Administrative spending soars at largest Oklahoma school districts

ADMINISTRATIVE SPENDING SOARS AT LARGEST OKLAHOMA SCHOOL DISTRICTS

by Ray Carter, Center for Independent Journalism

Oklahoma schools devote a larger share of funding to non-instructional uses than their counterparts in several surrounding states and a dramatic surge in administrative spending in some of Oklahoma’s largest school districts suggests that situation is poised to get worse, based on data in a recent report by a state watchdog agency.

In a report reviewing Oklahoma’s K-12 public-school funding, officials with the Legislative Office of Fiscal Transparency (LOFT) found that administrative spending in Oklahoma schools is growing at a faster pace than instructional spending.

LOFT found that, between 2010 and 2021, Oklahoma public schools’ administrative expenditures increased by 40 percent while spending on instruction grew at a slower rate of 35 percent.

Dahm comments on voting against tax increase bill

State Sen. Nathan Dahm (R-Broken Arrow) posted a column the other day explaining why he voted against HB 1035X (the bill I argued was unconstitutional), which had the same $455M tax-hike language as was placed into HB1035X (that failed to receive 3/4ths in the House). Here it is:

This week I voted no one of the largest tax increases in state history. Why? Because I don’t believe the answer to our state’s budget woes is raising taxes.

Where are the reforms?

Every program that is currently being used as a bargaining chip with claims that the program will be eliminated could be fully funded WITHOUT raising taxes if reforms were made.

The majority of the legislature seems willing to raise almost half a billion dollars in taxes on nearly every single Oklahoman without passing any reforms.

Why is it that they will raise taxes on the oil and gas industry which creates tens of thousands of jobs in our state while at the same time cutting checks for tens of millions of dollars to subsidize the wind industry (and their dozens of jobs) every year?

Why is it that the entire state is forced to subsidize the Amtrak between OKC and Dallas? Why can't people pay the full price of a ticket? Why do people in Tulsa or the panhandle or Enid have to pay for others to take a joy ride to go shopping and spend their money (sales-tax free on certain items!) in Texas?

Why is it that the taxpayers had to subsidize over $4,000,000 to line the pockets of sleaze-ball Harvey Weinstein with his movie that made Oklahomans look backwards?

Why is it that we have to pay sales tax on groceries and necessities but not to buy a newspaper or magazine to read the fake news?

Why is it that state agencies can use taxpayer funds to foment raising taxes to take even more money from the taxpayers?

The reason is because those select few have extra influence at the Capitol. If you go after the newspaper carve out, they'll smear you for trying to eliminate freedom of the press (and they'll endorse your future opponent). If you go after the wind credits, they'll fund your opponent (tens of millions of dollars goes a long way in campaign contributions). And on and on it goes.

So what’s the result? The state budget is balanced on the backs of average Oklahomans. Because the average joe doesn't have a huge force of lobbyists and government affairs directors canvassing the Capitol on their behalf. All they have is two people who are supposed to be fighting for them: their Representative and their Senator.

Our focus should not be on the next election, but on the next generation. Elected officials must remember the purpose for government as outlined in our Declaration of Independence: "that to secure these RIGHTS, governments are instituted among men, deriving their JUST powers from the consent of the governed."

Nathan Dahm represents District 33 in the Oklahoma State Senate, and is a candidate in the 1st Congressional District GOP primary.

AG says Doerflinger's Rainy Day Fund raid was legal

The official with the longest title in state government, Secretary of Finance, Administration and Information Technology and Office of Management and Enterprise Services Director Preston Doerflinger surprised many officials at the Capitol and observers around the state when news broke in March that he had completely emptied the state's Rainy Day Fund to pay the state's bills. This occurred without anyone in the Legislature being made aware, causing questions to arise from many regarding the legality of the raid.

In the wake of the controversy, Doerflinger requested an opinion from Attorney General Mike Hunter on the matter. Hunter issued his opinion today; here's the "meat" of his statement:

It is, therefore, the Official Opinion of the Attorney General that transfers pursuant to 62 O.S.Supp.2016, § 34.55(A) from the Constitutional Reserve Fund to the General Revenue Cash-flow Reserve Fund as needed to satisfy monthly allocation of appropriations do not violate OKLA. Const. Art. X, § 23, so long as:

1. Such transfers are temporary transfers to other State funds that will be returned to the Constitutional Reserve Fund, and are not permanent expenditures out of the Treasury;
2. Such temporary transfers do not alter the annual budget for the current fiscal year or alter the amounts available for appropriation from the Constitutional Reserve Fund for the next fiscal year, but instead will be returned to the Constitutional Reserve Fund before any funds are expended or transferred from the General Revenue Fund for the next fiscal year;
3. Such temporary transfers are not made to avoid declaring a revenue fai]ure and reducing appropriations as a result of a revenue failure, but instead such transfers are made based on a reasonable estimate that increased revenues later in the fiscal year will be available to both satisfy monthly allocations without reductions and repay the Constitutional Reserve Fund; and
4. Such temporary transfers do not have the practical effect of interfering with the Legislature’s ability to appropriate monies from the Constitutional Reserve Fund.

Doerflinger issued the below statement in response:

Statement by Secretary Doerflinger regarding Attorney General opinion on Constitutional Reserve Fund borrowing

OKLAHOMA CITY — On April 5, Secretary of Finance, Administration and Information Technology Preston L. Doerflinger asked the Attorney General for an opinion on borrowing from the Constitutional Reserve Fund for monthly agency allocations.

Upon today’s issuing of that opinion, Secretary Doerflinger offers the following statement:

“I asked for the opinion to seek clarity for the current administration, future administrations, legislators and the public. We are grateful to Attorney General Mike Hunter for providing that clarity. We were always confident we worked within statutory and constitutional guidelines.

“Hopefully this opinion helps settle the issue and will help leaders focus on the state’s revenue problem that forced us to borrow from the Rainy Day Fund to make allocations to state agencies. An over-reliance on one-time funding sources and the absence of significant structural budget reform promise to make the upcoming fiscal year another challenge.”

