June 14th 2020 Newsletter
House and Senate Trump Index
Amazingly enough this was a decent year for conservatives in Oklahoma. There was only one really large major tax increase, the SHOPP Medicaid Expansion. There were a lot of omnibus bills with all sorts of things that had both good and bad in them and created a quandary as far as saying if they were good or bad. But the virus shortened the session and kept the amount of stupidity down to a dull roar.
As a result, or perhaps as a result of a decade of hammering in the idiots, the scores in the 2020 Trump Index were a bit higher than usual. There were some surprises like seeing Kevin McDugle pander vote enough that he had a decent score, or only one Democrat scoring high enough to make the top fifteen conservatives in the House.
Kevin West, Tommy Hardin, Tom Gann, and Denise Crosswhite Hader all tied for the top score at 90 points out of 100 possible points. Coming in at 80 points were Sean Roberts, Jim Olsen, David Smith, and Kevin McDugle. Steagall, Taylor, O'Donnell all tied at 70 points. Then ten more, packed with freshmen, came in at 60 points. Keep in mind that a Republican from a Democrat heavy district has always needed to stay around 60 points to remain in office due to rural concerns like subsidizing hospitals to keep them afloat.
But what was interesting was watching House leadership and their lieutenants all come in at 40 points, low but at least twenty to thirty points higher than in previous years. It may be that the RINOs are waking up and inching their way back towards the center. We also have to remember that we had over a billion dollar shortfall thanks to the virus and the plunge in oil prices so the legislators held the line on some tempting bills instead of passing more tax increases.
The Senate had a strong showing with about 13 Senators coming out at 50 points or higher. Natan Dahm came out at the top at 75 points, followed by Bergstrom, Pederson, Murdock, Dosett, Pugh, and Scot.
The brevity of the session coupled with the hammered economy and quarantine that made it nearly impossible for even a RINO to contemplate voting for tax increases in an election year created an unusual legislative session with a real shortage of bad legislation passed. That made us use a couple of bills that normally wouldn't have made the cut like the HB 2749 endowment limit bill, the SB 1728 wrongful death bill (anti abortion), or the SB 1081 anti red flag bill.
Why? Because it has always been our philosophy that legislators ought not to be rewarded for good behavior as good behavior ought to be expected from them as Republicans so a index ought to be a list of bad votes that betrayed conservative values and Oklahomans in general. The fewer the bills the more points each is worth; previous sessions might have had 18 or even 20 bills on the index so a missed bill or a normally conservative legislator voting against a conservative bill to placate his district had a direct impact on the dependable conservative legislator's score.
Then there is this, capping the endowment money from the state was long overdue, the state was hundreds of millions in the hole to pay for previous years, so one could understand yet not like a vote against the legislation. The wrongful death bill was a needed anti abortion bill that incrementally cranked some pressure on the abortion industry while we await Trump anointing one or even two more judges to the court to make possible an overturning of Roe V. Wade. And the red flag bill was sorely needed, yes a conservative ought to have supported the bill but the risk to our 2nd Amendment rights was great and a message needed sent. Now, follow that up in 2021 with a State Question to get the protection in the Oklahoma Constitution so it is difficult to back out and you have done some good.
So all in all, while it was a difficult year due to the paucity of bad votes, it wasn't difficult to come up with a list that asked; WWTD? What Would Trump Do? Too many groups wait till after the election before ranking legislators when the indexes are sorely needed by the voters and activists before the election.
Here are the top House scores, followed by a series of indexes ordered by district:
Next is the Senate scores, ranked by score, not district.
Please share and use these in any manner as long as you give STP credit for the index.
A PERSONS RELIGIOUS CHOICE IS THEIR OWN
BUT DO WE WANT PEOPLE FROM AN ACCUSED CULT
IN OUR LEGISLATURE
As we stated in the title, a person’s religious choice is their own. However, when a small religious group, with no known physical church supports multiple members of their congregation running for office, then we feel we must say something. Many of you may recall that in past issues of the Sooner Tea Party, there were articles that covered an individual running for office who lives in a home that has 12 to 14 adults and as many as 10 children in it. They are also looking for a property to purchase to form a commune type facility for their congregation somewhere between Guthrie and Edmond. Well folks, she was not their only candidate.
Meet Christian Ford, running for Senate District 28
While doing our research on the first individual we came across this candidate list of members of this small denomination who are currently running for office. When all is said and done, they have a total of 11 candidates currently running for office. There is just one major problem that we can see in this. Some, but not all, groups that track hate groups list their religious group as both a cult and as a hate group. We must ask if we want people known to be affiliated to a known or suspected hate group to represent us in the legislative houses of our government. Have not we seen enough hate this year?
We found this article about them that is somewhat disturbing in nature. Besides the list above showing who their candidates are, here we have an article that is somewhat promoting or appears to the promoting of the same tactics used by anarchist to bring an end to abortion, which many of us would like to see, and racial inequality which has been proven to be a hoax. What are the voters left to believe about these individuals?
We next went to his campaign web site located at this link to see what information was available. The first thing we noticed was that no where does the party he is running in appear on the web page. If you look at the “Get to know” page you get the impression that he is running for the Republican nomination for the seat.
We then found this article from Ballotpedia. This is being called a “special primary election” simply because we have three candidates running for the office that is an open seat. Other than that, there really was not a lot of information about the candidate on here.
We then found this letter from the candidate to a pastor concerning abortion and abolishing it’s practice here in the state. Although he does make several valid points, He also fails to recognize the progress that has been made and the defeats that have been suffered in the never-ending battle to protect the rights of the unborn.
We next went to www.votesmart.org to see what information they had available on Mr. Ford. We started with his biography page located here. Although they were aware, he was a candidate for a State Senate seat, all they could provide was his name. They had no additional information available.
We did check on all the other information pages available and except for one, there was no information on file.
We did find one indication under the candidate evaluation page that you can see by going to this link. We have also listed it below.
National Rifle Association 0% 2020
What we do not know about that rating is if it was because of his stance on guns, or if he failed to respond to a questionnaire that was sent to him.
We next went to the Guardian web site for the State Ethics Committee and the Campaign finance records on Christian Ford. From what was available, Mr. Ford is running a one-man campaign. He is the candidate, the committee chairman and the treasurer at the same time. There has only been one campaign finance report submitted at the time of this writing. It indicated that there were no donations made to his campaign through March 31, 2020.
In closing we can say that this does not have the appearance of being a serious campaign for office. Nor can we see why he has not submitted any information other than his name to anyone. We can say that, with all good intentions set aside, this is not someone that should represent anyone in Oklahoma in the Senate.
