Following the Oklahoma Legislature has always been a sometimes frustrating but always humor-producing activity as you read beneath (or “view, listen” beneath) the various agendas of the conservative state media to discover the multitudes of contradictions, rhetorical deceits, and pure right-wing propaganda that emits from our new domed Capitol building nowadays.

It is like making a mental journey to a traveling carnival filled with hucksters and tricksters. You know they are going to try to rip you off before you go in, and so you steel yourself against the coming sales pitches, lies, distortions, and omissions. Still, you can enjoy the lights, the cheap rides, the greasy food, the political spectacle. It is some of the best entertainment in Oklahoma City if you have a decent sense of irony and a strong stomach.

The big deal this legislation season, of course, was that for the first time in decades, the Republicans gained control of the Oklahoma House of Representatives. This was supposed to be a dawning of a new day in the state, something big and important, and, of course, in Republican terms, wonderful and extra wonderful with special extra wonderful sauce.

But what has happened is that our Democrat Governor Brad Henry has coolly, moderately, and deliberately taken away the Republican momentum and ensured himself a second term. Even the right-wing monsterThe Daily Oklahoman has found little to gripe about when it comes to Henry. The governor has truly emerged as a bi-partisan politician, a leader who simply wants to get something done here in the state, even if it can only be on a small scale. Henry is doing what he can. He is getting the lottery going, for example, to improve education funding, helping colleges get new classroom space, and now he wants to provide full-day kindergarten for the state’s residents.

This has left House Speaker Todd Hiett (R-Kellyville), who leads the new Republican majority, sounding like a typical carnival ring-toss huckster in news accounts. It has also put him in awkward positions, such as defending his reason for not necessarily supporting the funding of full-day kindergarten in the state.

Whenever you have been backed into a position that means you will not support Oklahoma kindergarteners, I think you have lost the political high-ground in some serious ways.

I know I’m on the left here in the belly of the right-wing beast, but I’ve traveled throughout this state for decades now, and I can tell you this: Oklahomans, generally speaking, support kindergarteners. In fact, here’s a secret, Mr. Hiett: we downright love them. I stake my record as a famous state political expert and former little league soccer and baseball coach on this statement.

Hiett’s claim, according to various news accounts, is that the $24 million kindergarten money is not appropriate because the state should have a “standstill” budget. In essence, if you proposed a new state program, you need to cut somewhere else in the budget to fund it. (Republican ideology: Give some money to kindergarteners, but take it away from sixth-graders or, better yet, nursing home residents.)

This is just a deceitful way to apply the Republican TABOR (Taxpayers’ Bill of Rights) mentality to our state. This ideology effectively means you can never offer new, progressive programs to our budget. All the studies and common sense shows that full-day kindergarten helps get kids ready for school, especially “at-risk’ kids who might not come from such great homes. Our state desperately needs such a program. It will save the state millions of dollars in the long run. This is obvious and forward thinking.

So this year, maybe we need to help out the kindergartners. Next year, maybe we might have to do something about fuel efficiency because of skyrocketing fuel costs. The year after that, it may mean improving the state’s technology so we can compete for business. It is just plain common sense. This does not mean, of course, you do not operate the state without good business practices, always looking for ways to cut waste or to streamline. This does not mean you cannot refund tax dollars. It just means you are pragmatic and real.

As I see it, this is the third time Hiett’s views have seemed really out of whack with Oklahomans.

Initially, for example, Hiett allowed his party’s school consolidators and closers to announce a program which was sure to shut down many rural schools. This seemed odd given that Hiett describes himself as a rancher in Kellyville. “Rancher” seems like a rural occupation to me. “Kellyville” seems like a rural place to me. The plan was later withdrawn after a public outcry.

Then, Hiett threw a fit over the higher education bond package. Even though Henry and the college presidents, and everyone else in the universe had a done deal, Hiett went and threw a fit so he could put some Republican “stamp” on the whole thing. But no one was fooled. The higher education bond package was about reasonable people of all political views coming together for the good of Oklahoma. Hiett just sounded mean and angry. Meanwhile, Henry was pure Okie Funk, folks, a cool (in every sense of the word), bi-partisan leader putting aside ideology for the state’s good.

The headline describing the speaker’s third political faux pas should read: Hiett To Oklahoma Kindergartners: Drop Dead!

I’m sure Hiett, the owners of The Daily Oklahoman, the people over at the archconservative Oklahoma Public Affairs Council, and many of the state’s Republicans cannot wait until virtually of the state’s income and wealth is in the hands of a few rich Oklahomans. If they got to take this money out of the mouths of kindergarteners, then so be it. But that might have to wait until the conservative juggernaut takes over all the branches of state government here like it has on the federal level.

