Small: Oklahoma Supreme Court appointment process deserves scrutiny

Judicial appointment deserves scrutiny

By Jonathan Small

In the 2024 general election, Oklahomans chose to move on from extremely liberal judicial activist, Oklahoma Supreme Court Justice Yvonne Kauger, when a majority of voters opposed her retention.

That process to replace Kauger, one of the court’s most liberal members, is now underway. Oklahomans should watch that process closely – at least what little they can.

As has become well known, Oklahoma’s judicial-appointment process is shrouded in secrecy.

Small: Voters send message with vote on judges

Voters send message with vote on judges

By Jonathan Small

Oklahomans sent a message this week when they voted, for the first time in state history, to oust a sitting member of the Oklahoma Supreme Court while two other justices came within a whisker of sharing the same fate. The question is whether defenders of the status quo will listen to the voters.

In 1967, Oklahoma voters chose to alter our state’s system of judicial selection including retention-ballot elections for key judicial appointees. Public evaluation of judges was always supposed to be a key component of the process.

But in the 57 years that have since passed, Oklahomans typically had little information provided about the judges they were supposed to evaluate. As a result, no member of the Oklahoma Supreme Court ever fell short on a retention-ballot vote before this year.

That changed in 2024. For the first time, Oklahomans were provided information on the justices facing a retention vote. For the first time, citizens had a way to evaluate judicial performance. And, for the first time, voters chose to remove a justice from the Oklahoma Supreme Court bench.

OCPAC, Oklahoma Values Coalition release voter guides

For decades, under founder/former president Charlie Meadows, the Oklahoma Conservative Political Action Committee (OCPAC) was the standard for rock-ribbed conservatism in the state. I remember a time when OCPAC and the Conservative Index (run by the Oklahoma Constitution newspaper with OCPAC input) was regularly mentioned on the State House and State Senate floors. Good times... long past, now...

New leadership has taken the group in a different direction and rebranded the organization as OCPAC Foundation ('Original Constitutional Principles Affecting Culture') and OCPAC Action, and their influence has changed as well. Still, they continue as one of the longest tenured political gatherings in the state, and in some ways, they have more pull with statewide officials than ever before, even if their influence with legislators is lessened.

Endorsements and Recommendations for the General Election

Tuesday, November 5th, is the Oklahoma General Election, and voters all across the state will be heading to the polls to decide who will hold elected offices for the next two to six years (depending on the position). Below are a few of my voting picks. I know I'm just a lowly blogger, but hopefully the information in this post will be helpful with your voting plans.

If you don't know where to vote, or want to see your sample ballot, use this helpful link from the Oklahoma State Election Board to find out. Early voting continues today (Saturday, Nov. 2nd), from 8am to 2pm, at these locations. Election day voting is 7am to 7pm at your polling place.

Pro-life leader: 3 Oklahoma Supreme Court justices on ballot have "deep pro-abortion bias"

The following is from Oklahomans For Life Chairman Tony Lauinger regarding the three Oklahoma Supreme Court justices up for a statewide retention vote:

Pro-Abortion State Supreme Court Justices’ Fate Rests in Voters’ Hands; Options Are Retirement  Or Six More Years of Pro-Abortion Activism

Three notoriously pro-abortion members of the Oklahoma Supreme Court are on the JUDICIAL RETENTION section of the ballot for the November 5th General Election. Under the heading Justices of the Oklahoma Supreme Court are listed separately the names of Noma Gurich, Yvonne Kauger, and James Edmondson. 

All three of these justices have shown themselves to be relentlessly in opposition to protecting the lives of unborn children.

Small: OKC news station fails the fact test on judicial retention story

Failing the fact test

By Jonathan Small

In policy debates, facts matter even if everyone is entitled to his own opinions about those facts.

Unfortunately, when it comes to understanding the history of Oklahoma’s judiciary and ongoing debates about reform, some individuals cannot get basic facts straight.

