It's the day after the November 8 election, and I feel compelled to talk about several issues which were decided yesterday. I'm quite sure that everyone didn't get everything they wished for as far as election outcomes, but most received at least some gratification - as several state questions and many candidates were running. I feel the same way most do, as I won some and lost some. I'd like to talk about something which was put on the back shelf as election day arrived, but I think it now bears closer scrutiny. The jaw-dropping felony charges against the state superintendent and her campaign consultant, AH Strategies, just days before the November 8 elections should be looked at more closely. The charges relate primarily to the use of "dark money" in Joy Hofmeister's campaign and the charge that Hofmeister, through her campaign consultant Fount Holland, both knew about and helped coordinate negative TV ads in opposition to Janet Barresi. When dark money is used against an opponent's campaign, the sponsoring candidate cannot have prior knowledge of any TV ads, telephone ads, or mailings which will benefit himself/herself. If prior knowledge by the beneficiary candidate is determined to be present by a district attorney - then charges usually follow. The Oklahoma County District Attorney claims to have such evidence in this case. The evidence is said to be from confiscated text messages to and from Hofmeister and Chad Alexander, an employee of Fount Holland (AH Strategies). It seems that when Chad Alexander stopped by the police over 2 years ago, he was in possession of cocaine. At that time, his cell phone was confiscated - and the conversations between Hofmeister and her campaign consultant were discovered.
It's too early to say if Hofmeister and Holland are guilty of what they're being charged with - "conspiracy" to coordinate dark money attack ads, but the penalty if convicted could be 30 years in prison and massive fines. I truly believe that Superintendent Hofmeister fell in with the wrong crowd on this deal. She was under the influence of Holland's dark money, which ultimately came back to haunt her. The first hint of corruption in my opinion, was when she hired AH Strategies for her consulting firm, several months before the primary election in 2014. AH Strategies was known for winning elections... at all costs, even breaking the law. As a matter of fact, I was a little surprised when Hofmeister hired it, as it was already widely known that Chad Alexander, an employee of AH, had been charged with possession of cocaine only a month before Hofmeister hired the firm. If there is "guilt by association", I guess this is it. Only time will tell if Joy Hofmeister is truly guilty of conspiracy.
If Mrs. Hofmeister is guilty though, I think the district attorneys in all counties should take a hard look at all clients of AH Strategies, as the firm had several more out there who won elections on Tuesday. Remember, the charges of conspiracy stem from the fact that Joy Hofmeister and Fount Holland coordinated "dark money" attack ads against Janet Barresi. If Fount Holland is guilty of conspiring with Hofmeister to coordinate "dark money", then he must be guilty of coordinating "dark money" with several more clients out there. Maybe, or maybe not. In the case of Hofmeister, the evidence appears to be a confiscated cell phone, so the Oklahoma County DA, David Prater, just lucked into it. As in Hofmeister's case, a county district attorney would just have to "luck into" evidence which indicates a crime was committed. One such candidate who is a client of Fount Holland is Tim Downing of the District 42 House in Garvin and McClain Counties. He won in a landslide on November 8, over Liz George of Blanchard. There is no doubt that "dark money" attacked Liz George, as many voters received campaign cards in the mail from the "dark money" group "American Federation for Children" (AFC) in the days leading up to November 8. As a matter of fact, I received 2 cards in the mail from the AFC, telling me what a great legislator Tim Downing will make. Many people believe that Mr. Downing was fully aware of the dark money group, and knew what they were doing. Downing said early on, though, that his campaign knows nothing of the dark money attack ads and phone calls from the AFC and another "dark money" group - Nation United (Catalyst Oklahoma) also out of Washington D.C.. I suggest though, that if a candidate completes an application for funding from a dark money group, they certainly KNOW about the ads and mailers. I, in fact, received the AFC questionaire to fill out and return for possible campaign funding, but trashed it immediately, as I knew what it was - dark money.
I know it's possible that Mr. Downing has no idea about "dark money" or that prior knowledge can be a crime, so it would be premature to jump to conclusions. Evidently, many people believe that Mr. Downing knew nothing about the dark money attack ads or phone calls, or they simply don't care, as he won handily on November 8, 2016.
