Category: ‘Politics and Law’

Why I am A Libertarian Who Is Leaving the Libertarian Party

June 22, 2021 Posted by zachary

Ever since I was a kid, I knew I wasn’t a Republican or a Democrat. My first real exposure to the idea of parties outside the dominant parties was Ross Perot and his Reform Party in 1992. As a kid I was excited to see what a three candidate race for President was like. Even though I expressed preferences based on what my parents felt, I still thought his run was history in my lifetime. I had no idea why when it came to the Clinton/Dole election in 1996 that we only had two candidates. This dulled my interest in elections. It wasn’t until the Bush/Kerry election in 2004 that I took interest in elections again. This came about in my college years and I felt I had an obligation to at least see who was running, but I didn’t take much interest at that time. I don’t even remember who I ended up voting for aside from that it wasn’t Kerry.

During all this time, I never really felt at home in the two dominate parties in the US. When I started voting, I registered Independent and stuck with it until 2012.

Because of that lack of home, I was always curious about what other parties were out there. I read about the rise and fall of political parties with keen interest and thought I might one day start a party. In 2006, I returned to Oklahoma and looked up the procedures in state law to find out what it would take. I was astounded by the high signature count needed to form and even higher electoral burden to stay recognized. I read about how few parties formed in Oklahoma and how none ever survived their first year on the ballot.

Around 2010, I found a group of like minded people at Oklahomans for Ballot Access Reform who were fighting to make it easier to form a new political party. I learned that prior to 1968, all it took to form a new party was 5000 signatures. But due to the success of a third party presidential candidate Oklahoma, a Democratic stronghold at the time, the election ended up with Nixon as the winner of the state’s electoral votes. So the Democratic majority in the state legislature increased the petition to 5% of the last vote for President or Governor, and increased the percentage of the vote that a party would need to stay recognized to 10% of the vote. Ridiculous.

I immediately got to work in the fight to change these laws. I worked every legislative session, calling legislators, visiting them in their offices, writing emails and letter campaigns, and writing a ballot access brief. 4 years I worked to get a bill passed to reduce that petition burden. Finally in 2014, we succeeded. After nearly 50 years, Oklahoma’s laws for forming a new party was eased. While not the 5,000 signatures it once was, the new 3% of the last vote for Governor was a huge improvement.

During this time, I worked on other efforts to expand electoral options for Oklahoma voters. In 2012, the American Elect party spent considerable money and effort to get on the ballot under Oklahoma’s old law. But when it came time to follow through with that ballot access success, they failed to organize and nominate a candidate for President. So a small group of American Elect supporters convinced me and others to join in nominating Gary Johnson for the Americans Elect position on the Oklahoma ballot. So I joined the party and registered to be an official Elector for Gary Johnson. We filed the necessary paperwork and immediately the Republican controlled state government challenged the nomination and sued to remove Gary Johnson from the ballot. They were successful in making up law on the spot and convincing the Oklahoma Supreme Court to rule in their favor and Gary Johnson was no longer a candidate for President in Oklahoma in 2012.

Back to 2014, during my time at Oklahoman’s for Ballot Access Reform, I met many people who were members of the Libertarian Party. As I learned more about that party, I was sure that I finally found a political home. Even before we were successful in getting the laws changed in Oklahoma, I joined the Libertarian Party and was elected as Secretary for the OKLP in 2012. Once the laws to form a new party were changed in 2014, I joined the effort to petition for party recognition. That petition was successful in time for the 2016 Presidential election.

Even during that time, I was still working to ease Oklahoma’s laws regarding the recognition of political parties. I knew that even if a party was successful in petitioning to form, they would have a severe uphill battle meeting the 10% vote requirement to stay recognized. So I convinced a handful of legislators to introduce a bill to lower that vote test to 2.5% of the vote for Governor or President. That bill passed in time for the 2016 election. That year Gary Johnson won 5.76% of the vote in Oklahoma, surpassing the new 2.5% requirement. Had that 10% requirement stayed, the Libertarian party would have failed to stay recognized and they would have had to petition all over again.

I wasn’t done yet. In 2017, I wrote a new bill that changed the vote test so that it applied to any statewide elected office as well as allow for a party to remain recognized for 4 years rather than 2. I convinced legislators to introduce this bill and pass it in 2018. This new bill again helped the Libertarian Party to stay recognized in Oklahoma. At that same time, I wrote and succeeded in getting passed a law that reduced the signatures needed to get an Independent Presidential candidate on the ballot as well as provide for an optional filing fee. Because of this, 3 Independent presidential candidates were on the 2020 ballot along with the Democratic, Republican, and Libertarian nominees.

