Inhofe, State Chamber Close Door To Public

The State Chamber’s decision to close an October political forum to the public and press is un-American and un-democratic.

The decision may also show the deeply entrenched partisan nature of the business organization, which apparently takes orders from Republican political operatives.

U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe, a Republican, and his opponent in this year’s election, state Sen. Andrew Rice, a Democrat, were scheduled to appear at an October 14 forum sponsored by the chamber. Rice, pictured right, canceled his appearance when he learned it was an exclusive, members-only event.

Past chamber political forums were open to the public and media, and some were even televised, according to an article by the Associated Press.

But not this year. Inhofe’s campaign manager, Josh Kivett, said the Inhofe campaign requested the event be closed to the public and media, according to the Associated Press, and Matt Robison, a chamber officer, said the event was closed to the public to allow for a “frank discussion. “ He told the Associated Press that no one put pressure on the chamber to close the forum to the public, but this contradicts Kivett’s remarks.

Robison did not respond to an email I sent him about the issue. In the email, I asked Robison these questions: “Did the Inhofe campaign contact you or any other chamber office and ask that the forum be limited to chamber members? When did the Inhofe campaign contact the chamber? Who contacted the chamber from the Inhofe campaign about the forum on this issue and how exactly was the request made? Why is the chamber breaking with the recent practice of allowing the press and public to attend these types of forums?”

Rice’s campaign manager, Geri Prado, put it this way: "Unfortunately, Jim Inhofe wants to campaign the way he works in the Senate — behind closed doors, unaccountable and away from the public.”

That is certainly true. Why is Inhofe, who leads in the polls and campaign fundraising, afraid to appear in an open forum? But the larger issue is this: The chamber’s decision is clearly an attempt to deny Oklahomans the basic information they need to make informed voting decisions. By default, the chamber’s decision implicitly condones secret government and secret elections. This is an acute moral violation of basic American principles. It is the continuing and appalling neoconservative rejection of basic democratic ideals.

Ironically, many Oklahomans would contend Inhofe’s outrageous comments about climate change, the Iraq occupation and cultural wedge issues have hurt the state’s image and thus hurt economic development here. But extreme right-wing ideology here has always trumped basic pragmatism even when it comes to creating jobs for people and improving the state’s quality of life.

In the state’s best interest, economic and otherwise, the chamber should reconsider its anti-democratic decision and open the forum to the public and media.