ROPE Voter Guide 2012

The Board of Directors of ROPE has agreed upon a number of candidates we believe worthy of support November 6, 2012. ROPE is a private organization and therefore cannot ENDORSE candidates as could a political organization with appropriate tax status (501C-3/4). ROPE does not donate money to political campaigns, nor do we assist any campaigns in an official capacity, though board members are free to personally support or endorse any candidate of their choosing. We are a non-partisan, Christian worldview organization that believes in limited government and local control of education. We have produced this voter guide not because we are well connected and feel we know the ins and outs of the system but because we have learned a few things in the last several years and are happy to share what we know. Please realize, we do not consider ourselves political pundits, nor do we believe we have all the answers these are just our thoughts. If we have NOT included a candidate or a race, it is because we either did not have enough information to make an informed decision, or we feel unable to support ANY candidate in the race. Though we made our ROPE Candidate Questionnaire available on the internet and attempted to pass it around in the best way possible (for us), very few candidates completed our survey. In fact, the only candidate still in a political race that completed the survey is HOWARD HOUCHEN running for Senate in District 5. Please find his very comprehensive Candidate Survey here. If you have any questions after reading this voter guide, please do not hesitate to contact any of our board, or me at jenni@RestoreOkPublicEducation.com. We are happy to do the best we can to educate you as to the reasons behind our selections. These are the most tenuous times for conservatism in recent history. Please vote this November 6th and urge others to do the same. Thank you for your time. Jenni White President Restore Oklahoma Public Education (ROPE)

PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

MITT ROMNEY and PAUL RYAN For those of you that may not know, President Romney has vowed in public, a number of times to return to the states, those programs not called for by the Constitution. One of these is education. Though President Obama has spent BILLIONS of dollars enticing states to adopt his very Progressive/Marxist model for public education (and our Republican Superintendent and Governor have put their hands out for a great bit of it even after telling voters they want the federal government out of education), Governor Romney has promised that he would revoke state education grants from the federal government. In our belief, there is no possible way of fixing public education without removing the stench that creeps in through the federal government. It is for this reason (and, we might add hope), we support Governor Romney for President of the United States. He is not a panacea, so we MUST continue to work to restore our Republic if he is elected, but we feel he will at least slow down our decent into socialism and give us time to reclaim our country and education system.

US REPRESENTATIVE
District 1 JIM BRIDENSTINE District 2 MARKWAYNE MULLIN District 4 R.J. HARRIS

STATE SENATE
District 5 Howard Houchen (R) District 11 Dave Bell (R) District 15 Rob Standridge (R)

STATE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

District 2 John Bennett (R) District 3 Roger Mattox (R) District 12 David Tackett (R) District 21 Dustin Roberts (R). Although we did not originally support Dustin, he has apparently reconsidered his position on the Common Core State Standards and seems to adequately understand the problems with the collection of public school student data. District 26 Justin Wood (R). We have met with Justin. His mother is a school teacher and Dustin himself seems to have very good grasp on the issues surrounding public education. During our interview, he has said he will not support federal intrusion into schools and will, instead, support local governance.

District 28 Tom Newell (R) District 47 Leslie Osborn (R) District 48 While we do not know anything about Brian Spencer (R), we cannot support the incumbent in this race, Pat Owenby (R). Rep. Owenby has rarely had time to discuss our concerns about Oklahoma education issues and rarely votes with us for local control, voting mainly with establishment Republicans who believe they know better than parents how to care for and educate their children. District 60 Dan Fisher. Dan will be an excellent, Christian addition to our State legislature! District 66 We will support the incumbent Jadine Nollan. Representative Nollan has been very nice to speak with us on several occasions and she did kill a bill that would have forced home school parents to submit copies of their lesson plans to the state but she, at times, seems to have difficulty discerning between parental rights and state control. If elected, it will be very important to make sure she hears the voice of her constituents this upcoming session. District 76 David Brumbaugh (R) the incumbent over Glenda K. Puett (D) District 78 Paul Catalano (R) over the incumbent Jeannie McDaniel (D) District 87 Jason Nelson (R), the incumbent, is a decent man with small children who we believe tries to do the right thing. The only problem is that he often doesnt trust the people to do the right thing and often feels that government should step in to handle perceived or real problems. He has always been very polite to speak with us, however, he tends to side with government control over local control (the people). He will require much contact from his conservative district residents if re-elected. District 88 Aaron Kaspereit (R). District 99 Willard Linzy (R) over the very liberal Democratic incumbent Anastasia Pittman. District 101 Gary Banz (R). Though Representative Banz (the incumbent) and ROPE have had their differences, Representative Banz has voted with us on the last several issues of the session (SB1797 and the A-F rules disallowance). We believe it is possible that, as a former history teacher, he is beginning to see that our schools have become overregulated and not locally controlled and will begin to legislate from that position a possibility which allows our support.

JUSTICE OF THE OKLAHOMA SUPREME COURT

Because of the fact that all Supreme Court Justices currently serving are holdovers from Governor Henrys terms in office, and because all four voted to kill the personhood initiative petition. Once these are gone, Governor Fallin can appoint others that - we certainly hope - will be pro-life, pro-family values, pro-Constitution individuals. Consequently, we suggest votes NOT TO RETAIN ANY of the current Oklahoma Supreme Court Justices. I have included a map of their districts, however, because I thought it might interest you to see who your justice is/was.