BACKGROUND AND UPDATE ON THE RAINY DAY FUND

The balance in the Constitutional Reserve Fund, also known as the Rainy Day Fund, is currently zero. The balance at the beginning of fiscal year 2017 was $240.7 million. The entire amount was borrowed to make monthly agency allocations and keep government running without deepening cuts to agency budgets.

In May, after General Revenue Fund collections were reconciled, $4.2 million was repaid to the Rainy Day Fund and then disbursed to the Department of Human Services per House Bill 2342. The next month, upon receiving and verifying May collections, $60.185 million was returned to the Rainy Day Fund and then distributed to the State Department of Education for ad valorem reimbursement by June 15 as called for by SB 842.

These actions left a balance owed to the Rainy Day Fund of $176,352,678, which will be returned when FY 2017 general revenue is reconciled after the close of the fiscal year.

That amount will be available to satisfy the remaining $83 million of Rainy Day Fund appropriations made by the Legislature and signed by the Governor for FY 2018: $32 million for the Health Care Authority per SB 844, $33 million to the State Department of Education per SB 852 and $18 million to the State Department of Education per HB 2360. That will leave the FY 2018 beginning balance of the Rainy Day Fund at $93.3 million.

Education spending up $2.25B since '15 despite appropriations falling $58M

The Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs is running a series of articles entitled The Bogus Budget, exposing how Oklahoma government is spending record amounts of taxpayer money, even as legislative appropriations have flatlined or declined, all the while "pleading poverty and demanding tax hikes."

Here's one example. According to information from the State Senate, spending by the Oklahoma State Department of Education increased by $2,258,781,968 (that's $2.25B) between FY2015 and FY2017, even while appropriations fell $58,151,699.

Governor Fallin is calling for the Legislature to massively increase taxes on Oklahomans, but this data seems to paint a different picture. A growth of 2.25 BILLION dollars, while appropriations decreased needs explaining -- and that's just from one department.

OCPA's Bogus Budget articles so far:

• The Bogus Budget: Space Cadets Edition
• The Bogus Budget: This One Cut Could Solve the Shortfall 
• The Bogus Budget: DEM & OETA
• The Bogus Budget: Money for Schools
• The Bogus Budget: Revolving Funds and Spinning Politicians

It’s NOT a ruse: Tax Cuts COULD be Financed by Cutting Government Waste

It’s NOT a ruse: Tax Cuts COULD be Financed by Cutting Government Waste

by Adam Kazda with Restore Accountability

In a recent opinion piece bashing the GOP’s failed attempt to fix Obamacare and its impact on plans to reform the tax code, the author confidently makes the claim that $600 billion in spending cuts could not come from government waste alone. Instead, he suggests money to offset tax cuts would have to come from entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare.

While Congress will need to address the shortcomings of Medicare and Social Security in the near future and there are plenty of ways to keep tax reform deficit neutral by closing tax loopholes, it is important to test this underlying claim: Is it possible to identify $600 billion in waste?

First, the largest discretionary budget item is defense, where a lack of accountable spending is weakening our ability to protect the nation.

Unable to pass an audit for over two decades, wasteful spending at the Pentagon has spun out-of-control. The American public should know where about $0.20 of every dollar they pay in taxes goes, and Congress should require the Department of Defense to submit one ASAP. Some reports suggest that by just auditing the Pentagon, it would realize savings of over $25 billion through improved financial management.

Furthermore, the Defense Business Board (DBB) recently identified a “clear path to saving over $125 billion in the next five years,” at the Pentagon. According to the Washington Post, “The plan would not have required layoffs of civil servants or reductions in military personnel. Instead, it would have streamlined the bureaucracy through attrition and early retirements, curtailed high-priced contractors and made better use of information technology.”

Another relatively easy reform are the positions within the Pentagon that include support, supply, transportation, communications, morale, welfare, and recreation support. Currently, about 400,000 active duty service members serve in these types of commercial roles, costing taxpayers $54 billion every year. The DBB calls this a “poor use of our most expensive personnel – active duty military.” If just one-third of active duty military in commercial roles were replaced with civilians, it would save $53 billion over ten years.

Finally, non-military research and development that has little or nothing to do with national defense now totals $6 billion. Some would say non-military research should be done elsewhere. Refreshingly efficient!

If you thought the Department of Defense was uniquely inefficient you would be wrong. In fact, most of the federal government cannot figure out who gets paid and who does not!

Read the rest of this article from Restore Accountability at this link.

Vote in 'Tournament of Waste: The Bitter 16'

Tom Coburn's Foundation to Restore Accountability has launched Tournament of Waste: Bitter 16, a March-Madness style contest designed to bring attention to the worst waste, fraud, abuse and duplication in government spending.

From RestoreAccountability.com:

Why the Tournament of Waste matters:

Our country is in serious fiscal trouble. Our national debt will soon hit $20 trillion. In addition, over $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities, and hundreds of failing and duplicative government programs will burden future generations that will ultimately have to foot the bill.

However, there is a way forward. Building consensus on areas like waste, fraud, and duplication can be a great starting point for bigger reforms.

We took the most outrageous wastes from the past year and want YOU to vote for the "team" that will be crowned the winner of the Tournament of Waste.

Not only is this tournament fun and informative, but also promotes conversation on what our country's priorities should be.

Learn more about our mission and how you can get started here.

Click here to vote in the Bitter 16. Submitting picks enters you in a drawing for a $100 Amazon gift card.

OCPA: A Public Letter to State Lawmakers

A Public Letter to State Lawmakers

Dear Lawmaker:

In the past few days a number of memos, emails and letters have been distributed regarding solutions to Oklahoma’s current budget challenge.

This is a sensitive time when well-intended people on all sides of the argument are working hard to create a satisfactory solution to a complex situation. You are to be congratulated and thanked for your service and willingness to tackle these difficult issues.

