Saturday, February 28, 2009
Friday, February 27, 2009
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Opening Up The Phone Book
How long do you think a business would remain solvent if every time they needed to make a purchase they waited until a supplier came to them instead of opening up the phone book and shopping around for the best deal?
Since becoming the Chair of the Modernization Committee, I have enjoyed being contacted by different individuals who have shared with me both their ideas for change in government and their stories of government inefficiencies or abuses.
Here is an example of a story about an abuse that allegedly occurred a few years ago.
The spouse of a person running for political office received a contract from the state for thousands of dollars where no one else even bothered to bid for the job. Following the award of the contract there was very little way to determine if the individual ever performed or followed through with the contract requirements in any significant manner. Further, it was not even clear the person was qualified to perform the contract in the first place. The bid was awarded either while or shortly before the candidate started running for office creating the fear that taxpayer money was being funneled through a non-performing vendor and possibly financing a campaign for office.
This story illustrates what I believe to be all too possible when dealing with a large government that controls billions of dollars of other people's money. The opportunities for abuse are simply everywhere.
In the last few years several studies have demonstrated the need for Oklahoma to modernize procurement practices and last week I asked approval for an idea for reform on the House floor that will hopefully address some of these problems.
The idea was initially presented by a consulting firm know as Treya Partners. Treya said the state should allow state procurement officials to engage in strategic sourcing in order to source a high number of quality vendors, analyze the various industries they are sourcing from and be allowed to negotiate with the potential vendors in order to get the best possible deal for the taxpayers. After negotiating a contract state buyers will continue to monitor the contract in order to make sure the vendor actually performs. If the vendor did not do a good job, their failure could be documented so hopefully state officials could make sure that the vendor did not get any future opportunities to waste taxpayer dollars.
Now, this is obviously a common sense step that any business would no doubt be sure to incorporate. Can you imagine what would happen to a business who awarded contracts without ever opening up the phone book and finding the best provider? However, this is the government, so it appears as if for many years there may have been little incentive for government officials to actually do the hard work to find the best service providers and then use the time and energy to make sure that they are actually performing.
Hopefully this system will also provide the checks and balances necessary to avoid examples like the one listed above. I don't believe there should ever be an occasion where a contract is just awarded to one bidder because they were the only bidder capable of bidding on a project.
The focus of the House Modernization effort has been to try and save taxpayer dollars by adding more efficiently to the procurement process. However, I am optimistic that a side effect of these reforms will be to make it harder for abuses like the above example to occur.
The strategic sourcing idea was one component of House Bill 1410 which was approved by the House last week and is now headed to the Senate.
Since becoming the Chair of the Modernization Committee, I have enjoyed being contacted by different individuals who have shared with me both their ideas for change in government and their stories of government inefficiencies or abuses.
Here is an example of a story about an abuse that allegedly occurred a few years ago.
The spouse of a person running for political office received a contract from the state for thousands of dollars where no one else even bothered to bid for the job. Following the award of the contract there was very little way to determine if the individual ever performed or followed through with the contract requirements in any significant manner. Further, it was not even clear the person was qualified to perform the contract in the first place. The bid was awarded either while or shortly before the candidate started running for office creating the fear that taxpayer money was being funneled through a non-performing vendor and possibly financing a campaign for office.
This story illustrates what I believe to be all too possible when dealing with a large government that controls billions of dollars of other people's money. The opportunities for abuse are simply everywhere.
In the last few years several studies have demonstrated the need for Oklahoma to modernize procurement practices and last week I asked approval for an idea for reform on the House floor that will hopefully address some of these problems.
The idea was initially presented by a consulting firm know as Treya Partners. Treya said the state should allow state procurement officials to engage in strategic sourcing in order to source a high number of quality vendors, analyze the various industries they are sourcing from and be allowed to negotiate with the potential vendors in order to get the best possible deal for the taxpayers. After negotiating a contract state buyers will continue to monitor the contract in order to make sure the vendor actually performs. If the vendor did not do a good job, their failure could be documented so hopefully state officials could make sure that the vendor did not get any future opportunities to waste taxpayer dollars.
Now, this is obviously a common sense step that any business would no doubt be sure to incorporate. Can you imagine what would happen to a business who awarded contracts without ever opening up the phone book and finding the best provider? However, this is the government, so it appears as if for many years there may have been little incentive for government officials to actually do the hard work to find the best service providers and then use the time and energy to make sure that they are actually performing.
