Should Private Companies Be Allowed To Own Our Roads?

As a member of the House of Representative's Transportation Committee I have been able to observe one of the most controversial but rarely talked about and mostly under the radar issues regarding the long term development of our highway system.

One year ago I wrote in my update about an the issue at the heart of which has been Oklahoma's membership in a group known as the North America SuperCorridor Coalition (NASCO), the desire of big corporations to enhance the movement of Chinese-manufactured goods throughout North America, the possible privatization of new state and federal highways and NASCO's desire to deploy sophisticated tracking devices along I-35.

In the past I written about what I believe to be the inappropriate and frightening alliance of big business monopolies backed up by the power of big government. Nowhere is this abuse more evident than when big companies buy long term leases of public roads. You can only imagine how your power as a citizen is minimized when a big (and likely foreign owned) corporation has complete control over a public road on which you depend in order to get where you need to go.

The issue of private ownership of public roads is in its infancy in Oklahoma but appeared to be growing after Texas planned out the construction of the Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC) network. The TTC was to be owned and financed over the next 50 years by a foreign investment group based in Spain known as Cintra.

The TTC initiative begun in 2002 focused on building a superhighway parallel to Interstate 35. It seems obvious that proponents of this privately owned super transit corridor may have intended on linking Mexican ports through Oklahoma to an inland port to be located in Kansas City and from there to various distribution points throughout North America.

A communist Chinese owned company known as Hutchison Ports Holdings is paying billions to deepen the Mexican ports of Manzanillo and Lazaro Cardenas in anticipation of the arrival of container mega-ships capable of holding up to 12,500 containers currently being built for Chinese shipping lines. These ports would likely serve as a starting point for Chinese goods that would be distributed into the United States along the super highway corridor.

NASCO, advocates for the I-35 trade corridor but has also been pushing for the creation of a tracking system known as NAFTRACS to be put in place along I-35. This technology would be developed in part by a joint venture owned by Hutchison Ports Holdings. NAFTRACS has been described by NASCO as a program that provides management tools for mitigating or minimizing traffic congestion and collecting the status of certain items in transit. The data generated by these sensors would be shared with the joint venture although it is not clear if the data would be shared with the Chinese government owners of the joint interest. In May of 2007, NASCO requested that the Oklahoma Department of Transportation sign a letter stating that ODOT was looking forward to participating in the tracking program.

During the 2007 legislative session it was discovered that Oklahoma is a dues paying member of NASCO. In other words your taxpayer dollars were helping finance this organization.

In my update in 2007, I wrote that Senator Randy Brogdon (R-Owasso) would be filing a bill to remove Oklahoma from the NASCO coalition. Shortly after that time the Oklahoma Department of Transportation announced they would be withdrawing from NASCO membership. At this time it appears that the effort to introduce foreign owned public roads in Oklahoma has met with too much resistance. However, as your Representative I am committed to opposing any new attempts to allow this type of long term private ownership of public roads.

Trying to Prevent Voter Fraud

Perhaps you have seen recent stories in the news about a group known as ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now). Some of ACORN'S employees have been accused of submitting false voter registration forms; some were signed "Mickey Mouse" and some listed Dallas Cowboys players’ names, even though none of the players lived in that particular state. Agents acting on behalf of ACORN employees were also caught filling out voter registration forms using names and addresses copied from the telephone book. In a number of states, fraud investigations are underway.

While these events are mostly occurring in presidential battleground states, I believe that Oklahoma's election system is also susceptible to fraud.

The voter identification cards used by the election board could be easily forged. Especially during low turnout elections, there is absolutely nothing to stop people from voting under different names in different precincts. If a group with the wherewithal and the power of ACORN decided to manipulate our elections by registering out-of-state voters or by registering the same person multiple times in different precincts under different names and addresses, there would probably be very little to stand in their way.

Right here in Logan County, according to election board records, in just one precinct preceding the 2004 elections, there were four hundred and fourteen people who registered to vote in September and October and who are still listed on the rolls of eligible voters. Of those four hundred and fourteen people, only eighteen of them showed up to vote at the next major election in 2006. One can only imagine how susceptible that precinct is to corruption when of all of the people who registered in September and October, only four percent of them turned out to be voters who would be still be voting at that precinct two years later. It would be next to impossible for a precinct official to recognize that person when he/she basically only registered to vote for one election.

In an e-mail update in May, I wrote about Senate Bill 1150 which would have provided for a required list of identification options prior to voting. The constitutionality of the bill was reinforced by a recent Supreme Court decision which ruled in favor of an Indiana voter ID law that requires photo identification at the polls, citing the need to reduce voter fraud.

I also included this bill on my constituent surveys and over 80% of my constituents responded by supporting the idea of required voter identification.

Unfortunately, I also wrote about the fact that some in the Senate leadership were able to kill the bill.