With three members of the Oklahoma Supreme Court facing retention elections this year, an Oklahoma City TV news station recently aired a lengthy related story.

That story, as originally aired, was notable for containing demonstrably false and undeniably incorrect information.

Oklahoma Freedom Caucus on judges, state questions on the statewide ballot

The Oklahoma Freedom Caucus has posted their voting recommendations on the Supreme Court justices, appeals court judges, and the two state questions on the statewide ballot.

A bicameral group of state senators and state representatives, the members of the Oklahoma Freedom Caucus are made up from the most conservative members of their respective legislative chambers.

Here's what you need to know about the judges on the 2024 ballot

It's voting time, and you're likely here because you don't want to be surprised when you see twelve judges and justices on your ballot that you know nothing about. Thanks for dropping by!

If you've ever done the frustrating task of searching for information on these courts and judges, I feel your pain. As I mentioned in previous election years, finding information on the justices and judges on the retention ballot can be a difficult task, and basic information such as their ages can be anywhere from difficult to find to completely unknown to even Google.

In this post, I'll cover the following justices and judges, which are on every Oklahoma voter's ballot:

• Supreme Court - Noma D. Gurich
• Supreme Court - Yvonne Kauger
• Supreme Court - James E. Edmondson
• Court of Criminal Appeals - William J. Musseman
• Court of Criminal Appeals - Scott Rowland
• Court of Criminal Appeals - David B. Lewis
• Court of Civil Appeals - James R. Huber
• Court of Civil Appeals - Timothy J. Downing
• Court of Civil Appeals - Thomas E. Prince
• Court of Civil Appeals - Robert Bobby Bell
• Court of Civil Appeals - E Bay Mitchell, III
• Court of Civil Appeals - Brian Jack Goree

Group launches campaign to oust liberal justices on Oklahoma Supreme Court

We're one month out from the election, and finally, someone is actually attempting to do something about activist liberal justices on the Oklahoma Supreme Court and running a campaign to get folks to vote 'NO' on the judicial retention ballot. Since Oklahoma went to this system in the 1960s, no justice or judge has ever lost a retention vote.

Watch the ad from People for Opportunity:

OCPA column: Researchers find Oklahoma Supreme Court is liberal

Researchers find Oklahoma Supreme Court is liberal

By Jonathan Small

Oklahoma has a reputation for being one of the nation’s most conservative states with Republicans routinely elected to statewide office and the legislature, where the GOP has long held supermajorities.

But our judiciary has been well to the left of the electorate for decades, according to recent independent research.

Democrat judges defy Oklahoma’s GOP trend

Democrat judges defy Oklahoma’s GOP trend

By Ray Carter | September 3rd, 2024

In the last 30 years, Republican candidates have been elected Oklahoma governor in 75 percent of races.

But nearly half of the members of the Oklahoma Supreme Court—four of nine justices—were appointed by Democratic governors. And those Democratic appointees have been retained by Oklahoma voters even as those same voters overwhelmingly vote for GOP candidates in presidential and statewide races.

The persistence of Democratic judicial appointees on Oklahoma’s top court contrasts with the pattern in two of the nation’s fastest-growing states where voters have largely supported Republican candidates in statewide races.

In Florida, as in Oklahoma, Republican candidates have been elected in 75 percent of the eight gubernatorial races conducted from 1994 to today. But all seven current members of the Florida Supreme Court were appointed by Republican governors. [Two members of the Florida court were appointed by Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, who was elected governor as a Republican in 2006 but became an independent in 2010 while running for U.S. Senate and eventually became a Democrat in 2012.]

In Texas, where justices are directly elected, all nine members of the Texas Supreme Court are registered Republicans.

In Oklahoma, judicial nominees are selected by the secretive Judicial Nominating Commission (JNC). The JNC selects up to three nominees for court positions, including the Oklahoma Supreme Court, and the governor then makes an appointment from that list.