Wednesday, November 9, 2016
Monday, November 7, 2016
The Hay's in the Barn... on State Question 777
Barry Switzer had a favorite saying when he was winning National Championships at O.U. and when he coached the Dallas Cowboys, winning a Super Bowl in 1992. After the last practice or last film session before a big game, Switzer would survey the team as they looked to him and say "well boys, the hay's in the barn". After I became a football coach at Duncan High School, we continued to say, at the end of each practice on Thursday evenings, "the hay's in the barn". It meant that the preparation for winning the next game was finished, and all that was left was to go out the next day - and "kick butt and take names". And so be it with State Question 777, the right to harm our family farms and environment - by the corporate factory producers and packers. As the facts have proven out, this bill is being fronted by a corporation, Farm Bureau, and was originally written by Shuanghui, Seaboard, and Tyson factory farms. These three corporate factory farms have convinced many of our family farmers and ranchers that this bill is for us. They have convinced many of us that the real enemy is the Humane Society, and we must protect ourselves from the evil HSUS by blocking Oklahoma from enacting any farm crippling legislation. Seaboard,et al, have convinced many Oklahomans they are family farms, and the only way to stop HSUS from invading our family farms is to give constitutional protection to international and foreign factory farms. Farm Bureau is fronting 777 because these foreign factory farms (their biggest customers) have told FB that it must. We (family farmers and ranchers) have tried over the past several weeks to educate the public about 777, by providing facts and data on what this bill actually does. The time is finally here to determine if our hard work will pay off. Election day is tommorrow, so as Barry Switzer said - "The hay is in the barn", Vote NO on SQ 777!
Saturday, November 5, 2016
Chinese Owned Farms and Corporations
The proponents of SQ 777, The Right to Harm, have publicly stated that this bill is not about Chinese and international farms. But let's look at the facts:
1) China owns the largest hog farm in the world, Shuanghui, located in Virginia. It produces 25% of all hogs in the U.S.A.
2) Seaboard foods, an international hog farm, is the 3rd largest hog farm in the U.S.A. located in the panhandle of Oklahoma. It is directly responsible for forcing the closure of most of the family hog farms in Oklahoma since 2005, reducing the "competition" by 1,626 family hog producers from 2005 to 2012. I personally know several hog farms that have "gone under" because they could not compete with the giant hog factory.
3) Oklahoma chicken farms have been reduced from 6,105 family owned farms in 2005 to only 3 factory farms in 2012.
4) Besides factory farms, China owns approximately a dozen other giant corporations in the U.S.A.
5) All told, the rise of corporate-industrial agriculture in Oklahoma coincided with the largest decline in the agricultural workforce in Oklahoma history. 77% of farm and ranch jobs disappeared in Oklahoma from 1990 to 2014 - greater than the decline in subsistence farming during the Dust Bowl.
6) The National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) is an industry group that represents the pork industry. Its leaders are executives with factory hog farms and industry lobbyists from pork producing and packing corporations like Shuanghui and Seaboard. They have been identified as a supporter of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), where bills are handed to state lawmakers which will benefit share-holders and executives.
7) The NPPC, working hand in hand with Seaboard and Suanghui factory hog farms, wrote "The Right to Farm" bill in 1996. They may have had assistance from the corporate insurance industry.
8) Right to Farm was rewritten in 2013 to fit the bill into a state question, where it was picked up by several states. Oklahoma lawmakers picked up the state question in 2015 at an ALEC conference.
9) The gist of the campaign effort by proponents of SQ 777 has been to instill fear of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) into local farmers and ranchers. Even though HSUS has never passed a state law inhibiting our right to farm, proponents of the bill (corporate owners) say that HSUS will take away our right to farm if we don't pass this bill (pure BS).
10) Ultimately, SQ 777 is all about corporate profits and share-holder gains, and has absolutely NOTHING to do with the right to farm. It's about the right to harm our family farmers and ranchers and the right of CORPORATIONS to harm our environment.
The above 10 points are all based on documented facts - VOTE NO on SQ 777!
1) China owns the largest hog farm in the world, Shuanghui, located in Virginia. It produces 25% of all hogs in the U.S.A.
2) Seaboard foods, an international hog farm, is the 3rd largest hog farm in the U.S.A. located in the panhandle of Oklahoma. It is directly responsible for forcing the closure of most of the family hog farms in Oklahoma since 2005, reducing the "competition" by 1,626 family hog producers from 2005 to 2012. I personally know several hog farms that have "gone under" because they could not compete with the giant hog factory.
3) Oklahoma chicken farms have been reduced from 6,105 family owned farms in 2005 to only 3 factory farms in 2012.
