taxpayer

Garfield Residents Have To Sue Enid Government To Protect Them From HUGE Solar Installation

On May 8th of this year, Michael and I welcomed Garfield County freedom fighter, NeeAnn Clinton to the podcast to talk about a 5000 acre solar installation proposed by NextEra Energy – a private corporation with an extensive ESG strategy that has given lots of money to Oklahoma legislators and has numerous pending lawsuits including securities fraud and which is under active investigation by the Federal Election Commission due to a web of dark money influence across numerous campaigns in Florida.

October 25th, we hosted NeeAnn again so she could give us an update on their fight to stop the solar installation.

I urge you to watch the full live podcast on either our YouTube or Rumble channels, but below is a clip of NeeAnn talking about the fact that Garfield County residents have had to sue the City of Enid’s Metropolitan Area Planning Commission to force them to uphold zoning laws inside a 3 mile corridor through which NextEra has already begun construction WITHOUT ANY PERMITS.

Now think, just like we – and V1SUT Vantage – have explained with public schools that trample on parental rights, victims (taxpayers) of the Garfield County NextEra solar scheme, have to take their hard-earned dollars in hand and sue people whose jobs only exist because of TAX DOLLARS. So, citizens have their dollars taken from them by their government by force with the Constitutional expectation that their rights and liberty will be upheld by that same government, only to find out that they’ll have to use MORE of their hard-earned paychecks to force the government to do their jobs. This, is a sure sign of government tyranny.

NeeAnn and I also talked about the fact that what we’re seeing with the NextEra solar project in Garfield County is the same thing I’ve found with carbon capture in Oklahoma – NO ONE IS IN CHARGE OF PERMITTING OR PROTECTING THE SAFETY AND PROPERTY RIGHTS OF CITIZENS. How can this be? Because our Governor wants Oklahoma to be an “Open For Business“, “Top Ten State“, with a “More Of Everything, All-Of-The-Above Approach” to energy development. Okay, but where are the citizens in those political soundbites? What about their rights to their property and safety?

Those thing aren’t a priority of our Governor and that’s made very clear when you hear both NeeAnn and I talk about our findings with respect to the ‘green energy agenda’ in Oklahoma.

So let’s hear that from NeeAnn again…

Please, go to the website Garfield County residents have created to educate residents and other Oklahomans about NextEra’s solar facility, Stop Skeleton Creek Solar. While you’re there, be sure to donate to their cause because, as I well know – lawsuits aren’t cheap!

October 27, 2024 0

I Spoke Before The Oklahoma State Textbook Committee. Here’s Why and What I Said.

Author: Janice Danforth, Chapter Chair, Moms For Liberty, Tulsa County

On Friday, October 6, 2023, I spoke before the Oklahoma State Textbook Committee. Back in September, the Tulsa County Chapter of Moms for Liberty spent time reviewing textbooks that were up for approval and discovered that McGraw Hill has embedded Social Emotional Learning (SEL) into its elementary-level math books. We do not support SEL and it most definitely does not belong in Mathematics.

Social Emotional Learning was coined in 1994 at the Fetzer Institute and came about in the face of school violence. In 2002 ESSA (Every Student Succeeds Act) either encouraged or required the inclusion of SEL in schools. By 2022 SEL instructional materials cost $1.725B up 25.9% from the previous year. Does anyone believe that school violence has declined since 1994? No, the opposite is true. In fact, a headline from an article in 2021 states, “Violence in schools seems to be increasing, why?” We are being sold an ideology that not only isn’t working but is costing taxpayers a lot of money.

Oklahoma students are suffering with proficiency, not only in reading, but mathematics as well. In 2022 The proficiency rate in MATH for OK 4 th graders was at 27%. We are ranked 49 th in education and I’m certain all can agree that it is time to move the needle in the other direction. Oklahoma students deserve to learn the core subjects and 100% of the material should be focused on academics. SEL takes time away from academics and also undermines parental rights which clearly state that we are the authority of our child and are the ones to direct their moral upbringing. SEL interferes with that. We along with many other parents see the failings of this ideology and by no means desire for the government to mold the character of our children.

