House Republicans may face an uphill battle

By Michael McNutt
Published: June 8, 2008

Squashing public debate this past legislative session may cost Republicans a couple of seats in the state House of Representatives, the chairman of the Oklahoma Democratic Party said.

Advertisement

"One of the things that we are going to campaign on is what we felt like was the lack of democracy in the House leadership on hearing bills, debating bills,” Ivan Holmes said.

Holmes said Democrats could pick up six to 10 seats.

Oklahoma Republican Party Chairman Gary Jones said Republicans will at least hold onto its 57-44 advantage in the House and could pick up some seats.

"It's going to be a very spirited election season,” he said. "At the end of the day we'll probably about break even or maybe pick up a few seats.”

Democrats, also energized by young voters registering because of the zeal of presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama, may win enough seats to reclaim the majority in the House of Representatives, which they lost in the general election four years ago, Holmes said.

Jones said he expects more Democrats will vote for the Republicans presidential candidate, John McCain.

Kern's anti-gay remarks
Democrats also could benefit from anti-gay comments made earlier this year by Rep. Sally Kern, R-Oklahoma City, during a meeting away from the state Capitol. An audio clip of her was posted on the

YouTube Web site in which Kern called homosexuality "the biggest threat our nation has, even more so than terrorism or Islam.”

Jones agreed that could be an issue.

"It's definitely caused people to take notice, but I will tell you there are people on both sides of that issue,” he said. "There'll be a lot of people that come to Sally's side and stand with her on the issue. Quite obviously it's an emotional issue on both sides.”

During the past session, a House Republican committee chairman twice prevented parents of autistic children from speaking on whether health insurance companies should be forced to provide autism treatment coverage and another House Republican committee chairman refused to let the principal chief of the Cherokee Nation speak against a proposal to make English the state's official language.

Jones said similar complaints were made when Democrats controlled the House for 80 years until 2004.

Democrats so far have an edge in trying to reclaim the majority — 20 of the 33 unopposed candidates are Democrats. The remaining 13 are Republicans.

Holmes said nearly 30 House seats went uncontested in 2006, so Democrats made an effort to recruit candidates this year.

Term limits come into play
Six Democrats and one Republican can't seek re-election because of 12-year legislative term limits.

Seven Republicans — including former House Speaker Lance Cargill and two powerful House committee chairmen — and one Democrat decided not to seek re-election.

Cargill, R-Harrah, stepped down from the speaker's office just before the start of this year's legislative session because of personal tax problems.

The state Ethics Commission also is believed to be investigating whether Cargill had anything to do with how political checks intended for the Oklahoma Republican Party instead went to the Oklahoma County Republican Party in 2004. Cargill has denied wrongdoing.

Who else is leaving?
Other House GOP leaders leaving are Majority Floor Leader Greg Piatt of Altus, Rep. Ron Peterson, R-Broken Arrow, chairman of the House Economic Development and Financial Services Committee, and Rep. Dennis Adkins, chairman of the House Energy and Technology Committee.

House Democratic leader Danny Morgan — who did not draw an opponent — said Democrats will make gains.

"We're going to be very pleased when this election cycle is over with the gains that we make,” said Morgan, of Prague.

House Speaker Chris Benge, who has a GOP opponent, said Republicans should hold onto the majority.

"We still are in a very good position to expand our majority from the 57 members that we currently have,” said Benge, R-Tulsa."I still feel very confident that we'll end up expanding our majority this election year.”


Toolbar sponsored by: David Stanley Ford
Bookmark and Share



Comments

Thank you for joining our conversations on NewsOK.com. We encourage your discussions but ask that you stay within the bounds of our terms and conditions. Please help us by reporting comments that violate these guidelines. To review our rules of engagement, go to Commenting and posting policy.

Editor's note: It is not our intent to offer comments on crime or fatality stories.

Leave a comment. Log in below or sign up (it's free).