During this time, I maintained some activity in the Oklahoma Libertarian Party. I still felt that they would be a home for me. However, due to the actions of some members of the party and the way they treated founding members of the modern OKLP, people who I considered to be friends, I reduced my activity to casual observer. I maintained my voter registration but stopped paying dues and attending conventions.

One aspect of Oklahoma election law that I like is the option for recognized political parties to invite voters registered as independents to vote in a party’s primaries. In 2016, the newly formed party invited independent voters to vote in the one primary election we had, for US Senate. While the primary results were not the ones the party, and even the candidates themselves preferred, I still felt it was a major reason why the party went from roughly 700 members at founding to several thousand after the 2016 election. But in 2017, the new Executive Committee chose not to allow Independent voters to vote in the OKLP’s primaries. This was primarily due to concern they had that independent supporters of Joe Exotic would nominate him for the LP place in the Governor Race. These concerns manifested themselves more broadly in 2019 and the primaries were once again closed. I felt this was a betrayal of the ideals of freedom and liberty that the Libertarian Party was meant to exemplify.

This wasn’t my only concerns with the party. For years, the Libertarian Party has had a provision in the Party Platform that allows for all sorts of restrictions on immigration so long as anyone claims that they are “reasonable”. And there are a lot of people claiming to be libertarian who believe that locking children in cages and destroying life saving supplies in the desert are “reasonable” restrictions. Despite many efforts to simply strike the word “reasonable” from that platform statement, it has failed every time. This isn’t my only concerns with libertarians. There are also many who believe that the government should be allowed to deny marriages to LGBTQ+ people. There are Libertarians who do not support civil rights in general. There are libertarians who glorify the Confederacy and hold that defenders of slavery were righteous warriors of freedom. Many libertarians also expressed solidarity with police who murder innocent civilians and who also violently break up protests against those police abuses. Not to mention the libertarians who express support or apathy towards pedophilia. It is frankly disturbing that people in the party of freedom for all would support so many anti-freedom beliefs.

Then the 2016 election came and boy was I not prepared. Trump won that election and the ensuing avalanche of support from supposed libertarians for him was mind boggling. Throughout his presidency with all his increasing of taxes, wall building, cracking down on immigration and asylum seekers and refugees; despite his effort to escalate the wars in the Middle East and start a new war with Iran; despite his terrible handling of the Covid pandemic, and so many efforts to destroy liberty and freedom in the US, libertarians flocked to him as if he was the epitome of libertarian ideals.

During his Presidency, Republican Congressman Justin Amash expressed disdain for the cult of Trump and changed his registration to Libertarian, becoming the first sitting Libertarian Congressman. He even made movements that indicated his intent to seek the Libertarian nomination for President. The 2020 nominating convention scared him off before he could even make an official announcement. Despite a deadly virus outbreak, some in charge of the convention refused to allow an online convention to take place. They fought to death to prevent it because they knew that if an in person convention was held, that their anti-immigration anti-freedom candidates would be nominated because only their Covid denying supporters would show up in person. Thankfully they failed and an online convention was held, but that whole fiasco scared off the best potential candidate since Gary Johnson.

It became quite clear to me that many active members of the OKLP and those seeking leadership roles in the party supporters were people who held the beliefs above. They fought against efforts to reject bigotry. They made it quite clear that bigots were welcome and the victims of bigotry are not. Then came the January 6 assault on the US Capitol that disrupted the counting and certifying of the 2020 Electoral votes. The OKLP refused to take a stand against it stating that it wasn’t an Oklahoma problem.

These kinds of libertarians were gaining extensive traction all over the country, but none so blatant as those in New Hampshire. The series of tweets that came from the official LPNH Twitter account were quite appalling and nary a word from the OKLP. When the national party decided to take action against New Hampshire, those in leadership and influence in the OKLP spoke out against the national party and in support of the edgelord messaging of LPNH.

All of this to say that at one time, I felt like I might have found a political home. There were so many aspects of libertarian ideology that rang true to me and influenced my line of thinking. But there are severe ideological differences between me and those who seek to control the messaging and direction of the Libertarian Party. Over the last week, so many people I admire have resigned from their roles in the party. Many people who started the Oklahoma Libertarian Party have long ago left the public spotlight. I feel it is my time as well.

I am moving soon. I will need to re-register to vote. When I do, I plan on once again registering as an Independent voter. However, I will continue to work toward a world set free. I will work for liberty and justice that is truly for all. I will be renewing my efforts with Oklahomans for Ballot Access Reform. There are still so many areas of Oklahoma election law that needs reform. I feel that is where I can be of most help toward a world set free. Perhaps one day a new political party will emerge from those efforts and it will truly reflect the ideals that make up who I am.

