Recently, the federal government’s EPA issued new mandates on the oil and gas industry – requiring a process called “green completion.”   These new EPA rules are meant to protect the air from harmful gases, such as methane, which can be released during the oil and gas drilling process.  

A noble purpose – but it raises two questions in my mind:  (1)   Do Oklahomans need Washington, D.C., intervention to protect us from the oil and gas industry? And (2) If so, do these EPA rules accomplish their goal in the least burdensome, most efficient way?

In my opinion, the answer to both questions is “no.”

Speaking as only one commissioner – and not for the Oklahoma Corporation Commission as a whole – my private sector experience has shown me that government intrusion from Washington, D.C., is not narrowly tailored to the needs of Oklahomans.  When regulation is formulated at a local or state level, Oklahoma’s citizens and taxpayers have a better opportunity for meaningful dialog with less intrusive consequences.  

The recently-adopted EPA rules state that their goal was ”cost-effective regulations, required by the Clean Air Act, to reduce harmful air pollution from the oil and natural gas industry while allowing continued, responsible growth in U.S. oil and natural gas production.”  To support this new mandate of “green completion,” the EPA argues that it will significantly increase air quality, and will not be overly costly on businesses.

Oklahoma’s oil and gas industry – both big and small companies – disagrees, pointing out some of the faulty assumptions made by the EPA to justify these additional mandates.  First, the amount of harmful gases emitted during the initial stages of a well’s life are far less than estimated by the EPA.  Oklahoma’s oil and gas industry estimates that the EPA missed the mark by as much as 1400%. 

Secondly, the EPA states that the costs of “green completion” are offset by the additional recovery of natural gas and other products which can be sold.  Again, our Oklahoma companies disagree.    Oklahoma companies estimate that cost to business could be as much as $1 million per ton of harmful gas reduction.  From a small business owner’s standpoint, these costs are huge and the benefit is small.  The math simply does not work.

To their credit, our largest oil and gas companies already use “green completion” methods in more than 90% of the wells drilled – and were doing so prior to the EPA’s edict.   As for the smaller companies, these new rules might cause them to choose not to drill a well – which means a loss of jobs for Oklahoma families

Regulation has a place, and there are sound reasons for it.  In fact, the Oklahoma Corporation Commission is the chief regulator of this industry.  Before state regulations are enacted, we hold official conferences to gather input from parties who will be affected by new regulations.  The Oklahoma commissioners are elected by Oklahomans – and are vested with the duty and responsibility to protect and defend Oklahoma’s resources, both natural and economic.    

States should be allowed to regulate our industries.  The Oklahoma Corporation Commission has been a leader in sound regulation for this industry, and in my opinion, is the best way for Oklahomans to regulate Oklahoma. 

When you’re on the wrong side of Planned Parenthood, you’re on the right side of history.

The left’s disingenuous and intellectually lazy “war on women” talking points have blown up in its face.  Most polls show Mitt Romney fast gaining on President Obama with female voters. Some polls even show him pulling ahead.

Still, it’s the multi-billion dollar abortion industry that may just give Romney the boost he needs to take a permanent lead.

Just days after pro-life investigative group Live Action released devastating evidence that Planned Parenthood systemically engages in the grisly practice of sex-selection abortion – a charge to which it now admits – the cash-flush abortion Goliath has done Obama an ironic disservice by endorsing his re-election bid. The group has additionally launched a $1.4 million advertising campaign to smear Mitt Romney.

Let’s put aside for a moment the scandalous disclosure that while Planned Parenthood receives over 350 million per annum in your taxpayer dollars, it nonetheless spends millions engaging in partisan politicking for the DNC. Troubling as that may be, utterly horrific is the revelation that this extremist organization – which absurdly presumes to defend “women’s rights” – has been caught red-handed torturing little girls to death in mamma’s womb, simply because mamma wanted a boy.