It is also a time to not let emotions control the conversation. It’s a time to focus on balancing a budget and building a state. Solutions we create today will have far-reaching implications. OCPA is committed to continuing to offer strategic and thoughtful policy recommendations for your consideration.

Let us clear up one thing. Tradition holds that the Governor presents an outline of policy priorities during the State of the State message. Governor Fallin laid out her plan to address the budget shortfall. We differ with the over-arching strategy, some of the recommendations and the premises that underlie them.

For example, we believe there is ample opportunity to look for savings within the state government system. That’s what fiscal conservatives do. One dollar of waste and inefficiency saved is a dollar of new revenue not required. Take education for example. We continue to fund an underperforming, top-heavy, bureaucratic system that is failing children who need an “I am prepared” education. Taxpayers receive a return on that investment of 39th in 8th grade reading and 46th in 8th grade math. Yet, we continue to heed the call of education producers for “more money” without reform and the true cost of our failure is paid for by the unprepared kids. More money without reform will change no outcome and only create a larger, ineffective system.

When the narrative is “We have a revenue problem,” we should not be surprised that the only path offered to achieve a balanced budget is to take the easy way out and manufacture more revenue. In this case through a nearly $2 billion tax increase...one that will never go away. That’s one possibility.

Another narrative is “there’s nothing else to cut.” That’s another possibility, but our experience and research suggests otherwise. But to do so requires hard work, clear thinking, and a relentless pursuit of carving out marbled waste within the meat of each agency. It risks disappointing someone and we get our hands dirty.
So, instead, some want to solve the problem by force – tax increases. This would be like a business going to its customers, notifying them of their money-losing operation and forcing them to pay more or buy more product.

Another possibility is to modify our tax structure so we tax work less in exchange for taxing consumption more. Or examine, perhaps eliminate, policies that siphon revenue from state coffers.

There are two bedrock issues that are absolutes in building a great state – a dynamic economic environment that encourages the creation of high-paying jobs and an excellent education system that stresses rigor and accountability. Without these, little else matters.

OCPA has been criticized by some for constantly saying NO. That refrain has been delivered throughout the halls of the Capitol for years.  It is a specious argument with no basis in fact. OCPA has led the charge, and been highly supportive of many significant reforms in recent years. But, when policy reflects a continuous shift to the left and abandons the principles of free markets, individual initiative/responsibility and limited government, we will always say NO.

Here’s why the argument is flaccid. OCPA was not the first to say NO. Budget proponents said “No” to conservative ideas. They said “No” to the idea of limited government. They said “No” to the idea of taxing work less in exchange for increasing taxes on consumption and services. Proponents said “No” to the idea of first creating greater efficiency in government. And, their “Yes” to nearly $2 billion of tax increases without reform is not good for the long-term viability or competitiveness of our state.

We continue to believe that for Oklahoma to be a high-achiever we must be a smarter, more prosperous state served by a lean, efficient government. That statement is principled and compatible with OCPA’s mission – free markets, individual initiative/responsibility and limited government. OCPA will continue to advocate policies based on conservative principles as an alternative when political expediency ignores them.

We encourage you to let your upcoming decisions rest on principle, not expediency. We encourage you to not just balance the budget, but also focus on building a state. You represent your state, not just your district. By your vote you accept responsibility for the outcome those votes create. We believe the OCPA mission – free markets, individual initiative/responsibility and limited government are the decision filters that will produce the best long-term outcomes for Oklahoma. We look forward to continue working with you for the betterment of all Oklahomans and thank you for your service.

Sincerely,

Larry V. Parman                                    
Chairman of the Board of Trustees

Jonathan Small
President

OCPA's Small: Higher Ed Delusions

Jonathan Small, OCPA President

Free Market Friday: Higher delusions

When Oklahoma voters trounced University of Oklahoma President David Boren’s tax increase at the polls on Nov. 8, a major reason many voters gave for voting no was the fact that a large chunk of the revenue would have gone to a higher education system they view as wasteful and inefficient.

Less than a month later, what do we hear?

“As a system of higher education we generate $9.5 billion a year for Oklahoma,” higher ed Chancellor Glen Johnson boasted. “For every dollar the Legislature appropriates, higher ed generates $4.72 back to the Oklahoma economy.”

Seriously?

“Government spending does not come out of thin air,” economist Joshua Hall of the Center for College Affordability and Productivity said of that $4.72 number. “Every dollar spent by state government comes out of the private sector at some point. A dollar of public spending is estimated to cost anywhere from $1.25 to $1.50 to raise.”

When asked what would have happened if some of that money had been left in the private sector, the analyst who came up with the multiplier that Johnson cites told CapitolBeatOK: “We don’t look at that for the projects we do. We were trying to find the economic impact of those dollars spent in public institutions of higher education and play that out. We did not look at the fiscal stream, as such.”

Indeed. So it’s no surprise that economist Richard Vedder, who helps compile the annual college rankings for Forbes, had this to say: “Econometric analysis I have done suggests that the relationship between state appropriations for higher education and economic growth is actually negative – resources are taken from competitive private enterprise driven by market discipline and given to an inefficient sector sheltered from such discipline.”

But hey, if Johnson is correct, then by all means policymakers should appropriate every single dime to higher ed – and we’ll all be rich.

With an annual compensation exceeding $411,000, Chancellor Johnson may make more money than the president of the United States – but he makes about as much sense. Remember President Obama’s claim about his “stimulus package” – that money extracted from taxpayers and crunched through a vast government bureaucracy magically generates more money?

If the higher education system is not willing to reduce administrative bloat, consolidate campuses, increase professor workloads, and rein in the out-of-control political correctness, appropriators should respond accordingly.

Jonathan Small serves as president of the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs (www.ocpathink.org).

OCPA: Why are school districts sitting on so much cash?

WHY ARE SCHOOL DISTRICTS SITTING ON SO MUCH CASH?

by Steve Anderson, OCPA Research Fellow

Oklahomans who have been told repeatedly that Oklahoma’s schools are underfunded may be very surprised to learn that the schools in fact have “savings accounts” that are full of cash sitting idle.