The JNC’s membership is substantially determined by the Oklahoma Bar Association, and public records show that 22 of the 32 individuals appointed to the JNC by the Oklahoma Bar Association from 2000 to today (nearly 69 percent) have directed most of their campaign donations to Democrats, including to presidential candidates like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Only one bar appointee to the JNC since 2000 overwhelmingly donated to Republican candidates.

The JNC’s structure tilts the judicial nominating process in favor of Democrat-aligned judges, particularly when the governor who makes the final selection is a Democrat.

However, judges are subject to retention ballot elections, which is supposed to allow the public to have input into the process.

But a lack of public information had made those elections virtually meaningless.

“What information would Oklahoma voters have on how judges are doing their job?” said Andrew Spiropoulos, the Robert S. Kerr, Sr. Professor of Constitutional Law at Oklahoma City University. “They’re not regularly involved in the legal system and so their presumption is that judges are doing their job and if that wasn’t the case someone would tell them.”

The Democratic appointees to the Oklahoma Supreme Court are Douglas Combs, Noma Gurich, Yvonne Kauger, and James Edmondson.

In 2012, all four Democratic appointees to the Oklahoma Supreme Court were on a retention ballot and received the support of more than 65 percent of voters each, even as two out of three Oklahoma voters supported the election of Republican Mitt Romney in that year’s presidential election.

While Democratic President Barack Obama received only 443,547 votes from Oklahomans that year, the three Democratic appointees to the Oklahoma Supreme Court received 775,016 to 792,216 pro-retention votes apiece.

In 2016, Combs was retained with nearly 59 percent of the vote even as nearly two-in-three Oklahoma voters supported Donald Trump’s election as president and Republican James Lankford was re-elected U.S. senator with nearly 68 percent of the vote.

Only 420,375 Oklahomans voted for Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton that year and just 355,911 voted for the Democratic candidate in the U.S. Senate race, but Democratic appointee Combs was retained on the Oklahoma Supreme Court with 760,927 votes.

When Gurich, Kauger, and Edmondson were last on a retention ballot in 2018, they were supported by 59 percent to 62 percent of voters apiece, even as Oklahomans elected Republican Kevin Stitt as governor. Stitt received 644,579 votes to the 500,973 votes cast for his Democratic opponent, but the three Democratic appointees to the Oklahoma Supreme Court received 611,334 to 637,315 pro-retention votes each.

In 2022, Combs was again retained with the support of 628,893 voters, or 61 percent of the vote, even as Stitt was re-elected with 639,484 votes. As a Democratic appointee to the Oklahoma Supreme Court, Combs received nearly 147,000 more votes for retention than the Democratic gubernatorial nominee received that year.

Why do Oklahomans vote for Republicans candidates in presidential and statewide races while giving strong majority support to Democratic appointees to the Oklahoma Supreme Court?

In part, it’s because few Oklahomans are aware those justices are Democratic appointees.

“They don’t see any partisan listing on the ballot,” Spiropoulos said. “And to be truthful, Oklahomans get very little information on how judges do their jobs.”

Because of the lack of information, it is possible that many voters believe Oklahoma Supreme Court justices are conservatives, given that Republicans hold all statewide offices and supermajorities in the Oklahoma Legislature.

In other states and cities around the country, Spiropoulos said judicial evaluation commissions are common and provide public information on judicial performance.

But that has not been the norm in Oklahoma.

However, this year the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs has created what may be the most comprehensive judicial review site in state history, providing information on members of the Oklahoma Supreme Court. The Oklahoma Judicial Scorecard can be viewed at www.oklajudges.com.

Under business-as-normal in Oklahoma, when voters are provided almost no information on judges facing retention, judges are seldom removed from office because few voters have even basic information about those jurists. Only individuals who make headlines for bad behavior face any consequences, and those cases typically involve behavior so extreme that the judge made national headlines.

Critics have long argued Oklahomans should have higher standards for members of the state judiciary than “don’t embarrass us on a national scale.”