This discovery – eerily reminiscent of Communist China’s forced one-child sex-selection policy – has shocked the conscience of an entire nation. So disturbing are the facts that on Thursday the U.S. House of Representatives voted on the Prenatal Non-Discrimination Act (PRENDA), H.R. 354, introduced by Republicans in Congress. Unbelievably, because the bill required a two-thirds majority for passage, Democrats were able to narrowly abort the measure by a vote of 246-168.

The legislation, which would have outlawed sex-selection abortions altogether, was also opposed by President Obama. This comes as little surprise when you consider that, while a state senator, Obama repeatedly fought Illinois’ Born Alive Infant Protection Act. This law simply required that when a baby survives a botched abortion – when she is “born alive” – further attempts to kill her must immediately cease, and steps must be taken to save her life.

But according to our president – leader of the “civilized” world – a law preventing the abortionist from finishing her off is “really designed simply to burden the original decision of the woman and the physician to induce labor and perform an abortion.”

This, coupled with Democratic support for sex-selection abortion (now on record), represents the true “war on women.” This is misogyny at its deadly worst. Take note, America: Obama and Democrats have officially endorsed the Mengelian practice of explicitly targeting little girls – over boys – for live dismemberment.

Still, there is good news here. This entire saga has placed in the national spotlight the irreconcilable incongruities central to our nation’s ongoing policy of legalized abortion on demand.

Consider, for instance, that under current federal and state law, if an off-duty abortionist – if any man, for that matter – physically assaults a woman and her unborn daughter dies, that man has committed murder. Yet if mom walks into Planned Parenthood and authorizes that same man to rip her baby girl limb-from-limb, it’s her “choice.” First case: murder. Second case: “choice.” Both cases: dead baby girl.

Furthermore, consider that – as established by a 2006 Zogby International poll of over 30,000 Americans in 48 states – 86 percent support a law banning sex-selection abortion. Doesn’t it stand to reason, then, that since the vast majority recognize the objectively reprehensible nature of sex-selection abortion, they, too, might recognize that it’s equally reprehensible for mom to have baby killed for no reason at all? This is what current law allows, without restriction, through the ninth month.

Indeed, incongruities abound. Still, it is the indefensible nature of empty “pro-choice” rhetoric that, I believe, will ultimately end legalized abortion in America. Truth, even when buried for decades, eventually has a way of rising to the surface.

It’s inevitable. Roe v. Wade will, in time, be tossed, alongside the slavery-justifying Dred Scott decision, exactly where both shameful scars on Lady Liberty belong: in the trash heap of historical inhumanity.

Just as those who excused slavery are reviled by history, so, too, will be those who called themselves “pro-choice.”

Matt Barber (@jmattbarber on Twitter) is an attorney concentrating in constitutional law. He serves as Vice President of Liberty Counsel Action.

Editorial:  The burn units in Washington, D.C. hospitals must be the busiest places in town lately, treating the blistered butts of the Democrat liars whose pants have been raging like California brush fires. Leading the way, as usual, is the Unprecedented One, Barack “Barry” Hussein Obama-Soetoro, or whatever his name is. The man truly is beyond belief in his capacity to lie. To paraphrase Admiral Farragut at the battle of Mobile Bay, “Damn the facts! Bull speed ahead!”

Campaigning seems to really get him all wee-weed up. His latest is a real jaw-dropper:

“Since I’ve been President, federal spending has risen at its lowest pace in nearly 60 years. Think about it. Think about it. I just point out that it always goes up least under Democratic presidents. This other side, I don’t know how they’ve been bamboozling folks into thinking they are the responsible, fiscally disciplined party? They run up these wild debts, and then when we take over, we’ve gotta clean it up.”

Here’s another:

“…and right now, we’ve got the lowest tax rates we’ve had since the 1950s. And, some of the Republican proposals would take it back as a percentage of GDP back to where we were back in the 1920s. You can’t have a modern industrial economy like that."

A sane person would know that even wacko liberal Democrats are aware that this is utter, outrageous nonsense, not even close to reality. However, it’s becoming more and more likely that we are not dealing with a sane person.