That’s one of the many things you’ll discover using OCPA’s new education finance data tool. The data, which were simply downloaded from the website of the Oklahoma State Department of Education, were compiled from the Oklahoma Cost Accounting System (OCAS). Would you believe that the schools’ largest revenue source for the 2015 school year was cash not spent in the prior year? The schools need to explain how they can be sitting on nearly $1.9 billion of unencumbered cash—cash that is not promised to any obligation currently—that they did not expend during the prior school year. (The table below looks at some specific school districts.)

In the 2015 school year, the difference between revenues and expenditures was a staggering 23.1 percent. This is the amount of revenues unspent, which explains how you get to such huge cash-forward balances.

The OCPA data tool also exposes another major inefficiency of the public K-12 establishment. The second and third largest expenses by function, which between them total nearly half of the amount spent on instruction, are “debt service” and “operation of buildings.” We continually hear about needing more money for teachers, but somehow the construction of expensive new buildings seems to continue unabated by diverting large amounts of education funding. The chart below shows that schools tie up huge amounts of funding in building-related funds.

Source: http://www.ocpathink.org/education-data 

Find the unencumbered funds for your district here.

Now clearly the enrollment growth in some school districts justifies the construction of new buildings. (Actually, enacting vouchers or ESAs would be a more cost-effective way to handle the growth, but that’s a subject for another day.) Still, there are many things that any prudent businessman or businesswoman would do before “soaking” their funding sources. For example, I noticed several things when I did my observation for my teaching certificates at John Marshall High School in Oklahoma City. A budget-conscious administrator could do simple things like sliding time frames for beginning and ending the school day for different groups of students (which would have the added dividend of better use of other capital assets such as buses). He could encourage more online enrollment for certain class offerings. He could reduce the amount of square footage dedicated to administrators and support staff through outsourcing of functions. He could do some simple linear programming to ensure that the size of the classroom fits the number of students. These are just a few recommendations; any businessman who has managed brick-and-mortar establishments could offer many more. Unfortunately, school administrators often tend to ask for more money instead of managing what they have better.

Some school superintendents will trot out reasons and excuses for why they need to maintain such large cash-forward balances. And some of their explanations have merit. For example, holding a small amount of funding in certain accounts for unseen emergencies or missed billing payments is understandable.

But some of the excuses don’t hold water. For example, some administrators will say these balances are needed for cash-flow purposes. They don’t seem to understand that the accrual of those expenses incurred but not paid should have already been made. Moreover, where else but in a government agency can you know your funding for the next 12 months and also know that you will be funded again after the end of that 12 months? (What small business wouldn’t love that guarantee?) When I was the state budget director in Kansas, the chancellor of the state’s largest university questioned why I was interested in the university’s large cash balances. To which I responded, “Madam Chancellor, we give you funding for 12 months. If you don’t need all of it, let us know and we will find places where it is needed.”

Another excuse given by administrators is that some of their cash-forward funds are federal funds that they cannot spend. Or that the federal fiscal year is different from the state fiscal year, requiring them to hold funds to bridge that time period. I studied these claims while serving as the top fiscal officer for the State of Kansas. The explanations for why they don’t stand up to scrutiny are long and technical. Suffice it to say that, in an environment where you are provided 12 months of cash flow from both federal and state sources of funding, the rebalancing of the cash flow for their different fiscal years is not complicated. I am available to meet with any administrator to discuss these matters.

The chart on cash-forward balances shows that the largest amount of funding sitting idle in school cash accounts is in fact money that is in the general fund, which allows for a wide range of potential uses. But even when the funding is limited in type of expenditure allowed, that doesn’t mean that a well-managed school cannot spend those funds. In fact, if done properly, those expenditures could not only save the school money but also stimulate the local economy.

For example, a forward-looking school district administrator could help put more money in the pockets of the parents of the very children they are educating while providing a healthier and more appealing lunch menu to those children. In previous articles, I have shown how Oklahoma’s agricultural sector can, by producing high-value food crops, become more diversified. And the education establishment is perfectly positioned to be a purchaser of these crops via existing federal programs like Farm to School and the Children’s Nutrition Program—which in 2015 expended more than $500 million. Taxpayers should expect Oklahoma’s public schools to look at those programs to see where they could save money by participating and at the same time stimulate the state’s farm sector.

The state school superintendent and her staff have a key role to play in helping smaller districts coordinate purchases, storage, and logistics. To truly maximize savings and dollars returned to the state and local economy, the state superintendent should offer to perform this function for the entire public school system. Would this require another bureaucracy within the Oklahoma State Department of Education (OSDE)? No. OCPA has already pointed out the federal resources already available for this process. In today’s cyber-world, the staffing at school districts that manage inventory currently can be incorporated in a way that allows them to be a resource not just for information but also to be active participants in the process. As always, OCPA stands ready to assist OSDE in the initial plan set-up.

In sum, administrators who continually complain about not having enough of the taxpayers’ money need to explain to those taxpayers why they are sitting on so much cash. Before trotting out excuses, the tax consumers who run Oklahoma’s schools should walk a mile in the shoes of the tax payers who run Oklahoma’s small businesses.

In the long term, if school administrators are unable to do active management of cash flows then we may need to look to those with business experience to run our schools. Doing so could conceivably bring a more efficient operational approach to school districts—especially some of Oklahoma’s mega-districts. And though these unencumbered funds shouldn’t be used for pay raises, they do serve as a useful reminder: The simple truth, as OCPA president Jonathan Small has noted, “is that our preK-12 education system currently has plenty of money—$8.2 billion in total revenues last year, the most in state history. But in a bloated system that employs more non-teachers than teachers, that money’s simply not going to the right place: take-home pay for the many excellent teachers who have earned a raise.”

Republican Legislative leaders tossing around massive tax increases

The last few weeks of a legislative session tend to be the most dangerous, as far as bad legislation is concerned. That danger increases if the legislature is facing a budget shortfall, like they are right now.