4) Besides factory farms, China owns approximately a dozen other giant corporations in the U.S.A.
5) All told, the rise of corporate-industrial agriculture in Oklahoma coincided with the largest decline in the agricultural workforce in Oklahoma history. 77% of farm and ranch jobs disappeared in Oklahoma from 1990 to 2014 - greater than the decline in subsistence farming during the Dust Bowl.
6) The National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) is an industry group that represents the pork industry. Its leaders are executives with factory hog farms and industry lobbyists from pork producing and packing corporations like Shuanghui and Seaboard. They have been identified as a supporter of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), where bills are handed to state lawmakers which will benefit share-holders and executives.
7) The NPPC, working hand in hand with Seaboard and Suanghui factory hog farms, wrote "The Right to Farm" bill in 1996. They may have had assistance from the corporate insurance industry.
8) Right to Farm was rewritten in 2013 to fit the bill into a state question, where it was picked up by several states. Oklahoma lawmakers picked up the state question in 2015 at an ALEC conference.
9) The gist of the campaign effort by proponents of SQ 777 has been to instill fear of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) into local farmers and ranchers. Even though HSUS has never passed a state law inhibiting our right to farm, proponents of the bill (corporate owners) say that HSUS will take away our right to farm if we don't pass this bill (pure BS).
10) Ultimately, SQ 777 is all about corporate profits and share-holder gains, and has absolutely NOTHING to do with the right to farm. It's about the right to harm our family farmers and ranchers and the right of CORPORATIONS to harm our environment.
The above 10 points are all based on documented facts - VOTE NO on SQ 777!
Friday, November 4, 2016
Dark Money Update
According to the "Daily Oklahoman" newspaper, "State schools chief charged with campaign violations, conspiracy". You've seen the story by now, so know the state superintendent of schools is involved along with her campaign management firm - AH Strategies. What is alleged to have occurred is that the state superintendent had prior knowledge of the actions that a dark money group would take to ensure victory in the race against Janet Barresi (two years ago). It was dark money television ads which ran, as a way of depicting Barresi as being out of touch with public schools. It's legal for dark money groups to run negative campaign commercials or send out negative mailers against candidates for political office, but it's not legal for candidates to actually have advance knowledge of negative campaign ads or mailed campaign brochures. This is where the conspiracy charges originate - that the state superintendent along with her campaign consulting firm, AH Strategies, knew in advance just how much money would be spent and which dark money group would be spending the money - for her campaign. "Authorities believe Hofmeister, (Fount) Holland, a political adviser and founder of AH Strategies, and others worked together to solicit excessive funds for the state campaign by coordinating activities between Hofmeister's committee and an independent expenditure, which came to be known as Oklahomans for Public School excellence (OPSE). They allegedly funneled excess contributions to benefit Hofmeister's campaign as she fought to defeat Superintendent Janet Barresi" (Tahlequah Daily Press). The press also reports that "An Oklahoma City-based campaign strategist facing criminal charges... has consulted for other 'House candidates', according to financial disclosures filed this year."
Among the several House candidates represented by AH Strategies, is Tim Downing, who won the House District 42 seat in Garvin and McClain Counties. While Mr. Downing received over $40,000 in support from the dark money groups American Federation for Children (AFC) and Citizens United, it is still unknown who their major donors are. It is also unknown if Mr. Downing had prior knowledge of this dark money support, as he denies it. However, documents have surfaced which indicate that Mr. Downing did have prior knowledge - such as the "application" document for AFC support. There are also indications that prior knowledge of Citizens United support exist, as it discussed possible support with candidates. It will certainly be interesting to note if the "net widens" on this investigation, as it will take a good investigative reporter or inquisitive district attorney.
Among the several House candidates represented by AH Strategies, is Tim Downing, who won the House District 42 seat in Garvin and McClain Counties. While Mr. Downing received over $40,000 in support from the dark money groups American Federation for Children (AFC) and Citizens United, it is still unknown who their major donors are. It is also unknown if Mr. Downing had prior knowledge of this dark money support, as he denies it. However, documents have surfaced which indicate that Mr. Downing did have prior knowledge - such as the "application" document for AFC support. There are also indications that prior knowledge of Citizens United support exist, as it discussed possible support with candidates. It will certainly be interesting to note if the "net widens" on this investigation, as it will take a good investigative reporter or inquisitive district attorney.