Obama-Soetoro has a well-documented history of saying one thing to one group, and then, in front of a different group on another day, saying the opposite. This, clearly, is conscious lying, done with the knowledge that the complicit Ministry of Propaganda, aka the “mainstream” media, will not point out or even discuss the contradictions if they are brought up by his critics. This sort of lying is part and parcel of B. Hussein’s Saul Alinsky tactical maneuvering. He exaggerates and twists facts, and makes unkeepable promises. He knows what he is saying is not true, but they are the sort of lies that are not based on hard fact, and can be denied as “misstatements,” “misquotes,” “misunderstandings,” or – a periennial Democrat Ministry of Propaganda favorite – “taken out of context.” The recent campaign lies are different.

These are statements that fly in the face of known, and therefore, easily checkable facts. There’s no deniability here. These are facts that anyone can look up, in a library or on the web. So it seems pretty clear that Barry has come to believe his own lies.

Many people have presented pretty good arguments that The Chosen One is a psychopathic liar and a narcissist. A good case, too, has been made that his huge supporter, George Soros, is a sociopath. And it has been suggested that many of the Fat Cat corporate and Wall Street biggies who make up the bulk of his financial supporters are sociopaths, too. Add to this Michael Savage’s contention – with which I am in general agreement – that liberals are mentally ill, and you have a potentially very dangerous situation developing.

The mentally ill, especially sociopaths and narcissists, get very aggressive when they don’t get what they want. We have already seen Obama-Soetoro ramp up the use of executive orders and EPA regulators to by-pass Congress when they wouldn’t do as he demanded they do. And with a Democrat-dominated Senate, full of anti-Constitutionalists and running dog RINOs, it’s likely to get worse.

Now that the Senate has given its imprimatur to warrantless searches and armed FDA agents joining the multitude of unconstitutional armed federal agency police forces, the massive ammunition and weapons purchases by the likes of the Forest Service and the IRS become even more disturbing. The Senate, too, gave him the NDAA with its arrest without charges or Constitutional rights and indefinite detention of American citizens. A disaster, manufactured or otherwise, is now legally a trigger for the imposition of martial law, and a lot of folks are rightfully concerned and nervous about this. Given Obama-Soetoro’s well-known association with radical, unrepentant far left terrorists like Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, anti-American racists like Jeremiah Wright, his training in the philosophy of Marx and the tactics of Saul Alinsky, and his clear dislike of America, especially white, Christian America, there is no guarantee that the November elections will ever happen.

Americans truly need to understand that the lies and the liars of today are not simply politics as usual. These are dangerous people, out to turn America into a totalitarian socialist state, by whatever means necessary. And only We, the People, can stop them.

The 21st century homosexual lobby likes to point to the professional relationship between my uncle Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Bayard Rustin, his openly homosexual staffer who left the movement at the height of the campaign. Rustin attempted to convince Uncle M. L. that homosexual rights were equal with civil rights. Uncle M. L. did not agree, and would not attach the homosexual agenda to the 20th century civil rights struggles. So Rustin resigned.

Rustin was a brilliant strategist and was hired by Uncle M. L. not because he was gay, but because he was a capable strategist. He also was not fired, he chose to resign.

My uncle was not a bigot, and he didn’t judge people for the color of
their skin nor their sexual orientation. Neither do I. As compassionate
Christians who won’t be forced to sit on the back of the bus as far as
our spiritual commitments are concerned, we can be compassionate without
endorsing sin.

As to the relationship between Mrs. Coretta Scott King and the homosexual lobby, Mrs. King was a very compassionate woman. She and I shared conversations regarding misplaced compassion. When her daughter, my cousin Elder Bernice King marched in favor of traditional marriage a few years ago, the homosexual lobby demanded that Mrs. King publicly rebuke her daughter for her stance. Mrs. King did not rebuke her daughter. The issue here is compassion, and how to show compassion in the face of controversy.

