch. Read the comments on your wall; respond to questions; click like on stuff. Stay plugged-in!
2. Brand your Facebook presence to your other content with a profile picture and cover image. Coordinate what you do on Facebook with your other media, website, videos, blogs, Twitter, etc.
3. Update during peak usage times. People check Facebook most in the morning, while they are having lunch, and at night while watching Dancing with the Stars. Time your posts to go on your page when the most eyes are watching live.
4. Post a variety of content. Try news, links, pictures, quotes, videos, questions, interaction, etc. Make it fun, too. All work and no play feels like a subcommittee assignment!
5. Learn from stats. Your Facebook stats can tell you the best times to post. What types of posts are most popular. What are the demographics of your “fans,” and much more! Study the data and use what you learn.
6. Go viral! Stuff that is shared a lot by others is viral. Keep an eye out for images, articles, videos, and things other people are sharing frequently. If it’s appropriate for you, share something that’s going viral and ride the wave with it.
7. Make your own viral content. Why not create your own? Produce original videos, banners with cool sayings and quotes, pictures of cats…things people like to share, etc.
8. Monitor your opposition. Your competition may be playing their hand online by posting details of what they are doing on their page. Keep a constant eye on their page. Conversely, don’t give away your strategy online. Be a savvy tactician, especially in an election year.
9. Beware when you post your public location. When out at public events, keep security in mind. Post about your location with caution, knowing there could be people with bad intentions reading your postings. One strategy is to post as you are leaving an event.
10. Have admins and moderators help you. You can recruit other people to moderate and post for you, so you don’t have to constantly look at your page. Be careful to “keep it real,” though. Have them help you, but not do everything. People who know you can tell when it’s not really your voice.

Now that you are on Facebook, try some advertising. More about ads in a future post!

Chris Forbes (ChrisForbes.org) is a frustrated ex-comic, Indie Film Marketer, & Co-author of “Guerrilla Marketing for Nonprofits.” As an Oklahoma-based social media strategist he has been leading political social media campaigns since 2009. Follow @cforbesoklahoma on Twitter.

by Michael C. Carnuccio, February 21st, 2013

Last year, Gov. Mary Fallin staked out high ground on the issue of tax relief by rolling out what was then the most aggressive plan in the nation. Likewise, Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback ushered through the biggest tax cut in his state’s history. Now, Louisiana’s Bobby Jindal and Nebraska’s Dave Heineman have unveiled similar proposals. This year, Fallin is again calling for tax cuts. While more measured in scope, the across-the-board tax relief would be paid for entirely out of growth revenue. Such measures have proven time and again to lead to economic growth.

Senate President Pro Tempore Brian Bingman has stood firm that the best way to bring down costs for Oklahoma employers while also accounting for the needs of workers is to shift from the state’s adversarial judicial structure to an administrative system for processing injured worker claims. Oklahoma currently has the sixth-highest workers’ compensation insurance premium rates in the country. This places an unnecessary burden on employers, motivating some of them to leave the state and signaling others to keep out – meaning fewer jobs here.

House Speaker T.W. Shannon is focused on the approaching fallout when the federal government hits the fiscal wall. To prepare Oklahoma, Shannon has elevated the conversation about right-sizing state government. With U.S. government debt now exceeding the country’s annual gross domestic product, state leaders don’t have to be clairvoyant to recognize a day of fiscal reckoning. Our elected officials must exercise political courage to forego business as usual and ensure that Oklahoma doesn’t crater when federal coffers run dry. Shannon appears committed to reducing burdensome regulations and resisting federal and state intrusions on the lives of Oklahomans.

Read more…