   
John: I now see where you got the only 'covers 1 in 4 families with autism'. Again, this is Blackwell and Peterson's inaccurate spin of the facts. An independent cost analysis was performed specifically for Oklahoma. The independent study, whose methodology has been applied at several states that have passed the same legislation concluded only 1 in 4 families with autism would use the maximum benefit since all children with autism are different. Autism is a spectrum disease, with children at one end considered the extreme, and could require potentially more services and at the other end of the spectrum children may only require, say 20% of the maximum benefits. Listening to inaccurate 'spin' and believing it as fact will get you in trouble every time. By the way the Cost Analysis was provided to the press and to every legislator at the Capitol. Benge obviously didn't understand the methodology and Peterson simply told both he and Blackwell what to say. Blackwell and Benge probably didn't even have to read the study since Peterson was calling the shots from the very beginning.
Robyne, Edmond - Jun 9, 2008 7:10 PM
Report as inappropriate
To Bobby: Sorry, I misunderstood since their is a petition process at the Capitol to get a bill heard. Thanks for your suggestion.
Robyne, Edmond - Jun 9, 2008 1:39 PM
Report as inappropriate
To John: No it is not true that Nick's Law would cover only 1 in 4 families with autism (been talking to Reverend Blackwell, haven't you?). Let me explain: Many families with autism do not have insurance purposely because insurance does not cover their child's autism diagnosis. Why would they pay upwards to $1500/month premium for something that doesn't cover their child's illness? They spend that $1500 on their child's treatments and go to the emergency room for everything else. Others who don't have insurance rely on state services (Medicaid-they would not purchase insurance if it were $200/month. Many of these people are in a cycle of just living off the state, which is exactly what will happen once the 1000's of autistic children in Oklahoma turn 18 in about 2 years, if they aren't given the proven treatments to help reverse the symptoms of autism), while others would purchase insurance if it covered their child's illness, so you see Nick's Law would provide the incentive to reduce the number of uninsured in our state. The actuarial study performed indicated insurance premiums for a single member would cost $1.60/month, for a family it would cost $4.50/month. Not one insurance commissioner from any state that enacted similar legislation could attribute a rise in premiums to autism coverage. There hasn't been an insurance mandate in Oklahoma since 2003, yet our insurance rates continue to rise, deductibles continue to rise and benefits keep being reduced. 10 years ago autism was covered because there was no real treatment for these children, now that there is, insurance companies decided to deny coverage. If you would like to talk to me offline you may email me at wrohde@cox.net.
Robyne, Edmond - Jun 9, 2008 1:32 PM
Report as inappropriate
I repeat my last comment. Organize a petition drive and get your bill put on a ballet and go around the legislature.
Bobby, Edmond - Jun 9, 2008 1:20 PM
Report as inappropriate
To Bobby: We had a petition. Nearly everyone on the Senate side signed, including the Republicans, but only 4 Republicans signed on the House side so we were 20 short. The House Republicans were literally threatened by House Leadership if they signed they would not receive money from the Republican party for their reelection. We needed 68 for a petition to be discharged.
Robyne, Edmond - Jun 9, 2008 1:15 PM
Report as inappropriate
is it true that "nicks law" only would assist in covering about 1 in 4 children diagnosed w/ autism? why arent we advocating a more well rounded approach? what about families of autistic children that dont even have insurance? or are on a private plan that state mandates CANT cover? I still wonder if this mandate is the best solution if the true desire is to help ALL families with autistic children.