On Wednesday, May 9, 2012, President Barack Hussein Obama, known by many as the first “Black” President of the United States of America, also became the first Black President to endorse homosexual marriage. This startling decision came as no surprise to some who already knew him as the “most abortion minded president in the history of America.” A few days after President Obama’s announcement, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People also endorsed homosexual marriage.

Amid the controversy of these seemingly contemporary 21st century policies, the question repeatedly arises: How can we show compassion to those who believe that homosexuality and abortion are civil rights? My now deceased and beloved Aunt Coretta Scott King supported both the homosexual agenda and the abortion agenda. She even accepted the 1966 Planned Parenthood “Maggie” award in her husband’s stead. Uncle M. L. was prolife. Aunt Coretta was the first to ask me the compassion question in the mid-1980’s. Many have since posed the compassion question to me.

As one who is unabashedly unashamed of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, I must admit that when the question first came to me, I sought for a humanly wise response. I struggled and groped in my finite mind for something my Daddy A. D. King might say; or my uncle M. L. King, or my Granddaddy King. At first, I didn’t even remember their sermons, just thought about what their answers might be from a civil rights perspective. After all, I knew that they all preached the Bible, and like David, did their best to obey God in spite of their human frailties. I knew that they were pro-life and believed in procreative marriage. After all, I’m the one who coined the now popular slogan: “I have a dream, it’s in my genes.”

I wanted to express to the world that my great-grandfather, Dr. A. D. Williams, a Baptist preacher was an original NAACP founder. I wanted to express that my Granddaddy, also a Baptist preacher, was an early NAACP leader. Following in their footsteps, my Daddy A. D. King and Uncle M. L. King founded the 20th century Civil Rights Movement in the Name of Jesus.

Thank goodness my good friend Day Gardner helped me to get back on track quickly. In a joint press release from the African American prolife community regarding President Obama’s decision, Day wrote: “The NAACP was founded by Blacks who had an understanding and strong faith in God . They were people – pastors and congregations who knew that the Bible, God’s final Word – was very clear on the immorality and wages of homosexuality and abortion. It is appalling that this one time super hero ‘civil rights’ organization supports the breakdown of traditional marriage and the ruthless killing of our unborn children as a civil right. In its decision to please the world, the NAACP has turned its back on the things of GOD and in doing so it has become irrelevant. We must encourage those who know the truth to speak out – to stand firmly on the solid rock – to not look to the right or to the left. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. once said: “Our lives began to end the day we become silent about things that matter.””

Day’s thoughts lead me to the answer to the compassion question. How can we show compassion for people who want to legitimize sin?  If we love them, shouldn’t we try not to hurt their feelings by pointing out that things like abortion and homosexuality are against the Word of God?  No matter how many new Bible translations that people come up with, God’s Word isn’t going to change.

My answer came not from what would Daddy do, or Uncle M. L. do, or Granddaddy do? The answer will always be “what would Jesus do?” Living on the edge of a 21st century Babylon with the stench of Sodom and Gomorrah stinging our nostrils, we need to know that the question is relevant and the answer is imperative. Not only what would Jesus do, but what did Jesus do when confronted with sinners? Jesus extended compassion in the form of “ye shall know the truth and the truth will set you free.”

Right now the anti-procreative marriage community is in league with the anti-life community, and together with the NAACP and other sympathizers, they are seeking a world where homosexual marriage and abortion will supposedly set the captives free. To the contrary, it is the Word of God on these and all human issues that sets people free. As Christians, we must have the compassion of Jesus Christ and tell the truth and shame the devil. We must not allow false compassion to force truth to take a seat on the back of the bus.

As a young woman, sitting in the pews of the congregations of my elders, I must admit that I questioned God and the Bible, seeking inconsistencies in the Word. I wanted to enjoy sin, and was looking for loopholes. My Daddy and Uncle M. L. had similar experiences before they were “transformed” by God’s light and love through Jesus Christ.