“If a judge goes insane, or shoots somebody like we’re trying to deal with right now, have sex with your bailiff, they’ll remove you for that; the texting on the bench,” Spiropoulos said. “If a judge does something that’s publicly terrible, we have judicial discipline. But that’s the only time we remove a judge.”

Article authored by Ray Carter of the Center for Independent Journalism. Re-published by permission.

Oklahoma Judicial Scorecard releases, rates Oklahoma Supreme Court justices

 

With less than 60 days remaining until Election Day 2024, the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs (OCPA) has stepped up to help with a traditionally difficult and under-informed aspect of Oklahoma elections: the judicial retention ballot on Supreme Court justices and Criminal and Civil Appeals Court judges.

At OklaJudges.com, OCPA evaluates Oklahoma Supreme Court justices based on their decisions on various cases that came before their bench.

This year, three Supreme Court justices will be up for a retention vote;  'yes' vote keeps them on the Court, while a 'no' vote would remove them - something that has yet to happen since the retention system was put in place in the 1960s. The justices on the ballot will be James Edmondson, Noma D. Gurich, and Yvonne Kauger. 

Also on the ballot will be Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals judges David B. Lewis, William J. Musseman, and Scott Rowland. Unfortunately, the OCPA Oklahoma Judicial Scorecard does not cover the appeals courts, so those judges will continue to be a bit harder to research, but this is a positive step forward in voter transparency and education!

OCPA announces Oklahoma Judicial Scorecard

Glad to see this project taking place, as it would be a very helpful tool, especially around judicial retention vote time:

OCPA Announces Oklahoma Judicial Scorecard

Who are the nine justices on the Oklahoma Supreme Court?

How have their rulings impacted Oklahoma's ability to attract and keep jobs—and job creators—in our state?

Have the Court's rulings strengthened or undermined the rule of law and Oklahoma values?

These are some of the questions that will be covered by the Oklahoma Judicial Scorecard, a new project announced today by the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs.

In what is often seen as the “reddest state in America,” with a Republican governor and supermajority across the legislature, people are often surprised to learn that Oklahoma’s Supreme Court is considered one of the most liberal in the country.

Endorsements and Recommendations for the General Election

Tuesday, November 8th, is the Oklahoma General Election, and voters all across the state will be heading to the polls to decide who will hold elected offices for the next two to six years (depending on the position). Below are a few of my voting picks. I know I'm just a lowly blogger, but hopefully the information in this post will be helpful with your voting plans.

If you don't know where to vote, or want to see your sample ballot, use this helpful link from the Oklahoma State Election Board to find out. Early voting is Wednesday, Nov. 2nd, through Friday, Nov. 4th, from 8am to 6pm, and Saturday, Nov. 5th, from 8am to 2pm, at these locations. Election day voting is 7am to 7pm at your polling place.

Here's what you need to know about the judges on the ballot

It's voting time, and you're here because you don't want to be surprised when you see eight judges and justices on your ballot that you know nothing about. Thanks for dropping by!

If you've ever done the frustrating task of searching for information on these courts and judges, I feel your pain. As I mentioned in previous election years, finding information on the justices and judges on the retention ballot can be a difficult task, and basic information such as their ages can be anywhere from difficult to find to completely unknown to even Google.

In this post, I'll cover the following justices and judges, which are on every Oklahoma voter's ballot:

• Supreme Court - Dustin P. Rowe
• Supreme Court - James R. Winchester
• Supreme Court - Dana Kuehn
• Supreme Court - Douglas L. Combs
• Court of Civil Appeals - Stacie L. Hixon
• Court of Civil Appeals - Gregory C. Blackwell
• Court of Civil Appeals - John F. Fischer
• Court of Civil Appeals - Barbara G. Swinton
• Court of Civil Appeals -  Thomas E. Prince

Fair and Williams publish voters guide on judicial retention ballot

Conservative activists Steve Fair and Georgia Williams, both from southwestern Oklahoma, have published a brief voters guide since 1995, discussing the various state questions, judges, and justices on Oklahoma's statewide ballot every election cycle. The following information comes from their judicial retention ballot guide for the Chisholm Trail Shopper in Duncan. 