John, Norman - Jun 9, 2008 11:46 AM
Report as inappropriate
Robyne, another solution to problem with the "Republicans". Oklahoma law has provisions for just this type of dilema. You did not get what you wanted from the legislature, go around them and start a petition to get the isssue on the next election. What a concept. Allow the Oklahoma citizen to vote on Nick's Law. If enough agree, then it passes.
Bobby, Edmond - Jun 9, 2008 11:06 AM
Report as inappropriate
Robyne, and others, It is obvious from your many post that you consider your views "right" and the rest just uninformed, selfish or just plain mean spirited. That being the case, we could save a lot of time and money by doing away with the political proces and just having you decide for the rest of us what our priorities should be. Funding for roads, bridges, education, law enforcement, prisons, DHS, welfare, Nick's Law, Stephanie's Law, and a host of other social programs discussed on these Nick's Law blogs. You decide which of those causes deserve your consideration and which ones don't. While you are at it, figure out where the money is going to come from. Real world is that each and every one these worthy issues and others that do not come to mind, all cost money. Luckily for rest of us, the process has checks and balances built in which keep the legislature from knee jerk responses. I for one am very happy with the way House Republicans stood their ground. You like the Democrats, change parties. That is your right and choice.
Bobby, Edmond - Jun 9, 2008 10:46 AM
Report as inappropriate
Michael-As a card carrying Republican since 1976, and after our involvement in the legislative process during this last session, I agree with you 100% at least at the state level. Personally, I'm not thrilled with either national candidate, but again when it comes to Oklahoma, I have nothing but respect for the Democrats and I am ashamed of how the House Republicans behaved. Robyne Rohde
Robyne, Edmond - Jun 9, 2008 1:05 AM
Report as inappropriate
Brock in Beaver...impressive words to be sure, but not an ounce of truth to be found in them as they relate to Democrats. That is unless of course you consider helping the least among us as being self absorbed. Or if you consider wanting to protect our great planet as being perpetually pissed-off. Actually, when I analyze your quote the first thing that came to my mind was Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh - the official mouthpieces of the Republican party. While I do not think either of them is necessarily self-hating, I certainly think most view them as self-absorbed and perpetually pissed-off. The difference between right wing republicans and democrats can be summed up in two quite simple yet very meaningful words...democrats care.
Michael, Oklahoma City - Jun 9, 2008 12:32 AM
Report as inappropriate
...and then there are the Republicans!
Kevin, Oklahoma City - Jun 8, 2008 10:13 PM
Report as inappropriate
The Democratic Party has devolved into a club for the illegitimately aggrieved, the self-absorbed, the self-hating and the perpetually pissed-off. It is a sanctuary where solipsistic malcontents and their disjointed causes find refuge and support. It has long ceased being an earnest gathering of broad minds where man's timeless problems are examined against the backdrop of the Constitution and solutions to them proposed based on the actual realities of the human condition. It is now the political province of the intellectually deceased, where frightened, lock-step ideologues and other small men and women concoct and promote divisive, destructive, weird and cowardly policies developed within a not-so-quaint, quasi-Marxist stricture of gender, class and race. - - - Not my words, but very fitting.