House Bill 3213 was filed this week as a "shell bill" - an empty measure that serves as a vehicle to "plug" language into during the committee process. Yesterday, a committee substitute was filed, filling the empty bill with a bunch of nonsense.

Here's from the fiscal impact report prepared by House staffers:

The committee substitute for HB3213 refers to a vote of the people numerous changes to the Oklahoma sale and use tax code. If approved, the measure would increase the state sales and use tax rate from 4.5 percent to 4.9 percent and expands the list of services and property subject to sales or use tax. [emphasis mine]

The list includes:

• water, sewage and refuse from a utility or public service company;

• computer programming, design and analysis services;

• repair, installation, delivery and maintenance services when provided in conjunction with the sale of tangible personal property;

• pet grooming services;

• landscaping services;

• storage of furs;

• marina services;

• carpet and upholstery cleaning services;

• laundry, diaper and dry cleaning services;

• swimming pool cleaning and maintenance services;

• exterminating and pest control services;

• tire recapping and retreading services;

• computer software that is electronically delivered;

• digital products;

• auto repair services;

• video programming services;

• leases and rental of aircraft;

• overnight trailer park rental;

• telephone answering services and welding services.

Revenue from the increased rate would be used to fund a teacher pay raise, which is authorized by a companion measure, HB3214. In the event that HB3214 is enacted into law and voters do not approve the changes proposed in HB3213, then the teacher pay raise would not be authorized.

The fiscal impact statement didn't have specific figures yet, but expanding the sales tax to cover services would be a massive tax increase on Oklahoma citizens and a further burden on small businesses and employers. Under this measure, our family carpet cleaning business (and customers) would be affected.

Another measure would have raised the fuel tax by three cents -- it failed in committee.

Another measure would have raised the cigarette tax by $1.50 -- it failed on the House floor this evening, but could possibly come back. Until the Legislature adjourns Sine Die, nothing is truly "dead" in the final weeks of the legislative session. Because enough conservative Republicans held the line, Governor Fallin went to the House floor to [unsuccessfully] try to get the Democrats to help pass the tax hike -- oh the irony... a self-proclaimed "conservative Republican" begging the Democrats to vote for a tax increase! The Democrats are holding out for the Medicaid expansion (see "ObamaCare by another name").

Another measure passed by the House requires that all vehicles registered in Oklahoma pay a $5 fee to receive new license plates next year (regardless of if you need a new one or not).

I'm sure I missed some other tax-hikes and fee-hikes, but these will do for now.

Go to OKLegislature.gov, and scroll down to the bottom right to find who your state legislator is. Contact your legislators and tell them to vote against any tax increases. You can also do it through this page from Americans for Prosperity and this page from OCPA Impact.

Irony: "Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline"

In case you hadn't heard, Congress passed a $1,100,000,000,000 budget deal today. In the Senate, the last roll call vote before final passage was a "Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline".

Oh, you don't say. It's almost funny, in a pathetic, sad sort of way. Drowning in nearly $18,791,750,000,000.00 of national debt, I'd say our government long ago abandoned any pretense of "budgetary discipline"...

Followng Coburn, Lankford to Release a Gov't Waste Report

Senator Lankford to Release a Government Waste Report This Fall

WASHINGTON, DC— Senator James Lankford (R-OK) today announced he will release a federal government waste and solutions report later this fall. Specifically, the report will highlight examples of wasteful or duplicative spending, along with burdensome regulations, but will also offer a policy solution to each of the problems. Lankford’s report, entitled, “Federal Fumbles: 100 ways the government dropped the ball”, will continue a tradition started by former Senator Tom Coburn, MD. The Office of Senator Lankford released a short video on social media today to tease the release of the football themed-report in late November.

“With a massive $19 trillion federal debt and a half-a-trillion dollar deficit, we must tackle our federal budget and root out inefficiencies, duplication and wasteful spending wherever they exist,” said Lankford. “This report will provide specific examples of wasteful spending and unnecessary regulations that are not in the taxpayer’s best interest, and show how the federal government has dropped the ball.”

Lankford shares Senator Coburn’s sentiment that many Members of Congress should produce their own waste reports, and he applauds Rep. Steve Russell (R-OK), Senator Jeff Flake (R-AZ), Senator Dan Coats (R-IN), Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) and Senator John McCain (R-AZ), among others, who have released reports to expose wasteful spending.

After serving four years in the US House of Representatives, Lankford was elected to the US Senate on November 4, 2014, to finish the remaining two years of retiring Senator Coburn's term, which will end January 2017. From his position on the Senate Appropriations Committee, Lankford welcomes the opportunity to identify reckless government spending and gimmick pay-fors.

Regulatory reform has also been a top priority for Lankford during his first year in the Senate. He chairs the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Regulatory Affairs and Federal Management, and he launched the #CutRedTape Initiative with Senator Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND) in March. Lankford and Heitkamp have worked together on three regulatory improvement bills which passed Committee several weeks ago.

Fallin: prepare plans for 10% cut in nonessential spending

As a state that is heavily dependent on oil and gas revenues, the recent collapse of energy prices is setting Oklahoma up for another "tough" budget year. Here's a press release from Governor Fallin, with some of my thoughts below:

Governor Mary Fallin Orders State Agencies to Develop 

Plans for 10% Cut in Nonessential Spending

A moratorium is also placed on nonessential out-of-state travel

OKLAHOMA CITY - With 2016 expected to be a challenging budget year, Governor Mary Fallin today issued an executive order requiring the chief administrative officer of every Oklahoma agency, board and commission to prepare written plans to reduce nonessential expenses by 10 percent for both the remainder of this fiscal year and for the entire 2017 fiscal year, which begins July 1. The executive order does not mandate any spending cuts; rather, it asks agency heads to plan for potential future cuts.

The plans are to include an explanation of how the dollars saved from the reduction will be reallocated to other needs within the agency. The written spending cut plans are due to each agency’s respective Cabinet secretary by Dec. 1, according to Executive Order 2015-46.