-E. Zachary Knight

A Better House Of Representatives

November 6, 2020 Posted by zachary

While everyone is focused on the Presidential Election this year, I want to point out just how undemocratic and unrepresentative the US House of Representatives is.

In 1911, The House capped its membership at 435 members, the number of representatives at the time. The only time that increased was for a brief period after Alaska and Hawaii were brought into the Union. It was quickly brought back down to 435 members after then next census.During the following 100+ years, the US population increased by more than 3 times (92 million to 309 million). But we have not seen an increase in House membership to reflect that.

There are currently 7 states that have only 1 Representative in the House. According to the 2010 census, the populations of these states vary from 563k to 989k. That varying population means that there is less genuine representation in Montana (989k) than in Wyoming (563k).

The limitations in travel and technology present in 1911 when the House was capped is no longer an issue. Representatives can fly from their state to DC in a matter of hours. We have technology today that means that meetings and votes can be held virtually. The need to be in Washington at all is no longer relevant.

To fix this mass undemocratic body, I propose the following change (which I believe has been presented by others before me).

We should eliminate the cap entirely. Instead, we should set a floor. This floor will be that the least populated state in the Union gets at minimum 5 Representatives. If 5 would result in the members representing fewer than 30,000 people (the minimum set in the Constitution) then that state gets as many as that limit would allow. Then the Representation of the other states is based off that proportion.

If this were in place today, Wyoming would have 5 Representatives, and the proportion other states are based on would be 1 Representative for every 112,000 people. So, for example, Oklahoma would have 33 Representatives and California would have 330. For a total House size of roughly 2,700 members. Thanks to technology available today, there would be no reason for all those House members to have offices in DC, or to even have to travel there. They could be permanently stationed in their home states where they are more available to their constituents.

This change will also have the result of reducing the impact of the 2 at large Electors representing the 2 members of the Senate for all States. Meaning that the full Elector slate of each state will be more closely inline with the populations of the individual states.

EDIT:

To go along with this post about the House of Representatives and just how unrepresentative it is, I created a spreadsheet that gave me the data. This spreadsheet shows the population of the 50 US states as of 2010, their current number of Representatives, then in it goes into projecting various scenarios of Representative numbers based on different criteria. Basically, any scenario that isn’t a hard cap is going to increase the total number of Representatives.

State Representatives Current and Projected

What Is The Point Of Human Electors?

May 30, 2019 Posted by zachary

What is the point of having human Presidential Electors? Nearly every state binds the vote of the Presidential Electors to the statewide popular vote winner. Even if the winner of that state’s popular vote shoots his running mate in the face on election night, the Electors are still bound to cast their vote for him.

If Electors don’t vote for the winner of the state popular vote, they are immediately fired, fined, and replaced with another more willing cog. There is zero autonomy in this.

(more…)

2018 Oklahoma Midterm Election Endorsements

October 22, 2018 Posted by zachary

First things first, DO NOT VOTE STRAIGHT PARTY! I cannot stress this enough. Voting straight party means that many races you could be voting in and have a big impact in will be skipped. If you are voting straight party, and there is not a candidate of that party in some race on the ballot, then you are not casting a vote in that race. There are many qualified candidates who are independent, or are of a party you are ambivalent to that you could be supporting. Do you really want a candidate of a party you hate to win a high profile race simply because you decided to vote straight party and not to vote for their opponent?

Secondly, No one owns your vote but you. No candidate owns it. No other voters own it. It is yours and yours alone to freely give to whomever you wish. You are also absolutely free to withhold your vote in any race. You are not required to vote in any way. So in a sense, this second point counters my first point. So feel free to ignore me telling you not to vote straight party. But if that is your wish, I do ask you to at least look at your sample ballot and decide for yourself if those races that do not have a candidate of the party you support do have a candidate you could get behind.

Now for the simple task of putting forward my endorsements for all statewide and congressional races.

Statewide Races

For Governor, I am endorsing Libertarian Chris Powell. Of the three candidates, he actually supports full criminal justice reform and marijuana legalization for both medical and recreational use. Stitt says he supports the will of the people on medical, but he has expressed interest in blocking its growth. Edmondson was the state AG and used his position to expand the over-criminalization in Oklahoma leading to the problems we are facing right now. We cannot trust him to fix the mess he had a hand in creating. Neither Stitt nor Edmondson will reduce the size and scope of government in Oklahoma. Powell will. Powell has also stated clearly that he support ballot access reform, easing of the initiative process, and other changes to election laws to make it easier for you to vote, or run for office.