Thursday, November 3, 2016
State Question 790 (The Right to Pray)
State Question 790 will also appear on our ballot for the November 8 election. If SQ 790 passes, Article 2, Section 5 of the Oklahoma Constitution will be stricken. This is the clause which separates church from state. It prevents monuments related to all religions from being erected on state property. Oklahomans decided many years ago that if a monument such as the "Ten Commandments" was allowed on public property, a monument such as "Baphomet" (the goat-headed figure) for pagan idol worshipers must also be allowed. The "separation of church and state" was then added to our Oklahoma Constitution, so that NO monuments could be placed on "PUBLIC" property (emphasis on 'public'). Article 2, Section 5 not only prevents pagan idol monuments from being placed on public property, but it prevents the public funding of private religious schools and corporate charter schools. Corporate entities such as the American Federation of Children (an ALEC and "Big Club" member), a school voucher advocacy group, would certainly like Article 2, Section 5 of the Constitution removed, so that public tax dollars could be siphoned to out-of-state and foreign charter schools. Foreign charter schools, such as the Fethullah Gulen's charter chain (Turkey) would stand to benefit greatly, if only Article 2, Section 5 was removed from our Constitution. It's no small wonder that the American Federation of Children (AFC) has poured $ millions into the "vote yes on SQ 790" campaign. It's also a sad fact that the AFC has poured $ thousands into state candidate campaigns which support the AFC's vision of sending Oklahomans' public tax dollars to out-of-state private and corporate schools. Tim Downing, a House District 42 candidate from Purcell, is one such campaign which received $33,000 in support from the AFC. Any voters in House District 42 who received campaign literature from the Downing campaign, just check the disclaimer in small print - Paid for by The Oklahoma Federation for Children Action Fund.
Entities such as the non-profits and corporations which belong to the secretive club, ALEC, have dubbed SQ 790 - "The Right to Pray", to get it passed. I believe, as most Christians believe, that God's Word gives us the right to pray, any time - anywhere. Permission to pray doesn't come from corporations or any fascist group, such as ALEC - just as the "Right to Farm" (SQ 777) is provided by God's Word, not corporations. Corporate entities, such as the AFC and Seaboard farms use "the right" to do anything, as a way to trick people into supporting ALEC inspired state questions. I believe SQ 777 (The Right to Farm), SQ 790 (The Right to Pray), and SQ 792 (The Right to Buy liquor at Wal-Mart) are for corporate profits only, NOTHING ELSE... and ample evidence says so.
Entities such as the non-profits and corporations which belong to the secretive club, ALEC, have dubbed SQ 790 - "The Right to Pray", to get it passed. I believe, as most Christians believe, that God's Word gives us the right to pray, any time - anywhere. Permission to pray doesn't come from corporations or any fascist group, such as ALEC - just as the "Right to Farm" (SQ 777) is provided by God's Word, not corporations. Corporate entities, such as the AFC and Seaboard farms use "the right" to do anything, as a way to trick people into supporting ALEC inspired state questions. I believe SQ 777 (The Right to Farm), SQ 790 (The Right to Pray), and SQ 792 (The Right to Buy liquor at Wal-Mart) are for corporate profits only, NOTHING ELSE... and ample evidence says so.
Wednesday, November 2, 2016
One More Wooden Stake to the Heart of SQ 777 - The Right to Harm
Conservative groups across the state are lining up to say "Vote NO, on SQ 777", including the Oklahoma Conservative PAC and the Daily Oklahoman newspaper. There is actually a long list of entities state-wide that say "VOTE NO", including many family ranchers and farmers, which includes family hog farms in particular. Of course the reasons for voting NO, are numerous and varied - but the most prominent reason for family hog farms to vote "no" is as follows:
Out-of-state and foreign factory hog producers decided as early as 1996 that they wanted to "corner the market" as far as hog production was concerned, but to do that they needed state laws in place across the nation which would increase their bottom line - profits (both for shareholders and company executives). Of course, there are only a few corporate hog farms across the U.S.A., including Seaboard Farms which is international, and Shuanghui (Smithfield), which is owned by China. Critics of these corporations, including the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), have complained for many years about corporate mistreatment of livestock by these two farm "factories". As a matter of fact, in my opinion, several corporate factory farms have persuaded our local farmers and ranchers that this SQ is for them. They have done this by enlisting what many people believe are grassroots organizations such as Farm Bureau and the National Pork Council.