The governor also placed a moratorium on nonessential, taxpayer-funded, out-of-state travel for all state employees. Essential travel is limited to trips that are critical to core state agency functions, maintain professional accreditation unavailable in Oklahoma, are required by the federal government or are necessary to secure or maintain federal funding.

Also, effective Dec. 1, advance written notification must be given for proposed state payment of any:

• Agency, state and public employee or officer membership(s) in any private or public organization;
• Nonessential out-of-state travel for agency employees and officers that is wholly paid for by an entity other than the state, or;
• Nonemergency purchase(s) that exceed $10,000.

“I’m asking every agency to start planning for potential spending cuts and to develop a strategy that protects essential services,” said Fallin. “It’s important we get ahead of this issue as we enter a difficult budget year. Families and businesses tighten their belts during lean times; our state agencies can do the same.”

Revenue for the appropriated state budget for the 2016 fiscal year has come in below projections. A significant shortfall is expected to occur in the next budget year.

Here's a few thoughts I had on this.

"Non-essential spending"
If it's non-essential, why is government doing it? This reminds me of the federal government "shutdown" in 2013. Republicans [ostensibly] believe that government should be small and limited, which should preclude "nonessential" spending.

"Nonessential out-of-state travel"
Why is state government paying for any nonessential out-of-state travel to begin with?

Governor Fallin campaigned in 2010 and 2014 on "right-sizing" state government. Budget shortfalls provide the opportune time to do just that, yet we continue to see that state government hasn't really shrunk under Republican leadership.

The folks at OCPA have been beating this drum for a long time (example from earlier this year). State spending reached an all time high in 2015. It's time Republicans got serious and did more than "trim around the edges" of state government.

'Delenda Est Carthago': Defund Planned Parenthood

A bust thought to be of Cato the Elder

In the 2nd and 3rd centuries BC, there was a great struggle for Mediterranean dominance between the Roman Republic and Carthage, with three devastating wars fought between the two powers. Cato the Elder (234-149 BC) was a Roman statesman, orator and writer who, toward the end of his life, was obsessed with the fear that Carthage would once again grow into a major power and destroy Rome.

To that end, he ended all of his speeches in the Roman Senate, with the phrase "Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam" ("Moreover, I consider that Carthage should be destroyed"). The phrase is oftentimes abbreviated as "Delenda est Carthago".

His speech may have been about agriculture, or infrastructure, or commerce, or the latest events in the city of Rome, but he (according to history) always concluded by saying "Carthage must be destroyed." By consistent repetition and determination, he was able to turn Roman opinion to his side, and Rome drew Carthage into a third and final conflict that resulted in the total destruction of Carthage in 146 BC.

I contend that we need a new Cato.

Most of you have probably already seen or heard about the undercover Center for Medical Progress videos showing Planned Parenthood harvesting organs from aborted babies, and selling them. Planned Parenthood claims that they are simply "following the law" -- an argument reminiscent of the infamous 'Nuremburg defense' given by Nazi war criminals ("we were following orders").

The first video showed a senior director for Planned Parenthood munching salad and sipping wine while discussing how "a lot of people want intact hearts these days", how they're getting good at crushing above and below organs in order to get it intact, and hinted that they use partial-birth abortion techniques (which are highly illegal).

The second video showed another senior Planned Parenthood official haggling over prices for fetal tissue, and joking that 'I want a Lamborghini'.

The third video featured a former Planned Parenthood employee discuss, among other things, how her job was to "identify pregnant women at Planned Parenthood who met criteria for fetal tissue orders and to harvest the fetal body parts after their abortions."

The fourth video showed a Planned Parenthood medical director say "I think a per-item thing works a little better, just because we can see how much we can get out of it", and another staffer dig through freshly aborted body parts while exclaiming "another boy!"

More videos are coming. Planned Parenthood has publicly aired fears that as much as nine hours of recordings may be released.

Planned Parenthood receives over half a billion dollars in federal funding, primarily through Medicaid. Federal law (the Hyde Amendment) prohibits the funding of most abortions, yet giving Planned Parenthood any of my taxpayer dollars for one part of their activity frees up resources for abortions. Abortion is the greatest moral blight in America's history, and funding this atrocious organization in any way is despicable.

As a result of these videos, several states are opening up investigations into Planned Parenthood's practices. Congress plans investigations as well, and legislation has been filed in the House and Senate to officially defund Planned Parenthood. This is all good, but signs are appearing that GOP leadership isn't really committed to following through with it.

The House left for August recess without a vote. Rep. Diane Black (R-TN), the chief sponsor of the 'Defund Planned Parenthood Act of 2015', condemned the move, quoting Dietrich Bonhoeffer: "Silence in the face of evil is itself evil. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act." At least the Senate is going through the motions to schedule a vote, although we'll see if that actually happens.

I am tired of empty promises and vain rhetoric from the Republican leadership in Congress. We've been sold a bill of goods for years about how Republicans are pro-life, and how they're going to do something about it "when we win this coming election", yet time after time they fail to follow through.

We need a new Cato to stand up and shout a modern Delenda est Carthago! from the floor of each respective chamber of Congress.

When Congress returns from August recess, somebody in the House and Senate needs to take to the floor every single day and demand that Planned Parenthood be defunded.

They need to speak on every piece of legislation that comes up in committee or on the floor, and insert that Planned Parenthood needs to be defunded.

They need to amend every piece of legislation in committee or on the floor until Planned Parenthood has been defunded.

Who will be the William Wilberforce of our time, and fight the abortion juggernaut in the halls of power? Who will stand up, carry the banner and fight when no one else will? Who will stand alone and carry the cry until people listen?

If the GOP fails to act on this issue, if they fail to defund Planned Parenthood, if they fail to take a stand, then they deserve a purging the likes of which has never been seen in American history.

Defund Planned Parenthood!