For Lt. Governor, we are not given a lot to go on here. In general, I think the office of Lt. Governor is a pointless office and should be gotten rid of. But since we have a race for it, here we go. I checked out the Independent Candidate, Ivan Holmes, but he has no real information to share. One wonders why he is even in the race. As for the Republican candidate, Matt Pinnell, and the Democratic candidate Anastasia Pittman I really have no opinion. Since the Lt Governor in Oklahoma has so little power and basically nothing to do (seriously, when was the last time the Lt Governor had to cast a tie-breaking vote in the Senate?), I am simply inclined to cast an endorsement for Anastasia Pittman for no other reason than having a woman of color in that office is preferable.

Libertarian candidate John Yeutter is the only choice for State Auditor and Inspector. His only opponent is Cindy Byrd, Republican. Both are licensed CPAs. But John is also a professor of accounting and is a member of the only political party that will actually do something about the rising cost of government services and tackle wasteful spending throughout the state.

Attorney General is actually pretty easy. After carefully reading and considering their positions, Democrat Mark Myles wins out over Republican Mike Hunter. Unfortunately, both are pro-death penalty, but that is about where their similarities end. I don’t like everything about Myles’ platform, but he at least recognizes the issues that our over-criminalization has had on the State and plans to do something about it. He recognizes that our criminal “justice” system disproportionately harms people of color and the poor among us and wants to fix that. Hunter on the other hand is simply dumb on crime and wants to keep on forcing Oklahoma down the exact same path it has been on.

Who knows what is happening with the State Treasurer‘s race. Republican Randy McDaniel doesn’t even have a website I can find. He is a sitting legislator and seems to be using this to advance his political career. Independent Charles de Coune does have a website but doesn’t have a whole lot of information there. What little I can find, he seems to be the better choice over the establishment Republican looking to advance his political career.

For Superintendent, it is easy to rule out Joy Hoffmeister. She really hasn’t done anything of note during her current tenure. Both Democrat John Cox and Independent Larry Huff have teaching experience and a background in education. I am inclined to support Larry Huff in this race for no other reason than I want to see the duopoly party stranglehold in Oklahoma broken.

The Commissioner of Labor race is something of a mystery. Only Democratic candidate Fred Dorrell has anything resembling an idea of what they want to do in the office. For that reason, I am inclined to support him in the coming election.

In the Insurance Commissioner race, we have a Republican career politician and a small business owning Democrat. Republican Glen Mulready has been in the legislature for over a decade and was part of the insurance committee. He says he has written many laws that impacted insurance in the state but I haven’t seen any indication that those laws have improved anything. I am not inclined to trust anyone making a career out of politics, especially someone who clearly telegraphed his intentions so early. So I will endorse Democrat Kimberly Fobbs.

In the race for Corporation Commissioner, Incumbent Republican Bob Anthony doesn’t tell us much about what he plans to do, instead relying on his long history in that office. He has effectively made a career in this position. His Democratic opponent Ashley Nicole McCray has a plan that includes providing services such as high speed internet to rural Oklahoma, something that it is in desperate need of. She also wants to make sure that the citizens of Oklahoma are protected from the long history of carelessness on the part of major companies in the state. Ashley Nicole McCray has my recommendation.

Congressional Races

In the First Congressional race, we have Republican Kevin Hern and Democrat Tim Gilpin. I honestly don’t see a lot to like about either one. They are both pretty awful on a foreign policy perspective, but Hern’s terrible stance on immigration, one founded on many falsehoods about the Obama Presidency, makes him even worse. I don’t live in the district and if I did, I would likely hold my nose and vote for Tim Gilpin.

In the Second Congressional race, we have a four way race. Incumbent Republican Markwayne Mullin is not right for Oklahoma. He needs to go. His Democratic Challenger, Jason Nichols actually seems to be pretty good on many issues. For example, I love that he supports Net Neutrality. I do not support the Libertarian in this race. He is not a good person in general and has made personal attacks and lies about many of my friends. The Independent in this race doesn’t have any plan to speak of. So vote for Jason Nichols.

In the Third Congressional Race, I endorse Democrat Frankie Robbins. Republican Frank Lucas is a big government conservative and does everything he can to increase government spending. I don’t believe that Robbins will be much better in that regard, but he will at least push back on some of the worst Republican impulses in congress.

In the Fourth Congressional Race, I never liked Republican Tom Cole. He is a war hawk and just loves to increase spending in government. The Independent in the race actually advertises himself as a MAGA Republican, ugh. Democrat Mary Brannon gets my endorsement for her stated goal to retire Tom Cole, Inhofe and Lankford.

In the Fifth Congressional race, I highly recommend Democrat Kendra Horn. She is a solid choice and if any Democrat in Oklahoma has a shot, it is her. The 5th district has been trending Democrat for years and it is high time it flipped. Republican Steve Russell is a major spender in Congress, never seeing a spending increase he didn’t love despite his initial campaign against government spending increases. That needs to end.