DISTRICT 3 Noma D. Gurich DO NOT RETAIN DISTRICT 4 Yvonne Kauger DO NOT RETAIN DISTRICT 7 James E. Edmondson DO NOT RETAIN DISTRICT 8 Douglas L. Combs DO NOT RETAIN Please know we know nothing about the criminal justice system other than that it involves attorneys and the transmission of either private and/or public money. There is a site called Court Facts that explains the judicial system in Oklahoma, those judges that are up for retention and a bit about those judges. Carol Hefner, who ran for State Senate in 2012, has given an analysis of the rest of the public justices. We know of no other besides that produced by the Chamber of Commerce (doing business as the Oklahoma Civil Justice Council). The Chamber and ROPE are not in agreement with the way to educate our children (we dont believe in the education of children for the workforce) so we would not choose to advance their agenda. It appears that Mrs. Hefner and the OCJC are in agreement on their opinions, but again, this is not our area of expertise. Either memorize which justice will be on your ballot, or carry a cheat-sheet with you! Its the only way to be sure! Remember, justices should be FAIR and IMPARTIAL ALWAYS while upholding the Constitution of Oklahoma and the United States at all times. Judges should not be refereed by a scorecard as to whether or not they are pro-business (for example).

JUDGE OF THE OKLAHOMA COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

DISTRICT 1 Clancy Smith YES TO RETAIN DISTRICT 4 Arlene Johnson YES TO RETAIN DISTRICT 5 David B. Lewis YES TO RETAIN

JUDGE OF THE OKLAHOMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS

DISTRICT 3, OFFICE 1 P. Thomas Thornbrugh - DO NOT RETAIN DISTRICT 4, OFFICE 1 William C. Hetherington, Jr. - DO NOT RETAIN DISTRICT 5, OFFICE 1 Kenneth L. Buettner YES TO RETAIN DISTRICT 5, OFFICE 2 Robert Bobby Bell - DO NOT RETAIN DISTRICT 6, OFFICE 1 E. Bay Mitchell, III YES TO RETAIN

STATE QUESTIONS
Last year, What Am I Voting For put together very comprehensive videos and summaries of all the state questions. This year, we ran out of time to get that done. Consequently, none of us at ROPE are as knowledgeable on the state questions in 2012 as we were in 2010! Though there has been quite a bit of interest in the state questions, the problem appears to be that NO ONE SEEMS TO REALLY AGREE ON MANY. Yes, everyone has their opinions, but rarely are groups opinions intersecting. OCPAC (Charlie Meadows) and OK-SAFE (Amanda Teagarden) are two groups with whom ROPE collaborates. Both have published opinions on the state questions. Both groups have boards/members that provide input on their final document. Because Amanda has personally researched (to the point of sitting in excise tax meetings) the questions, and because her assessments make sense if you take the time to read her research and think about it, we will vote the same way as OK-SAFE on SQ758. We are providing both views in order to allow you to make up your own mind, however. Please note, we think it reasonable to suggest that if you dont understand a question, vote against it its the only way to be sure. This is the actual text of the state questions as they will appear on the ballot. Check the OKC912Project email voter guide for links to the actual ballots for many of the counties. Here OCPAC and OK-SAFE suggestions side-by-side. I am linking to the OK-SAFE document so you can read Amandas very thorough research on each question, but I have been unable to find a way (including the OCPAC Facebook page) to link to OCPACs document, consequently we cant provide access to those thoughts here. If you have questions about OCPACs position on any of the state questions, we suggest writing Charlie Meadows at charliemeadows7@gmail.com.

STATE QUESTION
758 Ad Valorem Taxation Limitation on Valuation Increases 759 Affirmative Action

OCPAC
YES

OK-SAFE
NO

ROPE
OK-SAFE received a letter from a Garfield County Assessor who agreed with their position. That is good enough for us. NO This question does nothing to address affirmative action at the federal level. Oklahoma is a Right To Work state what is the point of reaffirming a business right to hire whom they wish why change the OK Constitution for that? NO Although the idea was to speed up the parole process, if passed, SQ 762 will transfer accountability from the Governor to an unelected Pardon and Parole Board, depriving the people of the ability to hold the decision maker directly accountable. NO

YES

NO

762 Removes Governor from Pardon and Parole Board

NO

NO

764 Creates the Water Infrastructure Credit Enhancement Reserve Fund; allows the OWRB (Oklahoma Water Resources Board) to issue bonds 765 Repeals section of the Oklahoma constitution relating to the Department of Public Welfare and grants the Legislature the authority to create a new department. 766 Exempts all intangible personal property from ad valorem taxation

NO

NO

YES

YES

Anytime a legislator wants to create a fund and/or allow taxpayers to underwrite bond indebtedness we say NO! NO NO YES with Who knows if this idea will actually work, reservations but it doesnt expand government and might add a layer of accountability if the legislature will be diligent and watchful and not a rubber stamp for further misbehavior. YES NO While BOTH OCPAC and OK-SAFEs stances on this one are understandable and they both have excellent reasons for their votes we need to go with OCPAC here. Business shouldnt be taxed. Taxes should come from consumption its the only way to be truly fair with taxation as the poorest to the richest will pay the same tax on a squash, for example. There may be unintended consequences of this question as Amanda has so reasonably pointed out and that is a concern, but still and all, well go YES