          *          *          *          *          *          *

This post wouldn't be complete without giving suggestions on taking action. It's one thing to read about an issue and agree with it, but it's another to go to the lengths needed to carry that out. Here are some suggestions:

Go here to sign a petition hosted by LifeSiteNews.com.
Contact your U.S. Representative here, and ask them to defund Planned Parenthood.
Contact your U.S. Senators here, and ask them to defund Planned Parenthood.

Coburn issues his final "Wastebook" report

Gambling monkeys, dancing zombies and mountain lions on treadmills are just a few projects exposed in Wastebook 2014 – highlighting $25 billion in Washington’s worst spending of the year.

Wastebook 2014 — the report Washington doesn’t want you to read —reveals the 100 most outlandish government expenditures this year, costing taxpayers billions of dollars.

“With no one watching over the vast bureaucracy, the problem is not just what Washington isn’t doing, but what it is doing.” Dr. Coburn said. “Only someone with too much of someone else’s money and not enough accountability for how it was being spent could come up some of these projects.”

“I have learned from these experiences that Washington will never change itself. But even if the politicians won’t stop stupid spending, taxpayers always have the last word.”

Congress actually forced federal agencies to waste billions of dollars for purely parochial, political purposes.

For example, lawmakers attached a rider to a larger bill requiring NASA to build a $350 million launch pad tower, which was mothballed as soon as it was completed because the rockets it was designed to test were scrapped years ago. Similarly, when USDA attempted to close an unneeded sheep research station costing nearly $2 million every year to operate, politicians in the region stepped in to keep it open.

Examples of wasteful spending highlighted in “Wastebook 2014” include:

• Coast guard party patrols – $100,000
• Watching grass grow – $10,000
• State department tweets @ terrorists – $3 million
• Swedish massages for rabbits – $387,000
• Paid vacations for bureaucrats gone wild – $20 million
• Mountain lions on a treadmill – $856,000
• Synchronized swimming for sea monkeys – $50,000
• Pentagon to destroy $16 billion in unused ammunition -- $1 billion
• Scientists hope monkey gambling unlocks secrets of free will –$171,000
• Rich and famous rent out their luxury pads tax free – $10 million
• Studying “hangry” spouses stabbing voodoo dolls – $331,000
• Promoting U.S. culture around the globe with nose flutists – $90 million
  

Read the full report here.

Watch the Wastebook 2014 videos here and here and here.

OCPA's top 10 budget recommendations

The Oklahoma Council on Public Affairs (OCPA) has some recommendations for Oklahoma's FY-2015 budget:

Below are the top 10 ways the State of Oklahoma can cut wasteful spending:

1. Enact state employee health insurance reform – $95 million annually.
2. Reform Medicaid to make it work better for patients, improve health outcomes, and save taxpayer dollars – $100 million annually.
3. Eliminate taxpayer funds for operation of non-core agencies such as the Oklahoma Horse Racing Commission, the Oklahoma Insurance Department, the Oklahoma Department of Consumer Credit, the Native American Cultural and Educational Authority, OETA, etc. – $20 million annually.
4. End earmarks including rodeos, roping contests, local fair, local aquarium, local festivals, and more – $8 million annually.
5. Eliminate special earmark in Legislature’s budget - $7 million annually.
6. Enact performance evaluation reform and hiring reform – more than $5 million annually after first year, $41 million annually after 3rd year.
7. Perform telecommunications efficiency audits – $3 million annually.
8. Eliminate duplicative conservation district offices – $868,000 annually.
9. Eliminate state funding for attempts at space travel – more than $394,000 annually. (More than $8 million in the last 8 years.)
10. Eliminate legislative funding for the National Conference of State Legislatures – more than $141,000 annually. (More than $1 million in the last 8 years.)

To learn more, read OCPA’s proposed state budget here.

6th Grader: Government can save $400 million by changing font

From Reason.com:

Sixth Grade Whiz Figures Out How to Save the Government
Almost $400 Million by Changing Fonts

Figuring out how to save taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars on ink is so easy a sixth grader could do it. In fact, one did.

Suvir Mirchandani, a student at a Pittsburgh middle school, decided he wanted to look for ways to reduce waste at his school. So for a science project, he measured how much ink was used in creating enlarged versions of commonly used letters in his teachers' handouts. And then he measured how ink usage would be reduced by using different fonts.

Printer ink can be quite expensive—almost double the per ounce price of Chanel No. 5 perfume, as Mirchandani tells CNN, which first reported the story.

It turned out his school district could reduce its annual ink usage by 24 percent and save $21,000 a year by switching to Garamond, a lighter font with thinner, less ink-heavy strokes.

Suvir Mirchandani

After submitting his work to a journal for young researchers run by Harvard grad students, Mirchandani was encouraged to expand his research.

The task was tougher. But the potential savings were much, much bigger. CNN reports:

With an annual printing expenditure of $1.8 billion, the government was a much more challenging task than his school science project.

Suvir repeated his tests on five sample pages from documents on the Government Printing Office website and got similar results --change the font, save money.

Using the Government Services Administration's estimated annual cost of ink -- $467 million -- Suvir concluded that if the federal government used Garamond exclusively it could save nearly 30% -- or $136 million per year. An additional $234 million could be saved annually if state governments also jumped on board, he reported.

So will the Government Printing Office make a change? I wouldn't count on it:

Gary Somerset, media and public relations manager at the Government Printing Office, describes Suvir's work as "remarkable." But he was noncommittal on whether the GPO would introduce changes to typeface, saying the GPO's efforts to become more environmentally sustainable were focused on shifting content to the Web.

Sounds like Mirchandani may end up learning two lessons: With a little thought, a smart person can find simple ways for the government to save money—and the government doesn't seem terribly interested in pursuing them.

Peter Suderman is a senior editor at Reason magazine.

Oklahoma leads nation in 2000-2010 per capita state spending growth

I ran across this graphic recently, and found it to be very interesting, especially considering that the Oklahoma Legislature is in the middle of passing a $7.1 billion state budget that increases almost a quarter billion over last year's budget. As Patrick McGuigan of CapitolBeatOK.com points out, this "will be the third straight increase in state spending since Republicans took over every part of state government in 2010."