Hopefully this system will also provide the checks and balances necessary to avoid examples like the one listed above. I don't believe there should ever be an occasion where a contract is just awarded to one bidder because they were the only bidder capable of bidding on a project.
The focus of the House Modernization effort has been to try and save taxpayer dollars by adding more efficiently to the procurement process. However, I am optimistic that a side effect of these reforms will be to make it harder for abuses like the above example to occur.
The strategic sourcing idea was one component of House Bill 1410 which was approved by the House last week and is now headed to the Senate.
Friday, February 20, 2009
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Monday, February 16, 2009
Standing Up for States' Rights
The steps taken in the past few days by Congress to give the federal government nearly 800 billion dollars worth of increased power reminds me of a column I wrote last November. In that article I wrote about the expected expansion of the federal government and how I felt the issue of state's rights could once again be a significant issue in the Oklahoma Legislature this year.
It is important to note that in comparison to state governments, the federal government was created by our founders to be small and limited. This is because the people have a much stronger voice at the state level, whereas the ability of people to effect change is greatly limited at the federal level, and nearly non-existent on the global level of government.
Both political parties have used the expansion of the federal government as a tool to accomplish their various agendas. Now a group of aggressive liberals can use that power not only to move America to the left but to build upon itself and increase in size, making the federal government more expansive and powerful than ever before.
As a result, a bigger federal government will likely be most responsive to those only with enough money and influence to use that power to benefit themselves. This will leave the responsibility for paying for big government to the average taxpayer who cannot afford to invest in lobbyists and politicians in order to manipulate the system for their benefit.
This means that we can expect the federal government to reflect the desires of powerful special interests, liberal politicians and their support groups like ACORN (the possible recipient of 2 billion dollars because of the stimulus bill).
This week the Oklahoma House of Representatives Rules Committee voted unanimously to support House Joint Resolution 1003 authored by State Representative Charles Key. Key's proposal should now be headed to the floor of the House where I look forward to supporting it.
HJR 1003 seeks to reassert Oklahoma’s sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and according to the resolution’s language, serves as "Notice and Demand to the federal government, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers."
The Tenth Amendment states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”
Representative Key has made it clear that during the last few decades he believes that the Constitution has been hanging by a thread.
While a similar resolution passed with the support of the Oklahoma House during the last session of the Legislature, it appears to have failed to receive a hearing in the Oklahoma Senate. This year, with new leadership in place in the Oklahoma Senate, I am hopeful HJR 1003 will receive a fair hearing.
I consider it an honor to support Rep. Key's efforts in this regard. But, it is also going important for the state to refuse to participate in new inappropriate federal programs such as the apparent expansion of the welfare program included in the stimulus bill. No doubt advocates of Oklahoma's participation in this scheme will say that we must bring in new federal dollars by adding more welfare recipients. I say it is time to stand up to the federal government and it's latest expansions.
It is important to note that in comparison to state governments, the federal government was created by our founders to be small and limited. This is because the people have a much stronger voice at the state level, whereas the ability of people to effect change is greatly limited at the federal level, and nearly non-existent on the global level of government.
Both political parties have used the expansion of the federal government as a tool to accomplish their various agendas. Now a group of aggressive liberals can use that power not only to move America to the left but to build upon itself and increase in size, making the federal government more expansive and powerful than ever before.
As a result, a bigger federal government will likely be most responsive to those only with enough money and influence to use that power to benefit themselves. This will leave the responsibility for paying for big government to the average taxpayer who cannot afford to invest in lobbyists and politicians in order to manipulate the system for their benefit.
This means that we can expect the federal government to reflect the desires of powerful special interests, liberal politicians and their support groups like ACORN (the possible recipient of 2 billion dollars because of the stimulus bill).
This week the Oklahoma House of Representatives Rules Committee voted unanimously to support House Joint Resolution 1003 authored by State Representative Charles Key. Key's proposal should now be headed to the floor of the House where I look forward to supporting it.
HJR 1003 seeks to reassert Oklahoma’s sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and according to the resolution’s language, serves as "Notice and Demand to the federal government, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers."
The Tenth Amendment states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”
Representative Key has made it clear that during the last few decades he believes that the Constitution has been hanging by a thread.
While a similar resolution passed with the support of the Oklahoma House during the last session of the Legislature, it appears to have failed to receive a hearing in the Oklahoma Senate. This year, with new leadership in place in the Oklahoma Senate, I am hopeful HJR 1003 will receive a fair hearing.