I think the best way to find out about SQ 777 would be to ask any of the 50 hog farms statewide what they think of it. For obvious reasons, I believe its best not to ask Seaboard what it thinks (LOL).
A very important aspect of corporate control in ANY industry, is to put the competition out of business, so to speak. We see it all the time in our everyday lives as Wal-Mart enters a community to "corner the market" and run the local competition out of town. Grocery stores, tire shops, restaurants, pharmacies, and many other local vendors fold - when Wal-Mart comes to town. Wal-Mart does this by receiving tax breaks, free property, etc that our local businesses never had access to. SQ 792, the liquor modernization bill, is designed to run our local liquor stores out of business. As a matter of fact, Wal-Mart is the largest contributor to the vote yes on SQ 792 campaign at $1,613,507. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that Wal-Mart would like to corner the liquor market!
SQ 777 is to farms what SQ 792 is to our local liquor stores. Several years ago, there were 1,689 hog farms in Oklahoma.Seaboard factory farm entered Oklahoma in 1992, and the number of hog farms was slashed to only 53 full-time hog farms by 2012. This phenomenon was not because 1,636 hog farms decided to just quit the business, but because Seaboard began to corner the producer market. Many people believe that's "just too bad" (sarcasm intended), but it's because they have no friends that were forced out of the business. In my opinion, Seaboard and Tyson are the forces behind "Yes on SQ 777", as they "control" what many people believe are "grassroots" supporters of the bill. I have ample evidence to support my opinion, as ALEC is definitely involved.
In summary, I'll be voting NO on SQ 792, as well as SQ 777 because I support our local business owners as well as our local farmers and ranchers, and neither of these bills do that...
Out-of-state and foreign factory hog producers decided as early as 1996 that they wanted to "corner the market" as far as hog production was concerned, but to do that they needed state laws in place across the nation which would increase their bottom line - profits (both for shareholders and company executives). Of course, there are only a few corporate hog farms across the U.S.A., including Seaboard Farms which is international, and Shuanghui (Smithfield), which is owned by China. Critics of these corporations, including the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), have complained for many years about corporate mistreatment of livestock by these two farm "factories". As a matter of fact, in my opinion, several corporate factory farms have persuaded our local farmers and ranchers that this SQ is for them. They have done this by enlisting what many people believe are grassroots organizations such as Farm Bureau and the National Pork Council.
I think the best way to find out about SQ 777 would be to ask any of the 50 hog farms statewide what they think of it. For obvious reasons, I believe its best not to ask Seaboard what it thinks (LOL).
A very important aspect of corporate control in ANY industry, is to put the competition out of business, so to speak. We see it all the time in our everyday lives as Wal-Mart enters a community to "corner the market" and run the local competition out of town. Grocery stores, tire shops, restaurants, pharmacies, and many other local vendors fold - when Wal-Mart comes to town. Wal-Mart does this by receiving tax breaks, free property, etc that our local businesses never had access to. SQ 792, the liquor modernization bill, is designed to run our local liquor stores out of business. As a matter of fact, Wal-Mart is the largest contributor to the vote yes on SQ 792 campaign at $1,613,507. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that Wal-Mart would like to corner the liquor market!
SQ 777 is to farms what SQ 792 is to our local liquor stores. Several years ago, there were 1,689 hog farms in Oklahoma.Seaboard factory farm entered Oklahoma in 1992, and the number of hog farms was slashed to only 53 full-time hog farms by 2012. This phenomenon was not because 1,636 hog farms decided to just quit the business, but because Seaboard began to corner the producer market. Many people believe that's "just too bad" (sarcasm intended), but it's because they have no friends that were forced out of the business. In my opinion, Seaboard and Tyson are the forces behind "Yes on SQ 777", as they "control" what many people believe are "grassroots" supporters of the bill. I have ample evidence to support my opinion, as ALEC is definitely involved.
In summary, I'll be voting NO on SQ 792, as well as SQ 777 because I support our local business owners as well as our local farmers and ranchers, and neither of these bills do that...
Tuesday, November 1, 2016
No Industry Should Control Our Water - No on SQ 777
As I drove to OKC the other day, I saw a billboard on the west side of Highway 62 just north of Newcastle which read: "No Industry Should Control Our Water - Vote No on SQ 777". At that moment, I realized what it probably was referring, specifically.
