I've been running a post about what I learned about politics last year as I ran for the District 42 House seat on June 28, 2016. Since I was starting with a "blank slate" so to speak, I was thoroughly "schooled" in the fine art of politicking by Representative Tim Downing, my teacher and primary opponent. I discussed several lessons I learned in a previous post, but dedicate a single lesson to a new post:
In preparation for the 2016 State House primary election, I purchased and read the book How To Win Elections Without Hardly Cheatin' At All, by Martin Hauan. The author, Mr. Haunan, was press secretary for two Oklahoma governors, Johnston Murray and Raymond Gary, from 1951 through 1959, and operated his own publicity advertising firm, handling more than 25 successful statewide political campaigns during the 1950's, '60's, and '70's. In today's world, he would be called a political consultant. Mr. Hauan reviews the tricks of the trade in chapters titled Politricks University, Sex in the U.S. Senate Race, and Justice for Sale. If Martin Hauan were alive today (he died in 2001), and wrote his "how-to" book, he would probably title it How To Win Elections By Lyin', Cheatin', And Stealin'... And Gettin' Away With It. He would also add one chapter to his book today entitled Dark Money Talks, which is my lesson learned in this post.
Many public school followers now know that it is illegal for a political candidate to collude, conspire, coordinate, or even communicate with a dark money group in order to receive campaign support for the candidates campaign. This issue came to the forefront when State Superintendent Joy Hofmeister was charged with conspiracy (solicitation and coordination of campaign funds). Also charged was her campaign consultant, Fount Holland. The charges were subsequently dropped, but conspiracy is still a crime, and unethical in the minds of many.
An example of potential conspiracy to run negative campaign ads is the following: In January of 2016, I (as a candidate for the House District 42 seat) received an invitation from an OKC group to interview for campaign support. The group was made up of in-state, out-of-state, and international corporate entities. I knew from the invitation origin that I stood little chance of receiving its financial support, because I've always supported our local small business owners and local public schools. I accepted the invitation to interview anyway, because I wanted to see the inside of corporate and dark money support. I set an interview appointment and arrived at the destination on the designated time and date. When I entered the room to answer questions, I noticed that my monetary donations were projected on a screen alongside the monetary donations to Tim Downing, my primary opponent. My donations up to that point were very meager, while Downing had $30,000 in campaign support. The message I received from the monetary display was "We can't support a 'loser' who has only several hundred dollars in campaign support, when we can support a 'winner' with $30,000". OK, game over. I knew it would be before arriving. The group then told me they were there to determine if I could support business owners if I were elected to office. In my introduction, I told the group that I had been a school superintendent for ten years, and had kept public schools "in the black" (not red ink) as their Chief Financial Officer, so was financially conservative. I had also recommended that $millions be spent for student services and teacher salaries as the CFO of schools over the past ten years. One of the questions the group asked was "Do you support the one-cent state sales tax 'for teacher pay raises' which will be voted on in November?" I knew this was the "trap" question, to get me to admit that I was supportive of tax increases, even if it was for a teacher pay increase. I avoided answering the question directly, by saying "I believe it is the only way teachers will see a pay increase". One of the group then said "You didn't answer the question, does this mean you support a one-cent tax increase for a teacher pay raise"? I then said "Yes" and knew the jig was up. Needless to say I received no campaign support from the corporate group, but Mr. Downing received $Thousands according to the Ethics Commission website.
Members of the corporate group which interviewed me, are also financial donors to the American Legislative Exchange Commission, better known as ALEC. Contributing members of ALEC also include non-profits such as the American Federation for Children (AFC) and its State Legislator donor group, the American Federation for Children Action Fund. In addition to the invitation to interview, I received a questionaire from the Oklahoma branch of the AFC which had questions concerning a Legislator's choice of private and corporate schools (the AFC refers to a Legislator's choice as "school choice for children"). Just as in the corporate entity interview, if I answered their questions correctly, I would be the recipient of $thousands in campaign support. I immediately trashed the questionaire since I recognized the AFC Action Fund as dark money. I also knew that soliciting support from this group, could be construed by a State or District Attorney as conspiracy. I, therefore, did not want any doubt to be cast on me, for conspiracy with a dark money group. It's coincidental that several weeks after I received and trashed the AFC questionaire, voters began receiving phone calls from an entity which identified itself as Catalyst Oklahoma or Oklahoma United and basically lied and trashed my campaign for the District 42 House seat. (Several supporters of my campaign called to tell me about the negative phone calls.) After the "push poll" calls which indirectly encouraged voters to "vote for Tim", voters began receiving mailers which were very negative (mud-slinging) toward my campaign. Several of my supporters brought me the cards (3) which indicated they were paid for by the Oklahoma Federation for Children Action Fund. Many voters believe that if Mr. Downing completed the questionaire and solicited support from the OFC Action Fund, then he may be guilty of conspiring with it to send out the negative ads. It is still unknown if Superintendent Hofmeister is guilty of conspiracy, since charges were dropped, but if Hofmeister is guilty, then a good investigative journalist could probably uncover conspiracy by Tim Downing with a dark money group. UNETHICAL! in my opinion...
Also illegal is the use of one's elected office to campaign for a (candidate) for elected office. There are hints (not evidence) that Joy Hofmeister may have used her elected office seat to support and campaign for candidate(s) for other elected offices. For example, there is a rumor that Ms. Hofmeister used her office to support a republican candidate in the Stillwater House or Senate race. Maybe it's not true, but several voters also believe she used her elected office to support Tim Downing (R) in the 2016 House District 42 race. Again, maybe it's a complete fabrication, but I think a good investigative journalist could ask some questions of those who say they have evidence, and either prove or disprove the allegations.
No comments:
Post a Comment