Friday, June 22, 2018

GOP gubernatorial candidates respond to OSC ruling

I reached out to the GOP gubernatorial candidates to get their response to the Oklahoma Supreme Court's tossing out of the HB1010XX veto referendum being circulated by Oklahoma Taxpayers Unite!. Candidates Gary Richardson and Dan Fisher are the only ones at this hour to get responses back to me, posted below in the order that I received them.

Gary Richardson: 
   “The Oklahoma Supreme Court did not contest the merits of the taxation issue addressed in the petition. This ruling was based on the fact that it didn't comply with all of the technicalities that were required. Based on the court's strict compliance rules, when it comes to filing such as this, I can understand the court's ruling.  Again, based on what the court said, it has nothing to do with the merits of the petition.

   But Oklahomans still have a number of avenues to reverse the unjustified tax hikes which passed in the last legislative session. The most expedient avenue is to elect the right Governor, one dedicated to responsible government spending, who can work with lawmakers across the political spectrum to reverse the tax hikes.

   Regardless of this ruling, I don’t see how state leaders can morally justify raising taxes when it is abundantly obvious they are mismanaging the money they already have.

   My first order of business as Governor will be to thoroughly audit state agencies with performance and/or forensic audits so we can flush out the waste, abuse and corruption. All of the data shows, once these audits are completed, the state will save more money than it would have collected through the tax increases.  The tax increases are merely covering up the problem.”

Dan Fisher:
It is my opinion that our State Supreme Court has made it far too difficult for the citizens to express their will in the past.

The Declaration of Independence declares that “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,” and it is the obvious that the understanding and intent of the Founders was that government should function at the “will of the people” - not the other way around.

We have made it so difficult for the people to express their will through initiative petitions that it is practically impossible for them to “jump through all of the legal hoops” to do so.  This is certainly not the “spirit” of the laws governing the petition process.  The very right to petition our government is enshrined in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.  How are citizens to do this if the laws and courts make it impossible to do so?

Therefore, I disagree with our State Supreme Court and believe OTU should push forward.  Sadly, the opponents and the courts are "running out the clock” making it practically impossible for the people to succeed in having their voices heard on this important matter.

Lamb, Stitt, Jones, Cornett: no response yet

1 comment:

  1. I don't understand how any candidate can say the laws governing the initiative and referendum petition process is too stringent.
    Whens SQ 795 was going through the process it faced the same challenges by the OIPA.
    As it was properly researched, crafted and written, it passed the germanness test of the Oklahoma Supreme Court and was allowed to proceed.
    The issue in the case of 799 was the proponents failure of due diligence and transparency when crafting the referendum.
    Rather than full disclosure, they focused on areas to make 1010xx appear to be a imposition of a seemingly unjust government existing only to fleece it's citizens.
    The Oklahoma Supreme Court deserves credit for ruling on the pure legal aspects of this referendum


PLEASE INCLUDE YOUR NAME when commenting. Anonymous comments may be rejected if NOT accompanied by a name.

Comments are welcome, but remember - commenting on my blog is a privilege. Do not abuse that privilege, or your comment will be deleted.

Thank you for joining in the discussion at! Your opinion is appreciated!