Several months ago, at a Leadership Oklahoma retreat in Tulsa, one of the topics for study was "water". Specifically, how water should be used in Oklahoma, for the benefit of Oklahomans. One presentation involved "competing" interests as to how our water should be controlled. On one side was Tom Buchanan, President of Oklahoma Farm Bureau, and on the other side was a representative of the Cherokee Nation. Each side on the issue was allowed to speak for approximately 30 minutes and present its case as to how Oklahoma water should be controlled. Mr. Buchanan, whom I met and briefly visited with at the presentation, made the case that water in "wet" parts of the state should be transferred to drier counties, basically from east to west. This seems to make some sense, since farmers and ranchers in the west need more water than they currently have. I assumed that the farmers and ranchers in the west mostly carried FB Insurance, just as they do everywhere. The only issue with this perspective is that farmers and ranchers in eastern and central counties may not wish to give up any water to pump west. I know I don't, and my ranch is in south-central Oklahoma. My ranch has experienced drought just like those in the west, and since future droughts are unpredictable, I doubt if those ranchers in the east would like to lose any water either. Also, since this perspective of water rights is from a corporation (Farm Bureau) - it must at least be considered that to vote yes on SQ 777, is corporately inspired (There are only a few farm corporations in Oklahoma, such as Seaboard and Tyson). Seaboard farm factory is located in a very dry area of the state - the Oklahoma Panhandle - while Tyson farm factory is in the eastern part of the state. I also assume both factories have ties to Farm Bureau. A side-note to this water issue is that Farm Bureau is solidly supporting SQ 777, while our Indian Nations (I believe most if not all) are saying "VOTE NO" on SQ 777.
The Cherokee Nation representative, then presented its case against SQ 777. The Cherokees as well as the Chickasaws (the area where my ranch is located) believe the water rights belong to the people who reside in any particular location. For example, they believe the water my livestock drink and my ranch uses should stay where it naturally occurs. They believe water is a natural resource provided by God, and not meant for an "industry" to decide where its to be sent (hence the billboard I referred to earlier).
The takeaway for me from the water issue in SQ 777 is this: Farm Bureau would like to control Oklahomans' water rights, while the Tribal Nations want our family farmers and ranchers to control their own water. It's as simple as that, so I'll be voting NO on SQ 777 - just one more reason...
Several months ago, at a Leadership Oklahoma retreat in Tulsa, one of the topics for study was "water". Specifically, how water should be used in Oklahoma, for the benefit of Oklahomans. One presentation involved "competing" interests as to how our water should be controlled. On one side was Tom Buchanan, President of Oklahoma Farm Bureau, and on the other side was a representative of the Cherokee Nation. Each side on the issue was allowed to speak for approximately 30 minutes and present its case as to how Oklahoma water should be controlled. Mr. Buchanan, whom I met and briefly visited with at the presentation, made the case that water in "wet" parts of the state should be transferred to drier counties, basically from east to west. This seems to make some sense, since farmers and ranchers in the west need more water than they currently have. I assumed that the farmers and ranchers in the west mostly carried FB Insurance, just as they do everywhere. The only issue with this perspective is that farmers and ranchers in eastern and central counties may not wish to give up any water to pump west. I know I don't, and my ranch is in south-central Oklahoma. My ranch has experienced drought just like those in the west, and since future droughts are unpredictable, I doubt if those ranchers in the east would like to lose any water either. Also, since this perspective of water rights is from a corporation (Farm Bureau) - it must at least be considered that to vote yes on SQ 777, is corporately inspired (There are only a few farm corporations in Oklahoma, such as Seaboard and Tyson). Seaboard farm factory is located in a very dry area of the state - the Oklahoma Panhandle - while Tyson farm factory is in the eastern part of the state. I also assume both factories have ties to Farm Bureau. A side-note to this water issue is that Farm Bureau is solidly supporting SQ 777, while our Indian Nations (I believe most if not all) are saying "VOTE NO" on SQ 777.
The Cherokee Nation representative, then presented its case against SQ 777. The Cherokees as well as the Chickasaws (the area where my ranch is located) believe the water rights belong to the people who reside in any particular location. For example, they believe the water my livestock drink and my ranch uses should stay where it naturally occurs. They believe water is a natural resource provided by God, and not meant for an "industry" to decide where its to be sent (hence the billboard I referred to earlier).
The takeaway for me from the water issue in SQ 777 is this: Farm Bureau would like to control Oklahomans' water rights, while the Tribal Nations want our family farmers and ranchers to control their own water. It's as simple as that, so I'll be voting NO on SQ 777 - just one more reason...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)