Columnist: Why I Refuse to Vote in Judicial Retention Elections

I Abstain: Why I Refuse to Vote in Judicial Retention Elections

By Tyler Williamson, 1889 Institute

Every two years, certain judges are placed on the ballot for a simple yes/no retention vote. These elections stem from Oklahoma’s judicial selection method, and ask voters whether they want to keep, or retain, certain judges. Elections are staggered so judges only face retention every six years. However, not a single judge has been voted out in the fifty-plus years since retention elections were instituted.

I would wager that the majority of Oklahoma voters, including me, a relatively informed voter, know next to nothing about the judges that come up for retention votes. That is unsurprising, considering most people don’t have the time to research and evaluate the legal philosophy and judicial track record of every judge. Thus, a look at election results from the past few elections tell a simple story: a majority vote yes on all of the judges, a decent minority vote no on all of them, while only a small fraction do research and make informed votes. To be clear, I am not lambasting Oklahomans for being uninformed. Many people I know personally vote “No” on all retention elections no matter who it is. I used to vote “No” by default as well. The problem is, it doesn’t matter how informed you are. The judicial selection system we use is extremely flawed, thus rendering your vote meaningless.

Consider the following:

Here's what you need to know about the judges on the ballot

It's voting time, and you're here because you don't want to be surprised when you see eight judges and justices on your ballot that you know nothing about. Thanks for dropping by!

If you've ever done the frustrating task of searching for information on these courts and judges, I feel your pain. As I mentioned in a previous post, finding information on the justices and judges on the retention ballot can be a difficult task, and basic information such as their ages can be anywhere from difficult to find to completely unknown to even Google.

In this post, we'll cover the following justices and judges, which are on every Oklahoma voter's ballot:

• Supreme Court - Tom Colbert 
• Supreme Court - Richard Darby 
• Supreme Court - Matthew John Kane IV 
• Criminal Appeals - Robert Hudson 
• Criminal Appeals - Gary Lumpkin 
• Civil Appeals - Deborah Barnes 
• Civil Appeals - Keith Rapp 
• Civil Appeals - Jane Wiseman

A quick explainer before we move to the judges themselves. From CourtFacts.org:

Oklahoma Supreme Court, Court of Criminal Appeals and Court of Civil Appeal are called "appellate courts," because they hear cases that have been appealed, and judges on these courts are thus called "appellate judges."

Appellate judges are first appointed by the governor from a list of three names of qualified individuals prepared by the Judicial Nominating Commission. At the end of their terms, appellate judges wishing to remain in office must declare their candidacy for retention. When a judge seeks retention, the judge's name is placed on the ballot at the next general election. Then Oklahoma voters can select "yes" to vote to retain that judge, or "no" to vote to not retain that judge. The Oklahoma Constitution provides that if an appellate judge does not receive a majority of "yes" votes, the office becomes vacant and the governor appoints a replacement.

If the judge does not file for retention or is not retained by voters, the governor appoints a new judge. 

Since Oklahoma went to this system in the 1960s, no judge has ever lost a retention vote. Each of these courts have six-year terms, so keep that in mind as you consider each of these judges and justices.

What's very important to remember is that the Governor is the individual who places judges and justices on these courts, so ultimately, they're respective political beliefs and party platforms influence and inform who they select to serve on the bench. If by some miracle one of the eight judges on the ballot this year becomes the first in history to lose a retention vote, Governor Kevin Stitt (R) would get to appoint a replacement. Do you like Governor Stitt? Are you a conservative or Republican? You might be more favorable to voting no on some of these judges then, as if the judge loses, Gov. Stitt gets the opportunity to appoint a replacement.