I consider it an honor to support Rep. Key's efforts in this regard. But, it is also going important for the state to refuse to participate in new inappropriate federal programs such as the apparent expansion of the welfare program included in the stimulus bill. No doubt advocates of Oklahoma's participation in this scheme will say that we must bring in new federal dollars by adding more welfare recipients. I say it is time to stand up to the federal government and it's latest expansions.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Monday, February 9, 2009
Purchasing Modernization Bill Passes House Committee
CONTACT:
Jennifer Monies, Press Secretary
Oklahoma House of Representatives
Office of House Speaker Chris Benge
Office: 405-962-7679
Cell: 405-550-8144
Email: jenniferm@okhouse.gov
Purchasing Modernization Bill Passes House Committee
OKLAHOMA CITY (Feb. 9, 2009) – Legislation giving certain state agencies more purchasing flexibility to allow for greater savings unanimously passed out of House committee today.
House Bill 1410, by Rep. Jason Murphey, amends the Central Purchasing Act to allow for a restructuring of the Department of Central Service’s caseload. If the legislation is enacted, state buyers will have more time to focus on leveraging state spending patterns into more competitive prices. The buyers will also have more time for ongoing vendor performance monitoring to ensure quality.
“Government modernization is a top priority for the House this session, and a slower budget year gives us an opportunity to realize real savings,” said House Speaker Chris Benge, R-Tulsa. “We see this as a chance to make our government leaner and more efficient while still maintaining quality services to all Oklahomans.”
The bill also authorizes DCS’s State Purchasing Director to renegotiate existing contrasts in an attempt to get better rates for the state. An annual report documenting savings realized by each agency will also be required by the legislation.
“These are the type of savings that the state should have realized years ago,” said Murphey, R-Guthrie. “In a down budget year, we have an opportunity to find efficiencies without a painful impact on services seen on the street. This legislation will help us better leverage the state’s purchasing power.”
Murphey said he is pleased the governor included $35 million in purchasing savings in his budget proposal released last week, which was based on the results of hearings House Republicans held over the last two years showing huge efficiency and savings potential in the state’s purchasing practices.
A report conducted by IBM in 2007 showed Oklahoma could realize as much as $70 million in savings if purchasing best practices were put in place. A second report conducted recently by a company on contract with DCS found similar savings potential.
The legislation, which will now proceed to the full House for a vote, is part of the House Republican agenda to modernize and streamline government.
Jennifer Monies, Press Secretary
Oklahoma House of Representatives
Office of House Speaker Chris Benge
Office: 405-962-7679
Cell: 405-550-8144
Email: jenniferm@okhouse.gov
Purchasing Modernization Bill Passes House Committee
OKLAHOMA CITY (Feb. 9, 2009) – Legislation giving certain state agencies more purchasing flexibility to allow for greater savings unanimously passed out of House committee today.
House Bill 1410, by Rep. Jason Murphey, amends the Central Purchasing Act to allow for a restructuring of the Department of Central Service’s caseload. If the legislation is enacted, state buyers will have more time to focus on leveraging state spending patterns into more competitive prices. The buyers will also have more time for ongoing vendor performance monitoring to ensure quality.
“Government modernization is a top priority for the House this session, and a slower budget year gives us an opportunity to realize real savings,” said House Speaker Chris Benge, R-Tulsa. “We see this as a chance to make our government leaner and more efficient while still maintaining quality services to all Oklahomans.”
The bill also authorizes DCS’s State Purchasing Director to renegotiate existing contrasts in an attempt to get better rates for the state. An annual report documenting savings realized by each agency will also be required by the legislation.
“These are the type of savings that the state should have realized years ago,” said Murphey, R-Guthrie. “In a down budget year, we have an opportunity to find efficiencies without a painful impact on services seen on the street. This legislation will help us better leverage the state’s purchasing power.”
Murphey said he is pleased the governor included $35 million in purchasing savings in his budget proposal released last week, which was based on the results of hearings House Republicans held over the last two years showing huge efficiency and savings potential in the state’s purchasing practices.
A report conducted by IBM in 2007 showed Oklahoma could realize as much as $70 million in savings if purchasing best practices were put in place. A second report conducted recently by a company on contract with DCS found similar savings potential.
The legislation, which will now proceed to the full House for a vote, is part of the House Republican agenda to modernize and streamline government.
Sponsoring Additional Term Limits
I am a big supporter of Oklahoma's term limit laws.
There is little doubt that term limits on Oklahoma legislators was a
key factor in the breaking up of the "old guard" political machine
that used to dominate Oklahoma politics.