Meanwhile, Brad Henry and Oklahoma’s people might have something to say about that. I get the sense something progressive and populist is brewing in the heartland.

But let us go back to the carnival, shall we? (Picture yourself with corndog in hand as the Ferris wheel turns and the fortune tellers turn over the cards predicting good times ahead for Okie progressives.) The Daily Oklahoman continues to scream out on its biased editorial pages that we need to improve and better fund education at all levels in the state, with which I and any other rational, thinking person can agree. (In fact, I have been amazed at how adamant the newspaper has been about increasing higher education funding which has been shrinking as a percentage of the budget over the years.) But then they also, at least in principal, support obstructionist Republican politicians like Hiett, too. So which side are they on here? Again, think of a carnival huckster trying to get you roped into playing a rigged game of darts and balloons. The newspaper’s principal owners and publisher do not care about regular Oklahomans. Just like a traveling carnival huckster, they want your money, and then they laugh behind your back all the way to their next town.

In recent blogs, I have discussed how President George Bush’s fiscal policies and priorities continue to hurt red states such as Oklahoma. My argument is that Bush manipulated emotional issues such as American nationalism and religious “wedge” beliefs to get Oklahomans and other red-staters to vote against their economic interests. Now that the election is over, Oklahomans can expect a continuing stagnant job market, higher living costs, higher health costs, cuts in federal funding for education, Medicare, and Medicaid, cuts in farm subsidies, and a “let-them-die” attitude towards rural, Oklahoma towns.

But, of course, there is one small group of Oklahomans making out like bandits on the backs of the majority of hard-working Oklahomans in George Bush’s America. That would be the top stockholders and chief executives of the local oil and gas companies such as Kerr McGee, Chesapeake, and Devon. As gasoline prices reach record levels, one has to wonder if Oklahomans and all Americans will allow this massive shift of wealth into the hands of a few oil company executives and owners to continue without any oversight and regulation.

Let’s call them the energy oligarchy in Oklahoma, the rich elites. It is a small, diminishing cabal (more and more large energy companies are moving from the state), and it is supported by the state’s entrenched, right-wing power structure such as The Daily Oklahoman, the state Chamber of Commerce types, and a lot of Republican politicians—U.S. Senator Tom Coburn is one of them—who get their campaigns funded with the money you pay at the pump. Their mantra has always been that what is good for local oil companies is good for the state because these companies produce jobs, pay taxes, and do charitable work.

I think this prevailing, conservative philosophy about oil companies is incredibly shortsighted, and it ultimately prevents the Oklahoma economy from diversifying and growing. It is bad for the vast majority of the state’s residents, even those ordinary hard-working people who are employed at state oil companies.

Here’s why this Oklahoma support-the-oil-companies-at-any cost ideology is wrong.

The world’s overuse of fossil fuels will ultimately be a short blip in world history. I can see future historians remembering the twentieth and twenty-first centuries as “The Oil Age,” which created a ripe environment for war, corporate greed, and the enormous neglect of the Third World countries by the oil-rich countries. Simply put, we are running out of oil and natural gas. No matter how you look at it, the world’s fossil fuel resources are finite. Now some oil experts contend the world has vast quantities of untapped oil and gas resources if we only drill deep enough, but drilling costs make that prohibitive now and in the future. Are we really ready for a reality in which we spend a half or more of our household income on energy costs, essentially to drive to work and heat our homes? Of course not. That’s why some companies are now starting to develop viable alternative forms of energy. Look at all the new hybrid cars on the market today. That is our future. This development of alternative energy sources will only increase in the years to come. Oklahoma will eventually be abandoned by the oil companies once they have sucked out the last drop of profit-producing oil from the state’s red dirt. We may all be dead by then, true, but what a terrible legacy to leave for those who come after us in Oklahoma.

This prevailing oil-companies-are-great ideology means the state will remain mired in regressive politics, which is bad for our economy. Only archconservative Republicans are going to support a national and state energy policy that supports oil monopolies and does not allow for competition by alternative energy companies. They will do so because their campaigns are funded by corporate America, including all the major oil companies. These conservatives, then, bring to the state this stagnant, status-quo politics which benefits only the richest citizens of Oklahoma. Can you imagine how much the price of oil would drop if the federal government announced a major plan to study renewable energy resources, or if it called on the automobile manufacturers to increase fuel efficiency? In addition, regressive politics do not allow for diversity in business or “thinking” or people. That, in turns, drives away some of the state’s brightest residents who must leave for the coasts to expend their intellectual energy. We get left with a handful of rich oil executives who live in modern-day fortresses (gated communities) and who could care less about the state. They, in turn, influence the state politic through campaign contributions.