Down Ballot

For all down ballot races, I won’t get into any specifics. There are too many to go through. So I will post my formula here. I have not met a single Libertarian running for Oklahoma Senate or House that I don’t like. So if there is a Libertarian running in your district, I highly suggest voting for them. After that, I tend to vote against incumbents. But I prioritize Democrats in races where there is no incumbent.

For my local district, OK House District 81, I endorse Jackie Phillips. She has a good plan in place to represent Edmond in the capital.

State Questions

There are 5 state questions on the ballot this year. Here is how I am voting and how I recommend that you vote.

Vote Yes on SQ 793, allowing optometrists to open up shop inside of a retail establishment. This will be good for competition. They only people against this proposal are those benefiting from the lack of cheap competition.

Vote No on SQ 794. The Oklahoma Constitution already has a provision protecting victims’ rights. This question would put victim rights at odds with the right of the accused doing damage to due process in the state.

Vote No on SQ 798. The office of Lt Governor needs to go. Combining its race with the Governor race makes no sense and opens up the potential for the legislature to use this change to harm new political parties.

Vote No on SQ 800. The state does not need another rainy day fund, and they especially don’t need to create a new tax for a new one.

Vote No on SQ 801. Pushing more of the funding for public schools onto property tax payers is a no go. It would create a very uneven funding mechanism for Oklahoma schools, punishing schools in low income areas and propping up high income schools.

The First Amendment And The Right To Deface The US Flag

May 18, 2015 Posted by zachary

This is the American Flag. It is the symbol of  the United States of America. It is also just a piece of cloth. Just as those who support the government can wave it as a symbol of their love, those who are upset with the government can treat it as an effigy of that same government. If you are not allowed to criticize the government through the defacing of this flag, then we no longer live in a society that believes in the freedom of expression.A short while ago, I posted this image on Facebook that stated that people have the right to deface and burn the American Flag. I stand by that statement. Why? Because it is true. For that, I have been called an idiot, a traitor and a terrorist. They say this because I associated the flag with the government and not the nation. Why did I choose that phrasing? Because the true symbol of this nation is not the flag but the Constitution. The Constitution is the very document that created this country, the very document that our forefathers died to allow us to create this nation.

These people who called me an idiot, traitor and terrorist are upset that people displeased with the government would burn, deface or tread upon the American flag, yet they have nothing to say about the people elected to office, who swore with an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, who tread upon and burn the Constitution.

Our country is dying because we sit idly by and allow the true liars and traitors to sit in office and destroy our constitutionally protected rights, not constitutionally granted rights, protected rights. Our Congress and Presidents over the years have stripped the Constitution of its original meaning by trampling our 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 8th, 14th and many other protected rights. Yet because those elected officials wave that American Flag and shout patriotism from the capitol steps, a majority of people in this nation turn a blind eye to their traitorous acts.

Yet, I am the liar, idiot, traitor and terrorist because I speak out against this and support others who do as well.

Rally to your flag if you wish. That is your right. But for me, I will rally to my Constitution.

In Which I Respond To Comments To My Letter To The Editor

November 17, 2014 Posted by zachary

Over the weekend, I had a letter to the editor published to both NewsOK and at the Tulsa World. Both sites, published the letter with little modifications. The letter itself is mostly a rehash of my earlier article about Oklahoma’s low voter turnout and its impact on future petitions. It also called for real reform to pass.

However, there was one problem. I wanted to respond to a comment on the Tulsa World which I felt poorly reflected on the current petitioning climate. Tulsa World reader J. Lee wrote:

It appears that many people don’t really care what happens. But that is absolutely no reason to lower the party petitioning burden especially to what it was 40-50 years ago since the population has increased over a million since that time.

Any entity which lowers it standards to appease a few will eventually be left with no standards.

What J. Lee wrote here does a real disservice to those seeking to form a new party in Oklahoma. It is based on the false premise that Oklahoma’s petitioning laws and the change in 1974 was based on some actual reasoning based on population. That is not true at all.

The problem with this is that the Tulsa World’s commenting policy prevents me from responding to this comment directly. The Tulsa World wants me to pay nearly $200 just to comment on articles of interest. That is not happening. So instead, I am responding here in the hopes that interested people will read it and misinformation will be cleared away. If anyone out there has a subscription or still has commenting enabled because they have not reached their monthly ration of articles, feel free to respond to J. Lee with the following:

Let me lay out a few facts for you. I hope that I won’t have to explain any of this too much.