Those of us who are fighting to put an end to the abuses of the past
face an increased likelihood of success, due in part to the fact that
there are many new elected officials who have taken office in the past
few years. Many of these individuals have not been corrupted by the
political process. Unlike some of their predecessors, they are not
career politicians. Oklahoma's term limit law allows all
representatives and senators to serve a maximum of only twelve years
in the Legislature. After that, they are under a lifetime ban from
ever again holding office in the Legislature.
This new generation of representatives and senators is fulfilling one
of the important visions of our nation's founding fathers: the concept
of a government in which an average citizen dedicates a few years of
his or her life to representing the people as a citizen/statesman. At
the end of his/her term of office, the legislator returns to the real
world to live under the laws he or she helped create. This ensures
that legislators will be more representative of the people, rather
than becoming a class of the political elite.
As a result of the term limits law, the Legislature is very different
than it was just a few years ago. Gone are many of the "old guard"
power bosses who tightly maintained the status quo. These politicians
could have stayed in office almost indefinitely and they held powerful
committee chairmanships where they would bottle up reform-minded
legislation. They have been replaced by a group of energetic
professionals, many of whom wish to enact pro-growth policies in order
to change Oklahoma for the better. And, should some succumb to the
temptation to become part of the status quo, they will inevitably be
replaced because of term limits.
I think all Oklahomans should take pride in the fact that Oklahoma was
the first state to pass a legislative term limits law, and this year I
am honored to serve as the House Author for Senate Joint Resolution
12. SJR 12 is sponsored by in the Senate by Senator Randy Brogdon and
would allow the people to vote on expanding Oklahoma's term limit laws
to include statewide elected officials. A House version of the bill
will be carried by Representative Mike Jackson, meaning there will be
two opportunities for the effort to be successful this year.
I have written about a term limits bill in two previous years, but
unfortunately it was narrowly defeated both times. Now, because of
term limits, yet another wave of freshman representatives and senators
have been elected, and they have ensured the appointment of a new
leadership team in the State Senate that will undoubtedly support the
idea.
I think this is a good sign for the future because it demonstrates the
commitment of Oklahoma's new leaders to continued reform. It is also
important to remember that none of this would have been possible
without the people of Oklahoma taking the initiative to pass the first
term limit proposal through the initiative petition process.
As your Representative, I will continue to advocate for this important reform.
There is little doubt that term limits on Oklahoma legislators was a
key factor in the breaking up of the "old guard" political machine
that used to dominate Oklahoma politics.
Those of us who are fighting to put an end to the abuses of the past
face an increased likelihood of success, due in part to the fact that
there are many new elected officials who have taken office in the past
few years. Many of these individuals have not been corrupted by the
political process. Unlike some of their predecessors, they are not
career politicians. Oklahoma's term limit law allows all
representatives and senators to serve a maximum of only twelve years
in the Legislature. After that, they are under a lifetime ban from
ever again holding office in the Legislature.
This new generation of representatives and senators is fulfilling one
of the important visions of our nation's founding fathers: the concept
of a government in which an average citizen dedicates a few years of
his or her life to representing the people as a citizen/statesman. At
the end of his/her term of office, the legislator returns to the real
world to live under the laws he or she helped create. This ensures
that legislators will be more representative of the people, rather
than becoming a class of the political elite.
As a result of the term limits law, the Legislature is very different
than it was just a few years ago. Gone are many of the "old guard"
power bosses who tightly maintained the status quo. These politicians
could have stayed in office almost indefinitely and they held powerful
committee chairmanships where they would bottle up reform-minded
legislation. They have been replaced by a group of energetic
professionals, many of whom wish to enact pro-growth policies in order
to change Oklahoma for the better. And, should some succumb to the
temptation to become part of the status quo, they will inevitably be
replaced because of term limits.
I think all Oklahomans should take pride in the fact that Oklahoma was
the first state to pass a legislative term limits law, and this year I
am honored to serve as the House Author for Senate Joint Resolution
12. SJR 12 is sponsored by in the Senate by Senator Randy Brogdon and
would allow the people to vote on expanding Oklahoma's term limit laws
to include statewide elected officials. A House version of the bill
will be carried by Representative Mike Jackson, meaning there will be
two opportunities for the effort to be successful this year.
I have written about a term limits bill in two previous years, but
unfortunately it was narrowly defeated both times. Now, because of
term limits, yet another wave of freshman representatives and senators
have been elected, and they have ensured the appointment of a new
leadership team in the State Senate that will undoubtedly support the
idea.