The oil-companies-are-great philosophy, along with one-party Republican rule in the country, means there is an increased likelihood that oil companies will price gouge. Pundits and oil company executives are arguing that recent spikes in gasoline costs are because of increased oil demand in Indian and China, along with a diminishing oil supply. Throw in the American “summer driving season” and we are paying $2.25 a gallon for gasoline easy, and it is only going to get higher. But the Catch-22 here is that oil companies are announcing record profits, too. (This happened in the 1970s energy crisis, too.) This cannot be explained away by outside factors. Are oil companies colluding? Do they use perceived shortages and increased demand to price gouge Americans? Do not count on the Bush government to even touch this issue. When you fill up your SUV and it costs $100 or so (and soon maybe $125, $150, $200, $300, etc.), do you ever think about those large campaign contributions that helped Coburn get elected? Do you really think Coburn or U.S. Senator Jim Inhofe care about your personal gasoline costs?

Ultimately, this state has been sold an historical lie by the right-wing power structure about how oil companies help Oklahoma. It has been a form of brainwashing since Oklahoma became a state in 1907. Oil companies benefit a few Oklahoma rich elites who then ensure their financial positions by contributing to morally-challenged politicians. This is not a political and economic system that will make the state thrive in the future and give our children a decent future here. This is the old story of power and greed, and it is immoral.

Meanwhile, the cost of all consumer goods is going up as gasoline prices shoot through the roof. You can say “thank you” to Oklahoma’s oil company executives who try to brainwash us with their sanctimonious propaganda about how wonderful they are for the state’s economy.

We should all commend those three Democrats in the Oklahoma Legislature who are trying to pass a state resolution that would ask Congress to reject President George Bush’s plan to dismantle Social Security by privatizing the system.

The three legislators, Reps. Ryan Kiesel (Seminole) and Richard Morrissette (Oklahoma City), and Sen. Kenneth Corn (Howe), have the courage and tenacity to stand up against Oklahoma’s entrenched, right-wing power structure on this important issue. (The Okie conservative, fat-cats are already howling about this one.)

Their resolution simply asks Congress to reject Bush’s risky scheme that would allow younger workers to set up private investment accounts with their Social Security money. The point is not necessarily to tell Congress what to do but to show the legislative body that there is a growing grassroots movement—even in Oklahoma’s Bush country—against the president’s plan to transfer billions of tax dollars to wealthy Wall Street bankers.

Ultimately, some argue, the president’s plan would mean reduced benefits for everyone in the country, including those retired people now collecting Social Security. The system cannot sustain the costs of the private investment accounts without major cuts of some type.

This Republican plan to destroy Social Security is part of its continuing immoral scheme to transfer even more money to the wealthiest people in our country. Since Bush has taken office, the rich have gotten richer off the backs of hard-working people in Oklahoma and elsewhere. Meanwhile, the job market remains stagnant, health costs are up, and the price of gasoline is skyrocketing.

The Daily Oklahoman, of course, is already howling about the state resolution. An April 5 editorial, titled “Leave it alone: State Security effort is off base,” argues that the three are “pandering to the AARP (American Association of Retired People) wing of the Democratic Party.” The “AARP wing”? Give me a break. This is deceitful and immoral. (Funko Heads, I ask you to picture some weird Oklahoman editorial writer hectoring a poor, elderly person in a wheelchair. That, essentially, is what is going on here.) The American Association of Retired People is not a political organization. It simply opposes Bush on this particular plan and rightly so. It has supported the president on other plans.

But, of course, the editorial will not mention that because the newspaper is part of a ongoing smear campaign against the AARP.

Do you think Christy Gaylord Everest, a principal owner and the publisher of The Daily Oklahoman, will ever have to rely on a Social Security check to make ends meet? Of course not.

So why won’t she call off her editorial dogs on this issue? Does she not have any conscience whatsoever? How much more money does she need?

And what about our right-wing U.S. Senators Tom Coburn and Jim Inhoffe, or how about the rest of Oklahoma’s morally-challenged Congressional delegation, including Representatives Ernest Istook and Tom Cole? Will they ever need a Social Security check to buy groceries or life-sustaining medicine or make a mortgage payment? Of course not.

Everest and our right-wing Congressional delegation do not care about you or your future or your children. They want your money, as much as they can get, and they are laughing behind your back all the way to the bank.

So I think it a good, healthy sign in Oklahoman that these three courageous state politicians will brave the scorn of the state’s largest newspaper and the entrenched filthy-rich and right-wing power structure to protect the future retirement of ordinary, hard-working Oklahomans. It takes guts to stand up to the Oklahoma power structure, which is constantly squelching dissent in subtle and obvious ways.

Let’s hope it’s a part of something larger here.