By the same token, the party affiliation of the Governor who appointed each of these judges is a contributing factor for you to consider. Do you agree more with the Republican Party platform, or with the Democratic Party platform? When appointing justices and judges, Democratic and Republican governors each have tendencies that generally mirror their party platforms. The judicial beliefs of their appointed judges usually follow (not always, but generally). Your position on the differing platforms is an important point to remember.

After giving what useful information I was able to find online, I will conclude each judge by listing how I will be voting, along with suggestions from conservative Tulsa blogger Michael Bates and conservative activists Steve Fair and Georgia Williams from the Lawton/Duncan area, both being sources that I trust.

Supreme Court (6 year term)

Justice Tom Colbert (71) was appointed to the Oklahoma Supreme Court by Democratic Governor Brad Henry in 2004.

He is the first African-American member of the Oklahoma Supreme Court. In college, he was All-Conference in the triple jump and All-American in the long jump. Colbert was a member of the U.S. Army's Criminal Investigation Division from 1973 to 1975, receiving an honorable discharge in 1975. He later taught in Chicago public schools and law school in the late 1970s-early 1980s, was an assistant DA for two years, and then had nearly 15 years of private practice. Republican Gov. Frank Keating appointed him to the Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals in 2000, the first African-American judge on that court.

When the State Supreme Court ruled that the 10 Commandments Monument had to be removed from the groups of the State Capitol, Justice Colbert was one of two who dissented. However, on the three most recent cases relating to abortion, Justice Colbert took the pro-abortion side every time.

I will be voting 'no' (do not retain) on Justice Tom Colbert. Michael Bates agrees with this position, as well as Steve Fair and Georgia Williams.

Justice Richard Darby (62) was appointed to the Oklahoma Supreme Court by Republican Governor Mary Fallin in 2018.

Darby served as a district judge for 23 years before his appointment to the Supreme Court. Before that, he was a Special Judge for four years, then Associate District Judge for four years, for a total of nearly thirty-five years of judicial work. His wife was the longtime superintendent of Altus Christian Academy before retiring this year.

On two different cases relating to abortion since he joined the Court, Justice Darby took the pro-life side both times. 

I will be voting 'yes' (do retain) on Justice Darby. Fair and Williams concur, while Bates plans to vote no in order to give Gov. Stitt a new position to fill (and an opportunity to "continue his winning streak" on Supreme Court justices) has shifted to a 'yes' vote upon further consideration.

Justice Matthew John Kane IV (58) was appointed by Republican Governor Kevin Stitt in 2019.

Kane is a former district judge of 14 years. He is a homeschool dad, and a Roman Catholic. Prior to his appointment to the Supreme Court, Kane had also served as the Presiding Judge on the Oklahoma Court on the Judiciary- the body that actually judges other judges. His great-grandfather (and namesake) was on the original Oklahoma Supreme Court, serving from 1907 to 1923.

On the one case relating to abortion since he joined the Court, Justice Kane took the pro-life side.

I will be voting 'yes' (do retain) on Justice Kane. Fair and Williams agree, as does Bates (who knows Kane personally and speaks very highly of him).

Court of Criminal Appeals (6 year term)

Judge Robert Hudson (63) was appointed by Republican Governor Mary Fallin in 2015.

Hudson is a former district attorney of 16 years, with 13 years of private law practice before that. He served as First Assistant Attorney General for a year, and then had two years as a Special Judge before joining the Court of Criminal Appeals. Hudson is a deacon and Sunday School teacher at First Baptist Church of Guthrie, and runs a wheat and cow-calf operation near Guthrie.

I will be voting 'yes' (do retain) on Judge Hudson. Fair and Williams concur, while Bates argues for a 'no' vote in light of Hudson's ruling on the Daniel Holtzclaw case.

Judge Gary Lumpkin (74) was appointed by Republican Governor Henry Bellmon in 1989.