I think this is a good sign for the future because it demonstrates the
commitment of Oklahoma's new leaders to continued reform. It is also
important to remember that none of this would have been possible
without the people of Oklahoma taking the initiative to pass the first
term limit proposal through the initiative petition process.
As your Representative, I will continue to advocate for this important reform.
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Opposing Debt in a Debt-Happy Society
If you are like me, you are very upset by the recent actions of the federal government. Under the false pretense of an economic stimulus, they are using the economic downturn to approve yet another nearly trillion dollars of debt! The latest "stimulus" bill consists of a tremendous amount of political pork, some of which is no doubt designed to help the organizations that put the current office holders in power. This is just the latest (and worst) in a series of actions taken by the federal government over the past few years that are unimaginably irresponsible.
We have come to a time in our nation's history when our leaders are actually purporting to be able to partially eliminate a downturn in the market. Markets naturally have ebbs and flows and it is to be expected that every few years there will be another downturn. There are many who are now in power who seem to have put aside the perspective provided by hundreds of years of history to such an extent that they really believe the government is powerful enough to prevent an economic downturn. Do we really want a government that views itself like that?
I believe this attitude has been reflected in recent years by British Prime Minister Gordan Brown who, while not one of our government officials, has received much attention for his reported pronouncement that the cycle of boom and bust had been brought to a halt in his country. Today, instead of admitting he was wrong in talking about the economic downturn, Brown points to the fact that this is a global recession. Brown's claims bring forward the frightening spectacle that in order to truly end boom and bust, governmental action on a global scale may be necessary.
In the meantime, gone are the days when it seemed that our leaders were willing to talk about balancing the budget, cutting spending, and addressing the looming crisis of the depleted social security fund. As national politicians have recently demonstrated all too well, it is very easy for politicians to spend now what will be someone else's debt in the future.
In Oklahoma, state officials have unfortunately given in to the same temptation. Issuing long-term debt is often considered by state officials as a way to handle short-term concerns. For years, Oklahoma officials have issued new debt and have done so by using the excuse, "Everyone else is doing it and we don't have as much debt as they do."
This issue hit especially close to home when agencies' officials testified recently to legislative committees about where they would make cuts if the economic downturn forces them to cut their budgets by 5%. Those agencies burdened with long-term debt simply point to the fact that they cannot cut their bond payments, and in fact, a 5% cut might be more like a 10% to 15% cut in discretionary revenue. In other words, as we have gone through time and more debt has been added to the state government, the ability to shrink government becomes inhibited.
This is why I have maintained and will continue to maintain a strict policy of voting against all new issuance of debt.
We have come to a time in our nation's history when our leaders are actually purporting to be able to partially eliminate a downturn in the market. Markets naturally have ebbs and flows and it is to be expected that every few years there will be another downturn. There are many who are now in power who seem to have put aside the perspective provided by hundreds of years of history to such an extent that they really believe the government is powerful enough to prevent an economic downturn. Do we really want a government that views itself like that?
I believe this attitude has been reflected in recent years by British Prime Minister Gordan Brown who, while not one of our government officials, has received much attention for his reported pronouncement that the cycle of boom and bust had been brought to a halt in his country. Today, instead of admitting he was wrong in talking about the economic downturn, Brown points to the fact that this is a global recession. Brown's claims bring forward the frightening spectacle that in order to truly end boom and bust, governmental action on a global scale may be necessary.
In the meantime, gone are the days when it seemed that our leaders were willing to talk about balancing the budget, cutting spending, and addressing the looming crisis of the depleted social security fund. As national politicians have recently demonstrated all too well, it is very easy for politicians to spend now what will be someone else's debt in the future.
In Oklahoma, state officials have unfortunately given in to the same temptation. Issuing long-term debt is often considered by state officials as a way to handle short-term concerns. For years, Oklahoma officials have issued new debt and have done so by using the excuse, "Everyone else is doing it and we don't have as much debt as they do."
This issue hit especially close to home when agencies' officials testified recently to legislative committees about where they would make cuts if the economic downturn forces them to cut their budgets by 5%. Those agencies burdened with long-term debt simply point to the fact that they cannot cut their bond payments, and in fact, a 5% cut might be more like a 10% to 15% cut in discretionary revenue. In other words, as we have gone through time and more debt has been added to the state government, the ability to shrink government becomes inhibited.
This is why I have maintained and will continue to maintain a strict policy of voting against all new issuance of debt.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)