Population of Oklahoma:
1970 – 2,559,063
2010 – 3,751,351
Percent Changed – 46.6%

Voting Population of Oklahoma:
1972 Presidential Election (last election before new rules went into effect) – 1,057,396
2012 Presidential Election (most recent similar election) – 1,334,872
Percent Changed – 26.2%

1974 party petitioning requirement – 5,000 signatures or 0.47% of the 1972 vote
2014 party petitioning requirement – 66,744 or 5% of the vote cast in 2012
Percent Changed – 1,235%

If we wanted to adjust the number of signatures needed to form a new party based on population, then we would have this amount:
5,000 plus a 46.6% change = 7,330 signatures today.

However, if we base it off of voting population, we would get this number:
5,000 plus a 26.2% change = 6,310

Both of those calculations are far far smaller than the current signature requirement that is 1235% higher than it was in 1972.

So do you want to rethink your position?

Again, I would love to respond myself. When I aired my issues with the Tulsa World on Twitter, their only response was to upsell me on a subscription. They offered no real solution. I guess, if anyone wants a real conversation on a news site, they will have to go with NewsOK where all you need is a free account to read everything and comment to all articles.

My Latest Letter To The Editor Is Published In The Tulsa World

June 6, 2014 Posted by zachary

My latest letter to the editor points out that the legislature once again failed to pass ballot access reform. This one was published by the Tulsa World. I sent the same letter to the Daily Oklahoman.

Another session of the Legislature has ended and Oklahoma is still number one in having the worst ballot access laws in the nation.

Oklahoma has the harshest laws regulating who can form a new political party or who can be on the presidential ballot. All other states have an easier process for both of those actions.

This year, the Legislature considered House Bill 2134, which would have greatly eased both of those processes, but once again was quietly killed it. The bill would have reduced the number of signatures needed to form a new political party by half. It later was changed to reducing the independent presidential petition requirement by half. The bill went to a conference committee where it languished and died. This is the same sort of committee that has quietly killed every ballot access bill in the last six years.

Oklahoma is in sore need of new political ideologies and new leadership outside the current parties. But we will get neither if we keep electing the same people who block efforts to allow those ideologies and leaders access to the political process. We need to reform our laws, but more important, we need to vote out of office anyone who votes to deny political freedom in Oklahoma.

My letter was also published by the Daily Oklahoman. Here it is as they published it.

Another session of the Legislature has ended and Oklahoma is still No. 1. In what? In having the worst ballot access laws in the nation. This state has the harshest laws regulating who can form a new political party or who can be on the presidential ballot. All other states have an easier process for both actions.

This year, the Legislature considered a bill that would have greatly eased both of these processes; once again, lawmakers quietly killed it. The bill would have reduced, by half, the number of signatures needed to form a new political party and to meet the independent presidential petition requirement. The bill went to a conference committee, where it languished and died. This is the same sort of committee that has quietly killed every ballot access bill that passed both chambers of the Legislature in the past six years.

Oklahoma sorely needs new political ideologies and new leadership outside the current parties. We will get neither if we keep electing the same people who block efforts to allow these ideologies and leaders access to the political process. We need to reform our laws, but more importantly we need to vote out of office anyone who denies political freedom in Oklahoma.

Sorry Representative Cleveland. Media Hype Is Not Justification For Legislation

December 3, 2013 Posted by zachary

Oklahoma State Representative Bobby ClevelandI am sure many of you have heard of the recent media scare called the “knockout game“. In this “game”, an assailant targets a random individual and attempts to knockout that person in a single punch. While the media has been playing this up as a dangerous new trend for youth, reality is far from it. Aside from the media reports of this “trend” there seems to be no verifiable evidence of it being an actual thing.

But don’t let facts get in the way of a law maker who wants to “take a stand” on what he sees as a dangerous threat to the safety of the citizens. This is my State Representative Bobby Cleveland for you. Cleveland is a freshman legislator in the Oklahoma House and he has yet to find that niche that will make him a household name in Oklahoma. Last year, his major contributions were the repeals of some old and outdated criminal laws, such as a law that made it illegal to horse race on main street. While he wants to keep that up, he has now set his sights on other areas he would like to tackle. One specific case is the “knockout game”.

Disappointed to see him waste his time and legislative slot on something like this, I wrote him a letter hoping to convince him that this was a bad idea. I specifically applauded him for his repeal efforts, explained that the “knockout game” is probably not a real threat, and pointed out that his proposal would most likely end up as one such law that someone else would end up having to repeal in the future.

Representative Cleveland,

I have greatly admired your efforts this past Legislative Session to repeal old and outdated criminal laws. It has been a breath of fresh air to see someone in the Legislature take that effort which so rarely happens.