As the chapter chair, I had three minutes to state my reasons for why we were requesting the committee to reject this contract with McGraw Hill, and in turn, McGraw Hill had the same opportunity to share why they felt the committee should accept their contract. The State Textbook Committee has a month to make their decision.

While the committee may not reject the contract with McGraw Hill, I firmly believe we make changes one conversation at a time. Going up against a Goliath like McGraw Hill may seem daunting and even impossible, but change only happens when we fight, when we stand up, even if we lose this time. Because eventually, we get a win, and then another, and then another. But it takes all of us willing to stand up to the giant, to ignore the noise of the haters, and to go into the battle, win or lose because our children deserve for us to try. Our children deserve for us to fight for them, because if not us, who else will?

My Remarks

Good morning. My name is Janice Danforth and I am the chapter chair of the Tulsa County Moms for Liberty. I am here because our chapter spent time reviewing textbooks that were up for approval by the State Department of Education. We discovered that McGraw Hill has embedded Social Emotional Learning into its elementary level Math Books. We do not support SEL and it most definitely does not belong in Mathematics.

I want to give a quick background about SEL so you as a committee can understand why SEL is a concern. Social Emotional Learning was coined in 1994 at the Fetzer Institute and came about in the face of school violence. In 2002 ESSA (Every Student Succeeds Act) either encouraged or required the inclusion of SEL in schools. By 2017, K-12 was spending $21-47B annually on SEL. By 2022 SEL instructional materials cost $1.725B up 25.9% from the previous year. Does anyone believe that school violence has declined since 1994? No, the opposite is true. In fact, a headline from an article in 2021 states, “Violence in schools seems to be increasing, why?”

So, here are some concerns related to SEL:
SEL undermines parental rights
SEL is designed to become the “Parent Voice”
SEL is designed to be woven throughout all subjects
SEL impersonates mental health services
SEL allows teachers to psychologically evaluate students
SEL removes/doesn’t take into account beliefs existing at home
SEL coerces students to pick the “right” answer
SEL distracts and takes time away from actual education and gaining knowledge
SEL sets the focus on feelings rather than truth/facts. Why? Because emotions are easy to manipulate. You can’t manipulate the truth.

So, as a parent and as a taxpayer I have to ask the question, why are we spending so much money on a program that not only isn’t working but is undermining how a parent raises their child? And SEL has now become embedded into all subjects at school and this is a problem.

McGraw Hill creates textbooks and has been doing so since the late 18 hundreds, but that does not mean we blindly trust them and continue to allow their textbooks into our schools. In this particular instance, they have embedded an ideology into a core subject of Math, this is a red flag and should be for each of you. Oklahoma students are suffering with proficiency, not only in reading, but mathematics as well. In 2022 The proficiency rate in MATH for OK 4 th graders was at 27%. We are ranked 49 th in education and it is time to move the needle in the other direction. These students deserve to learn the core subjects and 100% of the material should be focused on academics.

As Moms for Liberty, Tulsa County I am asking you to reject the contract with McGraw Hill. The only way we change the trajectory of where we are headed is to say no to publishers like McGraw Hill who have embedded an ideology into a core subject. If enough states start standing up and saying no, these publishers will be forced to get back to academia and will be forced to remove programs like SEL because let’s be honest, for them, making money is the bottom line.

Set a precedent today for McGraw Hill and for other publishers that want to do business in Oklahoma that we will not tolerate nor invest in publishers that have embedded ideologies into their textbooks. Instead, let’s invest and partner with publishers that desire to increase proficiency and that is their only motivation. This is what Oklahoma students deserve!

October 8, 2023 0

What Do The Oklahoma Tax Commission (OTC) Rules Say About The Oklahoma Parental Choice Tax Credit?