Lumpkin served on active duty in the U.S. Marine Corps from 1968-1971, including 18 months in Vietnam. He retired with thirty years of service on June 1, 1998, with the rank of Colonel in the Marine Corps Reserve. He completed his military service as one of only two Marine Reserve judges assigned to the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals. Lumpkin spent the late 70's and the 80's as an Assistant District Attorney, First Assistant District Attorney, Associate District Judge, and then and four years as a District Judge before his appointment to the Court of Criminal Appeals. He is a member of Waterloo Road Baptist Church in Edmond. An acquaintance of mine who worked for Lumpkin calls him 'to the right of Scalia'.

I will be voting 'yes' (do retain) on Judge Lumpkin. Fair and Williams disagree and call for a 'no' vote (seemingly due to his long time on the court), while Bates argues for a 'no' vote in light of Hudson's ruling on the Daniel Holtzclaw case.

Court of Civil Appeals (6 year term)

Judge Deborah Barnes (66) was appointed by Democratic Governor Brad Henry in 2008.

Barnes was in private sector legal and oil/gas work before being tapped by Gov. Henry. It does not seem that she had any prior judicial experience, unlike most of the individuals on these various courts. She appears to serve on the board of elders for Harvard Avenue Christian Church in Tulsa (a very liberal denomination).

I will be voting 'no' (do not retain) on Judge Barnes. Fair and Williams and Bates likewise call for 'no' votes.

Judge Keith Rapp (86) has served on the Court of Civil Appeals since 1984, when he unseated an incumbent judge for the first time in the history of the court. Starting in 1986, the Court of Civil Appeals joined the retention ballot used by the Supreme and Criminal Appeals courts, and most sources online indicate that Democratic Governor George Nigh re-appointed Judge Rapp to the Court, where he had been retained ever since. As I said previously, some information regarding these judges is almost impossible to find. The Court of Civil Appeals webpage doesn't even have a biography of any of their judges (literally just a group photo and list of names).

Rapp served in the US Navy from 1953-1955, with two aircraft carrier tours to the Far East. Later, he seems to have been an instructor of Sino-Soviet relations and atomic and biological warfare in the Naval Reserves Officers’ School, and retired at a later date from the U.S. Naval Reserves as a Judge Advocate General Corps commander. Back in civilian life, he worked as an aerospace engineer, specializing in guidance and navigation systems, working on the Mercury, Apollo, Lunar Lander and Skylab projects. Rapp is the longest serving judge on the Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals

I will be voting 'no' (do not retain) on Judge Rapp. Fair and Williams and Bates likewise call for 'no' votes.

Judge Jane Wiseman (73) was appointed by Democratic Governor Brad Henry (D) in 2005.

Wiseman worked in the private legal field before being appointed a special district judge, and then district judge in the late 70's and early 80's. She officiated the first homosexual marriage in Oklahoma in direct contradiction to the 2004 state constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman, calling it a “joyous occasion” (featured prominently in reporting by the Tulsa World). Wiseman is a member of First Presbyterian Church in Tulsa, which is affiliated with the very liberal Presbyterian Church (USA) denomination.

I will be voting 'no' (do not retain) on Judge Wiseman. Fair and Williams also recommend 'no' votes, and Bates points out particularly egregious and contradictory rulings she made in Tulsa County before her elevation to the Court of Civil Appeals (he also urges a 'no' vote).

Again, as a quick recap, here are the judges and justices, along with my voting recommendation:

• Supreme Court - Tom Colbert (No)
• Supreme Court - Richard Darby (Yes)
• Supreme Court - Matthew John Kane IV (Yes)
• Criminal Appeals - Robert Hudson (Yes)
• Criminal Appeals - Gary Lumpkin (Yes)
• Civil Appeals - Deborah Barnes (No)
• Civil Appeals - Keith Rapp (No)
• Civil Appeals - Jane Wiseman (No)

I hope this information has been helpful to you. Pass it along to any voter you know that is in need of this material before they cast their ballot! No guarantees, but I'll try to do a similar post regarding State Question 805 and State Question 814.