While the Senate's decision to kill the bill was discouraging, I believe that a strong voter photo ID law can be passed in the future. The Speaker of the House recently announced that this will be a major agenda item for next year. Hopefully with more conservative leadership in the Senate, and with all of the national attention being given to voter fraud, the efforts of those who appear to keep our voter system susceptible to fraud will be defeated.

Politicians Giving Away More Of Your Money

One of the types of bills I am most disappointed to see appear on the floor of the House is a bill that makes a seemingly small but expansive change in the way an incentive program or tax credit give away is allotted to some special interest somewhere. I believe that most legislators have no clue about the identity of the special interest or group that is set to benefit from the change but are simply asked to support the bill in the name of economic development.

Over the past few years any number of programs have popped up that give away your money to any number of entities that will benefit from the special consideration of one of these incentive programs. The programs are usually created in the name of economic development which means it is very hard for most legislators to vote against them and run the risk of being seen as anti-growth.

Now, these programs appear to be slowly expanding to include more and more special interests. These groups are no doubt willing to invest in the lobbyists and build relationships with legislators in order to be successful in expanding these programs to include themselves.

I feel that Oklahoma's elected officials are putting us on a dangerous road down a path where anyone who can afford a high price lobbyist can create a special program that provides their specific interest with financial gain at the expense of the average taxpayers who are unknowingly forced to carry the burden of paying for these pay outs.

These programs essentially bypass the people's right as customers in the free market to determine who the winners and losers of the business world are and risks placing government bureaucrats and centralized planners in the position of determining who will benefit from the special programs.

And, with a lack of public transparency it seems there are a multitude of possible abuses that can occur as millions of dollars of tax credits appear to be distributed with little to no public awareness of who is receiving these credits and how they are being used.

I have always felt that in order for Oklahoma to compete with neighboring states such as Texas for economic growth it is important that many of Oklahoma's growth punitive taxes such as the personal income tax or the tax on capital gains should be greatly reduced or eliminated.

Unfortunately, as special interests are allowed to build holes into the tax code to provided targeted benefits in the name of economic development the harder it will become for Oklahoma to enact comprehensive tax reform. This is because a large and powerful constituency will be developed in order to maintain the big government status-quo and keep the targeted incentives in place.

A recently released report from the Tax Foundation demonstrates what is at stake. In their annual rankings the Foundation declared Oklahoma to have moved up to having the 19th highest tax burden in the United States. Oklahoma's tax burden ranking has steadily increased over the past 30 years. In 1977 Oklahoma ranked 42nd in terms of the level of state and local taxation. Now we rank 19th.

This high level of taxation does not provide incentive for growth. This is no doubt partly why Oklahoma's per capita income is one of the lowest in the nation. Despite all of good intentions of those who wish to grow our state by offering massive incentive programs I believe that Oklahoma will grow much more successfully if we reverse course and follow a path of less taxation.

Keeping Close to the People

When I sought election for office, a key component of my platform was centered around an issue about which I feel strongly. In my view, the events of the past few weeks have certainly reinforced the importance of what I believe to be an important principle.

As conceived by the founding fathers, the United States House of Representatives was to reflect the sentiment and values of the people, and its members were to be directly elected by the people every two years.

When the founding fathers of Oklahoma designed our State Constitution, they ensured this same principle would be reflected in state government by requiring that Oklahoma State Representatives also stand for re-election every two years.

I have observed firsthand how this makes the House much more responsive to the needs and concerns of the people they represent. For instance, in 2007 the House served as the catalyst for immigration reform even though it was opposed by the big money special interest group. Immigration reform was one of the rare high profile successful bills that was not driven by special interest money, but by the demands of the people. Representatives who knew they would soon be up for re-election were much more likely to take this sentiment into consideration than the Senators who are only up for re-election every four years.

Over the past few months, I have been honored to go door to door, visiting hundreds of homes of the people I represent. This experience provides a fascinating ground level point of view as I get to hear firsthand how people feel about the issues. The experience has also given me a forum through which I can relate my observations of what is occurring in government, and how I am applying my principles and beliefs to my job as State Representative. In addition, the people give me valuable feedback about how the new laws that I am voting for or against are impacting their lives.

I believe this is exactly how our founding fathers envisioned representative government would work. And this is why I believe the House of Representatives is one of the most exciting places in which a person can serve.

Certainly one of the most relevant issues the people talk to me most passionately about is their opposition to the recent actions of the federal government in approving the pork-filled bailout bill. I feel that one of the reasons the United States House of Representatives initially opposed the bailout was because they know the people oppose it and many of them are up for re-election in just a few weeks.

When I campaigned for office, I made it clear that I opposed the effort to expand the terms of State Representatives. I have much respect for the wisdom of our founding fathers and am dedicated to preserving the important principle that Representatives should be up for review by the people every two years.