According to Tax Foundation, "these percentages show the growth in direct spending between 2000 and 2010, in real dollars per capita (to eliminate the effects of population growth and inflation). Oklahoma leads the pack with a 74% increase in state government spending over ten years; Alaska, whose state government only grew 17% faster than its population, is at the bottom."

Lankford in top 25 Most Frugal Congressmembers of 2012

click on graphic to view larger

Recent figures released by the U.S. House of Representatives show that Oklahoma Congressman James Lankford (R-Dist. 5) was among the most fiscally frugal Representatives in Washington in 2012. Lankford used 78.74% of his allocated office budget of $1,370,399, making him the 17th lowest spender in the House.

With the sequester, members will have to cut 8.2% from their budget - and according to Jamie Dupree, some will have a harder time doing so than others (120 Congressmembers spent over 95% of their budgets in 2012, while only 22 spent less than 80%). Each member has a different sized budget (no district is the same, and there are numerous factors that relate to specific budget amounts per district), so percentages tell more than raw numbers when comparing spending.

Oklahoma's five members ranked accordingly (out of 435):

17 of the top 25 most frugal members were Republican, while 7 were Democratic.

Other members of note:

• 1st - Jim Jordan (R-OH): spent 63.35%, the least of all. Jordan chaired the Republican Study Committee (the conservative wing of the GOP caucus)
• 9th - Justin Amash (R-MI): spent 75.83%. Rising libertarian/conservative star who explains every vote he casts on his Facebook page.
• 25th - Paul Ryan (R-WI): spent 81.41%. Chairman of the House Budget Committee. 2012 GOP VP nominee.
• 40th - Nancy Pelosi (D-CA): spent 82.90%. House Minority Leader.
• 56th - John Boehner (R-OH): spent 84.15%. Speaker of the House.
• 64th - Kevin McCarthy (R-CA): spent 84.91%. Majority Whip.
• 102nd - Allen West (R-FL): spent 87.29%. Tea Party star, defeated in 2012 election.
• 144th - Pete Sessions (R-TX): spent 89.31%. Former NRCC Chairman.
• 166th - Steny Hoyer (D-MD): spent 90.38%. Minority Whip.
• 197th - Eric Cantor (R-VA): spent 91.22%. House Majority Leader.
• 219th - Barney Frank (D-MA): spent 91.85%. No longer in office.
• 281st - Michele Bachmann (R-MN): spent 93.82%. 2012 presidential primary candidate.
• 350th - Steve Scalise (R-LA): spent 95.84%. Replaced Jim Jordan as 2013 RSC Chairman.
• 360th - Debbie Wasserman Schulz (D-FL): spent 96.12%. DNC Chairwoman.
• 399th - Ron Paul (R-TX): spent 97.30%. 2008 and 2012 presidential primary candidate. Libertarian hero.
• 403rd - Mike Pence (R-IN): spent 97.41%. Now Governor of Indiana.
• 404th - Dennis Kucinich (D-OH): spent 97.44%. 2008 presidential primary candidate. Lost in primary 2012.
• 430th - Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-IL): spent 98.98%. Set to go to prison for campaign fraud.
• 435th - Nan Hayworth (R-NY): spent 99.91%, the most of all. Lost re-election bid.

Here is the entire list:

Congressmembers by Budget Spending, 2012 by

Senate passes fiscal cliff bill; House yet to act

At 1:39am New Year's morning, the U.S. Senate passed a "compromise" deal on the fiscal cliff -- with nearly all of the compromise coming on the part of the Republicans.

The Congressional Budget Office estimates the deal to raise tax revenue by $620 billion, while cutting only $15 billion in spending (which is off-set by increased spending elsewhere). That's $41 in higher taxes to every $1 cut. Additionally, only two billion dollars in cuts will take place during 2013 -- which means that when it's all said and done, not a penny will be cut. We've been down this road many times already.

Here are some details from RedState:

The bill raises income tax rates for those taxpayers with incomes more than $400,000 for individuals and $450,000 for couples from 35 percent to 39.6 percent. These higher income taxpayers will also pay higher rates on investment income, with rates on dividends and capital gains rising from 15 percent to 20 percent. Add the 3.8 percent ObamaCare surcharge on investment income — another tax that takes effect in January, and the top rate on investment income would rise to 23.8 percent for those high-income households.

The bill also raises taxes on couples earning more than $250,000 a year and single people earning more than $200,000 by limiting personal exemptions and itemized deductions.

Estates taxes will also be increased, with the top rate raised to 40 percent, with the first $5 million in value exempted for individual estates and $10 million for family estates.

The bill also delays the automatic $1.2 trillion draconian sequester spending cuts for sixty days. The sequester cuts, evenly split between defense and certain domestic discretionary spending, were scheduled to go into effect on Jan. 1, 2013. The $24 billion cost of the sequester delay is allegedly made up with a mix of spending cuts and new revenues from rules changes on converting traditional individual retirement accounts into Roth IRAs.

Worse, the bill actually increases the deficit by including:

• A permanent fix for the alternative minimum tax.
• A five-year extension of tax credits for college tuition and the working poor, which were enacted as part of Obama’s failed 2009 stimulus.
• A one-year extension for unemployment benefits, affecting two million people.
• The long-term unemployed could count on receiving emergency benefits for another year, at a cost of about $30 billion.

The bill passed 89-8. Three Democrats voted no: Sens. Bennett (CO), Carper (DE), and Harkin (IA). Only five Republicans voted no: Sens. Grassley (IA), Lee (UT), Paul (KY), Rubio (FL), and Shelby (AL). 40 Republican senators voted for the measure, including Oklahoma's Jim Inhofe and Tom Coburn.

As of this moment, the House has yet to act on the bill.

One thing is for certain - Republicans in both houses of Congress need new leadership. Far too often have GOP leaders in D.C. betrayed the trust that grassroots conservatives have placed in them.