However, I am greatly disappointed to see that you are proposing to introduce a bill which, if passed, would simply add to the list of pointless and outdated criminal laws. I am referring to your proposal to add further penalties to those playing the supposed “knockout game”.

http://newsok.com/oklahoma-lawmaker-seeks-to-deter-knockout-game/article/3908821

What really disappoints me here is that you are giving into the media hype around a game that may not actually exist and one that is not known to exist at all in Oklahoma. There have been exactly ZERO reports of anyone targeted this way in Oklahoma.

http://reason.com/blog/2013/11/25/is-the-knockout-game-a-hate-crime-is-it

We already have adequate laws against assault in this state and making an “example” of a particular kind of assault, which may not actually exist, does not seem to be an effective use of the Legislature.

I highly suggest that you end this idea of a law against the “knockout game” before you add to the pool of laws that someone like yourself will end up trying to repeal 10 years down the road.

Thank you for your time,

I will give Rep Cleveland credit here, he responded the same morning I sent my letter. I love it when I get quick feedback from my legislators. Unfortunately, his response was pretty light on substance. He did not really address my concern but simply restated his position that the law is needed for some as of yet unknown reason.

Good morning Zachary,

Thanks for your concern. First of all we do not have a law for juveniles that participate in the Knockout Game.

I am simply proposing that anyone under the age of 18 if they are convicted of knocking someone out they will be tried as as an adult.

Although, I am continuing to file Bills to repeal outdated laws, I believe my bill is important for Oklahomans.

I plan to repeal 31 laws this next session.

Again thank you for your concern.

Representative Cleveland

As you can see, this response really didn’t address my concerns in any reasonable fashion. So I sent a followup email. I responded to his email asking questions about each statement and then expanded my idea that this proposed legislation is a bad idea and does not address any real problem.  Oh. And I threw in a reference to another lawmaker who gave in to some rather absurd media hype.

Representative Cleveland,

Thank you for your quick response. I appreciate the effort you put into keeping the channels of communication open between yourself and your constituents.

I do feel the need to respond to your justification for your proposal.

You wrote, “First of all we do not have a law for juveniles that
participate in the Knockout Game.”

Do we not currently have laws for juveniles who participate in assault? Are those laws deficient in some way that they would not cover this perceived threat?

You wrote, “I am simply proposing that anyone under the age of 18 if they are convicted of knocking someone out they will be tried as as an adult.”

Is there really a need to take a youth, who is still growing both mentally and physically, and taking their life and future away for this perceived threat? Is the destruction of the future of a youth really a valid solution to this perceived problem?

Additionally, your bill proposed a solution, but I do not think you have fully identified a problem it is meant to address. I sent two links in my previous email. Both of which called into question the nature of the “knockout game”. Both expressed the idea that this “game” may not actually be a problem or even a “thing”. If this is nothing more than media hype, what puts your proposed legislature on higher ground than Senator Shortey’s proposed ban on using human fetuses in food production?

My main concern is that too many laws are introduced and passed based not on fact or science but on knee-jerk reactions to media hype. I would not want to see another law introduced on such flimsy grounds.

Again, I got a quick response from Rep Cleveland. Unfortunately, he seemed to have quickly grown tired of trying to defend and indefensible position. His letter was short and pointless. He did not address anything that I asked and did not provide any further justification.

BTW, I appreciate the nice things you said about my repealer bills. My knockout bill is more of a statement trying to get the word out that Oklahoma will not tolerate this game in Oklahoma. I understand where u are coming from. Again thanks for contacting me.

BC

In the end, what we have here is another lawmaker giving in to media hype and attacking the new and “scary” thing that your kids must be doing. It is a shame that he would defend this proposal rather than face the facts of the matter. Unfortunately, this behavior is rampant in legislatures across the nation.

All is not lost though. There is still time for Representative Cleveland to drop this idea. Legislators do not yet have to file legislation they wish to address in the 2014 session. So he could wake up to reality and decide that this legislation is a bad idea. Unfortunately, he has already gained press time for his idea and with that, his determination will probably be solidified. Which is sad really.

April Fools And All That

April 1, 2013 Posted by zachary

Today, if you had not noticed or don’t follow me on Facebook, I have been busy posting a whole lot of posts befitting the holiday. All my posts to Facebook, with the exception of one post, have been carefully constructed to contradict my normal political and idealogical positions. I will now document them here:

First up, my first post of the day regarding what games I purchase and play:

I have decided that I will no longer buy games unless they were published by Ubisoft or EA exclusively for Windows. There is nothing better than those combos. Except maybe always Online. Who needs offline play anyway?

For those who don’t follow me closely, I despise a number of positions, mostly due to DRM, that both EA and Ubisoft take. The Online-only requirement of many of their games being a big part of it. Additionally, as a Linux user, I try to avoid any game, with some exceptions, that do not have a Linux version.