I guess the best example of the transformation or born again experiences in my family would be my Uncle M. L.’s conversion testimony which came to him in 1956. As was previously stated, Uncle M. L. belongs to a long line of preachers, and during his early years, he depended on the faith of his fathers. Then, in 1956, King experienced his first personal encounter with God.

On page 59 of BEARING THE CROSS (Garrow), there is an account of the experience. At around midnight on Jan. 27, 1956, at the height of the bus boycott in Montgomery, Ala. Uncle M. L. was discouraged by death threats, exhaustion, and the heavy burdens of organizing the community. He also feared for his wife and babies. He was praying at his kitchen table, "It seemed at that moment," he later told an interviewer, "that I could hear an inner voice saying to me, ‘Martin Luther, stand up for righteousness. Stand up for justice. Stand up for truth. And lo I will be with you….’ I heard the voice of Jesus saying still to fight on."

The link between Christian faith and the 20th Century Civil Rights Movement was genuine and indistinguishable, in that you could not have one without the other. It was the vision and reality of Christian love that strengthened the Christian warriors. Uncle M. L. had a love for all humanity, that one race of people created by God. Agape love is not easily attained, but Uncle M. L., my Daddy A. D., Daddy King, our hold family legacy has always embraced Agape. God is Love. The Bible teaches us to walk in love, even as my Uncle M. L. was taught. The Bible was Martin Luther King Jr.’s best textbook, always.

Not long after his conversion, Uncle M. L. wrote the following to a youth seeking advice:

From 1950’s Ebony Advice Column

QUESTION: My problem is different from the ones most people have. I am a boy, but I feel about boys the way I ought to feel about girls. I don’t want my parents to know about me. What can I do?

MLK: Your problem is not at all an uncommon one. However, it does require careful attention. The type of feeling that you have toward boys is probably not an innate tendency, but something that has been culturally acquired. … You are already on the right road toward a solution, since you honestly recognize the problem and have a desire to solve it.

Question: About two years ago, I was going with a young lady who became pregnant. I refused to marry her. As a result, I was directly responsible for a crime. It was not until a month later that I realized the awful thing I had done. I begged her to forgive me, to come back , but she has not answered my letters. The thing stays on my mind. What can I do? I have prayed for forgiveness.

MLK: You have made a mistake. … One can never rectify a mistake until he admits that a mistake has been made. Now that you have prayed for forgiveness and acknowledged your mistake, you must turn your vision to the future. … Now that you have repented, don’t concentrate on what you failed to do in the past, but what you are determined to do in the future.

Uncle M. L. showed the compassion and love of Jesus in his letter to this youth. He didn’t help the young man embrace a position contrary to God’s Word, rather he extended God’s loving compassion in his response. We have a sure example of this type of compassion from Jesus Himself:

In the case of “the woman caught in the act,” Jesus said to her accusers: “Ye who are without sin, cast the first stone.” As one by one her accusers dropped their stones, and walked away, Jesus wrote in the dirt. He then asked Mary Magdalene, “woman, where are your accusers?” She realized that her accusers had dispersed. Then, Jesus spoke the startling words of liberation to the woman who would become his first female disciple. “Neither do I accuse you. Go and sin no more.”

Yes friends, Jesus acknowledged the woman’s sins, and he still loved her. He set her free, not just from those who would stone her, but from the behavior that bound her. Loving someone who is bound by sin, dismissing their sanctimonious judges and then setting the captives free by showing them a way out of sin is the answer to the compassion question. Show compassion by showing people the liberty and love of This Same Jesus Christ: yesterday, today and forever.

To do this, we must be transparent, admit to and repent of our own sins first, and then be the examples traveling the road of repentance and redemption. There is love, mercy, compassion and grace in what we have to offer. We just have to be bold enough and strong enough to love.

---

Dr. Alveda King is the founder of King for America and the Pastoral Associate for Priests for Life and Director of African American Outreach. For more information on her work, click here.

Wednesday afternoon (May 23), analysts from the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs said in a press release that the key problem with this year’s state legislative endgame has been that policy makers “have been unwilling to make reductions in wasteful or inefficient areas of state spending.”
 