Brock, Beaver - Jun 8, 2008 10:09 PM
Report as inappropriate
Why, thank you, Jason. I think you’re insightful and thought provoking comments will help our cause so much. Kinda like Rush's Operation Caius. Robyne Rohde, Mommy to Nicholas (Nick's Law).
Robyne, Edmond - Jun 8, 2008 2:31 PM
Report as inappropriate
Kevin-My insurance has never lapsed, therefore my insurance covers autism. It wouldn't matter if it did lapse, autism isn't considered preexisting. It isn't considered a preexisting condition. Hmmm, wonder why I have to pay for your prostate checkups or heaven forbid, your prostate cancer? I'm never going to need it. What about the Viagra my insurance pays for and then won't pay for my son's nutritional supplements because he has a compromised immune system? My insurance even pays for elective abortions....isn't that nice? My insurance also pays for diabetes (even the type II kind one gets later in life). My insurance pays for Aids treatments and we know how one gets this disease don't we? My insurance pays for treatments for lung cancer for someone who has smoked his/her entire life....interesting how insurance works, isn't it? Might want to call your insurance agent and ask him about your coverage....better make sure your policy doesn't cover any of the items mentioned in this post, and then maybe they would reduce your insurance premium....ya think?
Robyne, Edmond - Jun 8, 2008 1:55 PM
Report as inappropriate
Thanks, John. I appreciate your advice and how to improve our campaign to help families in Oklahoma living with autism. However, I was wondering do you live with autism everyday? Are you going bankrupt paying over $4000/month on your child's treatments while at the same time paying $1000/month in insurance premiums. Do you have to drive to Dallas every 2 weeks for treatments for your child that insurance doesn't cover? Or pay $560/week for therapies that insurance covers for only 20 visits(our son goes 2 times/week to his SLP and 2 times/week to his occupational therapist), then Aeta only pays what they consider 'cutomary and reasonable', which is about 1/2 the visit for 20 visits after we meet a $3000 deductible?. Are you missing work because of the endless therapist visits and trips to physicians in other states because of the lack of people in our state that understand how to treat autism? Have you had to deal with this for over 6 years? Were you at the Capitol EVERY SINGLE DAY during the last session? Did you have Republican representatives look you in the face and tell you they would support your legislation, then cowardly not do this because Benge and his leadership buddies were threatening them on everything from a decent parking place, to the location of their office to no PAC money for their reelection if they voted for Nick's Law? If you experienced even 10% of what the 1000's of families in Oklahoma faced during this last session, maybe, just maybe you might be a little upset. No matter, the candidates are contacting us (autism community)to discuss this legislation. The candidates will keep Nick's Law alive. They know what happened last session was wrong and they want to right what happened. I do appreciate your advice, though. Take care.
Robyne, Edmond - Jun 8, 2008 1:40 PM
Report as inappropriate
I dunno about the other 'Kevin,' but I plan to use my usual strategy of voting against all incumbants...
Kevin, Oklahoma City - Jun 8, 2008 1:29 PM
Report as inappropriate
Yeah Kevin in OKC, lets not force insurance companies to do anything. Lets let the "free market" dictate who is worthy of insurance coverage and who is not. Republicans don't get it. Medical insurance is not some luxury that only a few should have...in my mind, it should be something that everyone has. If we went along with Kevin and the extreme Republicans (I am a non-extreme republican), then we should only have police and fire service for the few that could afford it. I mean after all, what is the difference in a government that will allow the weakest and poorest to suffer without health insurance and a government that will allow the weakest and poorest to watch their houses burn? If we went along with the Republican line of thinking that the free market should take care of everything and the government should do nothing, then why have a government? Why dont we have a big free for all. Every man, woman, and child for himself. As a party, the Republicans don't give a rats a** about the weakest in our society. How Christian.
Michael, Oklahoma City - Jun 8, 2008 12:19 PM
Report as inappropriate
Robyne - i think you have a worthwhile issue but your venom will not help you be successful. I dont care how "popular" your issue is - it will not change the outcome of this election cycle - there are too many other issues that drive an election. SO what you are basically doing with your scorched earth tactic is issolating those you need to have legislative success. Ive read all about this issue and I understand that there is a possibility of it coming to a resolution in the next session - but and im telling you this to give you good advice - YOU ARENT HELPING YOUR CAUSE. And if i was a parent of another autistic child I would be very upset by your kamikazi type approach.
John, Norman - Jun 8, 2008 10:07 AM
Report as inappropriate
Geez Robyne, Nick's Law? Really? Why force insurance payers to pay for someone else's autism treatment? Why should I, someone who already has expensive medical insurance, have to be forced to pay for a preexisting condition which my insurance company should have denied coverage to? This is no different from being someone who waits until a cancer diagnosis to apply for health insurance. It doesn't work that way. Why JUST tax insureds for this? (because that's what Nick's Law is, it's a tax aimed at people who are already being hit hard by expensive medical insurance). If we're so concerned, let's be honest about it. Raise taxes on all Oklahomans to pay for the autistic. We don't have provisions in our laws like this for kids with Downs Syndrome, Prader Willie, etc., so why is autism more special than everything else? SOME of the Republican corporate shilling does get under my nerves, but not this.
Kevin, Oklahoma City - Jun 8, 2008 9:38 AM
Report as inappropriate
The House Republicans will be in for a fight. House leadership and the slimy manner in which they ran the caucus of catering to special interest groups and not their constituents will be reflected in the election. The way in which leadership addressed (or didn't address) issues that were important to the people of this state will hurt all Republicans. In a few days everyone will have a list of those who supported Nick's Law and those who were cowards like Benge and Reverend Blackwell and what organizations they belong to so the phone calls and letters will begin. The autism community is a powerful force in Oklahoma and we will not allow the discrimination to continue against our most vulnerable population of children in our state. Voters will be more informed than ever about our local and state candidates when they step into the voting booth this year. So Rep Benge, I wouldn’t be so confident in your statements. Because of your lack of leadership, the Republican party is going to take a hit. I am speaking as a card carrying Republican since 1976.
Robyne, Edmond - Jun 8, 2008 9:01 AM
Report as inappropriate
it is obvious that the unoklahoman is picking sides already in the political races, to bad they are quoting known liars. when has the demoliars ever spoken the truth as humans know it?
richard, oklahoma city - Jun 8, 2008 8:15 AM
Report as inappropriate