Next, a little support for No-fly lists managed in secret by our government:

Reason is just so wrong on this issue. No Fly Lists are the best things the government has ever done. They keep us safe by keeping crazy people off flights. If anything, the list needs to be bigger. Just think about all the crazy people who would be sitting next to you if we didn’t have these lists. As for finding out why you are on it, you know what you did. If you didn’t do anything wrong, you wouldn’t be on the list. Simple as that.

http://reason.com/archives/2013/04/01/why-the-no-fly-list-doesnt-fly

Of course I think any violation of our 6th Amendment rights to be a very bad thing. Any process that allows the government to make decisions and dole out punishment without proper due process is a horrible practice. I would never support something like this and campaign continuously to undue all the damage done after 9/11.

I have also had a change of heart as to my political affiliation:

I have also decided to give up in my endeavor to see ballot access reform in Oklahoma. I have decided to instead join the Republican party. This means that I will be working with them to make Oklahoma a one party state in which the only options available to voters will be Republicans.

If you can’t beat ’em, join ’em. That’s my new motto.

I have been an Independent/Libertarian all my life and don’t plan on being anything else. The Republican controlled Oklahoma government has been a source of many frustrations as efforts to open elections have been thwarted at every turn. About the only thing the REpublican party can do regarding ballot access is to make it worse by doubling candidate filing fees this year.

Following that, I have also been converted to better economic principals:

I have also been converted to the idea of Keynesian Economics in which government spending drives a healthy economy. If that sounds like it contradicts my previous change of Joining the Republican Party, it doesn’t. Republicans believe firmly, if not openly, in Keynesian economics as displayed in its acts of granting special privileges and tax incentives for special interest companies. How better to drive growth in the private sector than to open up the trough of taxpayer money.

There is nothing “Free Market” about the US’s current economy or market. The government dips its dirty little fingers into every aspect of commerce. If we need anything, it is less government. It doesn’t matter if it is Republicans or Democrats who run the government, the truth is that our hard earned tax money gets taken from us and given to special interests who did not earn it. That needs to end.

Next, I have changed who represents me in the video game arena:

I have decided to leave the Entertainment Consumer Association and instead join the Video Game Voter Network, run by the Entertainment Software Association. I have learned that consumer rights can never grow and blossom without the careful oversight of a benevolent and loving corporate parent. After all, corporations, especially multi-national and publicly traded corporations, know what is best for their consumers. That loving guidance is just not something that can come from an independent organization such as the ECA.

The lack of autonomy of the VGVN was no clearer than it was during the protests of the Stop Online Piracy Act. In that protest, the ESA was busy trying to push the legislation through while the ECA was busy protesting and trying to put a stop to that infringement of our free speech rights. Silent throughout the whole protest was the VGVN. That proved once and for all that it would never be a source of real protection for video gamers.

Interestingly enough, I did have one post that was not an April Fool’s joke. It was my first post of the day and was made prior to me remembering what today was. This was in regard to a picture a friend of mine posted that seriously misconstrued the arguments against a minimum wage hike.

Who is against Minimum Wage Hikes?This is what I hate about the debate over minimum wage. Those in support of increasing minimum wage try to make it out as CEOs of big multi-billion dollar corporations are against it. They are not. They actually love minimum wage increases because it causes competition to drop out.

The people against minimum wage increases are those mom and pop shops that pro-labor people love to idolize. Those mom and pop shops are the ones actually hurt by increases in minimum wage. Those shops are already barely breaking even and adding unnecessary and costly increases to their expenses will hurt them more than anything.

By supporting minimum wage, you support big multi-national corporations and hate locally owned mom and pop shops.

So it has been an interesting day for me and anyone who follows me. I know I got my wife there for a while when it came to the switch to the Republican party. Many others were pretty quick on the draw and enjoyed the fun. We’ll have to see what I can think of next year.

My Video Game Legislation Scare

January 18, 2013 Posted by zachary

I was doing a search for video game related legislation that may have been introduced in the Oklahoma Legislature. My search for “video game” returned two bills. Since the OKLegislature’s bill search is busted beyond just allowing the search, I went to a different page and typed in the bill number. What came up was a bill creating definitions and punishments for mass killings.

This shocked me and I immediately set about reading the legislation to find out how the author made the connection between video games and mass killings. I could not find a single instance of the phrase “video games” in my reading. A text search could not find it either. I thought that perhaps the author had submitted an early draft, which got indexed for the text search, but a second draft was actually uploaded to the server. Nope.

Turns out, I was looking at the wrong bill. The search for “video game” returned a bill number SB955. I then mistyped and entered SB995 into the other page. Once I figured out the error, I was greatly relieved.

SB955 turned out to be dealing with electronic recycling that I may need to consider as it mandates that any retailer that sells electronics also act as a drop off center for recycling of electronics.

The other bill that returned for “video game” was some changes to lottery regulations and the term “video game” came up as part of the definition of “electronic lottery game”.