Over several months, the free market think tank’s budget and spending analyses have pointed to a wide range of potential budget cuts that could provide means to pass a major income tax this year.

Additionally, the group has been sympathetic to efforts to eliminate or reform the Sooner State’s provision of various business incentives, creating a way to take major steps toward eventual elimination of the unpopular personal income tax levy.
 
In comments provided to CapitolBeatOK, OCPA President Michael Carnuccio (pictured above) said, “While working Oklahoma families still struggle to make ends meet, state lawmakers are planning to use nearly every bit of excess revenue from the state’s growing economy to maintain spending in nonessential areas of state government like rodeos and golf courses and aquariums, even increasing spending in many instances.”
 
OCPA’s fiscal analyst Jonathan Small has laid out a range of possible spending reductions, ranging from more than $800 million to just over $500 million. The latter figure was a springboard to the efforts of state Rep. Leslie Osborn and other conservative House Republicans to start the state on a glide path to actual elimination of the income tax.
 
As this year’s “endgame” accelerated in mid-May, in interviews with CapitolBeatOK, OCPA fiscal analyst Jonathan Small winnowed his suggestions down to a “top 10” list that could, if enacted, trim state government spending by around $190 million.
 
However, most tax credits and exemptions viewed as economic development tools have stayed in place.
 
The tax cut plan envisioned by Governor Mary Fallin and legislative leaders, as laid out last week, would finance tax reduction by eliminating some popular individual deductions or credits. While most taxpayers would get a tax cut, a significant number of lower middle-income and upper-middle income people would actually see their income tax liability increase.
 
As analysis made that clear in recent days, many House Republicans shifted against the proposal, despite lobbying by Governor Mary Fallin. House Speaker Kris Steele of Shawnee on Wednesdasy re-intensified his advocacy of broader tax cuts, while Senate President Pro Temp Brian Bingman of Sapulpa and members of his caucus want a vote on the deal announced last week.
 
Carnuccio said on Wednesday, “Plain and simple, it’s the spending. Until our state policymakers show an earnest and resolute desire to cut out any and all unnecessary spending of taxpayer dollars and let Oklahomans keep more of the fruits of their labor, we will continue to limit our state’s ability to attract jobs and capital.”
 
OCPA’s analysts are concerned about appropriations increases envisioned at roughly $300 million, and another several hundred million dollars worth of new bond projects.
 
Carnuccio continued, “Our elected officials have pledged time and again that they want to take the state in the opposite direction from that which the Obama White House is taking our nation.
 
“Yet they are on the verge of increasing overall state spending once again. And they are preparing to potentially increase state taxpayers’ future indebtedness by over half a billion dollars.” 
 
State leaders have said they want to cut taxes, and the intensity of those pronouncements heightened last week, as the Kansas Legislature moved to enact historic income tax and sales tax cuts.
 
This week, Governor Sam Brownback signed legislation that cuts his state’s top marginal tax rates by more than one percent.

OCPA’s policy vice president, Brandon Dutcher, said in comments to CapitolBeatOK, “In Kansas, they have made it clear they are more interested in letting hardworking citizens and job creators keep more of the fruits of their labor than they are in keeping state spending at current levels.”
 
Brownback’s budget director Steven Anderson (a veteran of Oklahoma state finance policy work) said in recent days, “It’s amazing what you can accomplish when you’re willing to cut spending.”
 
Dutcher praised that mindset, saying, “That mindset is what has allowed Kansas to take a dramatic leap forward toward becoming one of the best states in America for economic growth.”
 
Carnuccio concluded his reflections after a Capitol press conference yesterday by saying, “State policymakers across America are waking up to the fact that, if they want to be the premier destinations for business growth and job creation, they have to lower their tax burdens and make their regulatory environments friendlier.
 
“In Oklahoma, that means responsible tax cuts, focusing spending on priorities only, and taking our state’s workers’ compensation system out of the hands of the trial bar.”