You can help support the work here at MuskogeePolitico.com by indulging this quick pitch. While you're here, let me quickly introduce you to GetUpside, an easy way to save on fuel. 

GetUpside is a mobile app that gets you cash back on fuel purchases, which you can redeem for gift cards, PayPal, or a physical check. Gift cards include retailers such as Amazon, Walmart, Apple, Google Play, Domino's, Lowe's, Starbucks, and more. Participating gas stations are listed with a cents-off amount. 

Below is a screenshot on some areas here in Oklahoma, showing retailers that participate with GetUpside (prices were valid on the evening of October 26th). And yes, some of those stations are offering in excess of 20¢ back per gallon:

click to view full size

In my experience, most E-Z Mart stations in Oklahoma participate, along with quite a few Valero, Shell, and Sinclair stations. On road trips through states like Kansas and Tennessee, BP and Shell seem to be pretty common. There are a total of 122 gas stations in Oklahoma that you can use GetUpside at, and over 12,100 nationwide.

I've used GetUpside for just over a year, and saved nearly $80 on fuel thus far. Just the other day, I checked in at a participating gas station to save 17¢ per gallon. That's a pretty good savings, don't you think? Use my promo code by signing up at this link. Your first use will get an additional 15¢ off per gallon! 

You can view other money-saving apps I use, along with promo codes to get you jumpstarted, at this page. 

Thanks for humoring me and reading to the very end! I hope all of the information in this post is helpful to you. 

Wondering about those judges on the ballot? Help is on the way!

Every two years, Oklahoma voters go to the polls and find judges and justices on their ballots, having heard next to nothing about them hitherto in the election cycle. Making a last-minute decision on an unknown voting issue is definitely not the optimal situation. 

Don't worry, you're not alone. It sneaks up on everybody.

Finding information on the justices and judges on the retention ballot can be a difficult task. Trust me, basic information such as their ages can be anywhere from difficult to find to completely unknown to Google.

In the next few days, I plan to publish an article with as much information as I was able to locate, and that is helpful to your consideration.

To ensure that you get this important voting information, be sure to subscribe to the Muskogee Politico email updates. Once I have finished and published my judicial retention voter guide, you will receive a special edition of the newsletter placing that article in your inbox. 

With how the tech-giants' algorithms work, if you rely on reading Muskogee Politico articles on Facebook or Twitter, you may not ever even see them (a fate met by many conservative publications across the nation). Email subscription is a solid way to be notified of new posts and articles.

If you haven't already subscribed, you can do so below. And don't worry - you won't be flooded with emails. I usually average around once a week (sometimes less, sometimes more).

Signup for email updates from MuskogeePolitico!

* indicates required

Email Address *

First Name

Last Name

Test

Tulsa Beacon: Don’t retain Judge Jane Wiseman

From the Tulsa Beacon:

Don’t retain Judge Jane Wiseman

Judge Jane Wiseman, who is on the Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals, will be on the November 3 ballot for a retention vote.

In Oklahoma, voters can retain or dismiss judges on the Oklahoma Supreme Court of Criminal Appeals and the Court of Civil Appeals. Those are the three appellate courts in the state. (District court judges are not subject to retention votes but people can file and run against them). All judicial retention votes and races are nonpartisan.

Since the judicial reforms in the 1960s, Oklahoma has not dismissed a judge during a retention vote.

That’s an amazing statistic.

Why do judges always seem to get two-thirds yes and one-third no in statewide retention elections?

There are several reasons. One is that the vast majority of voters know nothing of the judges who will be on the ballot. So people tend to vote yes on all of the judges or no on all of the judges. No one – especially the liberal news media – delves into the records of the judges up for retention. It’s almost impossible to find information about them on the Internet.

And most of all, no one seems to care if bad judges get confirmed every six years.

Six years ago in October of 2014, Wiseman conducted the first legalized homosexual marriage in Oklahoma. The U.S. Supreme Court decided to make law by forcing states to permit men to marry men and women to marry women.