The Oklahoma Parental Choice Tax Credit Act (OPCTCA) – HB1934 – directed the OTC to create/promulgate rules “to implement the provisions of the [Act]” (page 6 and page 8). To that end, the OTC has created rules and now has them open for public comment until 4:30pm on Thursday, October 12th of this year. The rules can be found here. The Oklahoma Statutes created from HB1934 can be found here.

Beginning Monday (10/2), I began to compare the rules to the bill. The rules cannot mirror the bill/statute word for word, because the OTC rules will include verbiage specific to the Act’s implementation. After speaking with Representative Sherrie Conley, I did learn, however, that the rules do have to mirror the legislative intent of the Act – the OTC couldn’t add things via the rules process that weren’t already specified by the Act or the intent of the Legislature in creating the Act. Consequently, I confined my review of the rules to that parameter.

Wednesday, October 4th on our ROPE Report LIVE podcast, I explained my findings – but also, the reasons ROPE cannot abide the Act in the first place. You can find a clip of this video on the front page of the website, but the FULL video can be found on YouTube and Rumble. I think it’s worth a watch for the topics covered.

WHAT CONCERNS DID I HAVE WITH THE RULES?

I really didn’t find any place that did not mirror the legislative intent of the Act. In other words, I couldn’t find any law making through the rules. I did, however, take issue with a couple things:

There are two versions of “Taxpayer” in the rules. One called “Taxpayer” that copies the definition from the Act, and another called “Oklahoma Taxpayer” that defines that OTC verbiage for a tax payer. These two should be combined because it is confusing to have two “Taxpayer” definitions.
Under the definition of “Eligible Student”, the OTC adds to the Act’s definition by including the words, “and is registered with the Oklahoma Tax Commission”. What? Why would a child under 18 be registered with the Tax Commission? Their taxpayer parents/guardians are registered, not the child. This designation needs to go in my opinion (IMO). I don’t even see how it’s helpful here and it makes me nervous because we ALREADY collect so much data on CHILDREN in Oklahoma.
Warrant. There are several problems here IMO.
- The Act’s definition of “Warrant” says, “means an order for payment directing the State Treasurer to disburse funds to a designated payee. A warrant operates like a paper check.” (page 2 near the bottom of the page)
- 3D (top of page 5), says this, “Payment of the credit shall be made by the Tax Commission with an individual warrant made payable to the taxpayer and mailed to the private school where the eligible student is enrolled or expected to enroll. The taxpayer shall restrictively endorse the warrant to the private shcool for deposit into the account of the school, unless the tuition and fees for the eligible student have already been paid by the taxpayer.”
  - Why would the OTC send a paper check two places? Why does the school get it and the school ALSO get a warrant mailed to them? The taxpayer has to ‘restrictively’ (meaning they can’t endorse it for personal use – but then, how many people are going to have to be hired to check up on this?) endorse the check they receive to the school. Why doesn’t the parent just take the warrant to the school and not have the OTC issue two warrants?
  - This makes no sense IMO. In fact, the only reason I can see this ‘procedure’ being used is to make it seem as though the payment is coming from the family to the private school – which it is not. According to Forbes Oklahoma Income Tax Calculator, a married couple filing jointly have to make $180,000 before their Oklahoma income tax is $7500 (it’s $7,497) – the ‘reimbursement’ provided by the state for each child to go to private school. Therefore, the state pays the tuition to the private school for every child who applies for the ‘credit’ in a family that earns $180,000 or less.
  - This is extremely important because AG Gentner Drummond “is withdrawing a legal opinion that gained national attention for its support of creating religious charter schools” citing that he believes that state money going to private schools is unconstitutional. Not ony that, but there is a lawsuit to stop the publicly-funded Catholic online charter school already proposed.
  - Incidentally, a KOSU poll from last year found that voters oppose public money going to private schools – which is probably why House and Senate leadership (with cover provided by “school choice” groups Americans For Prosperity (AFP), OCPA and American Federation of Children) – lied to legislators and/or twisted arms to get them to agree that the Act was a ‘tax credit’.

Now, I could go more in depth about the OPCTCA here, but I did that in the video – and will continue to do it as time goes on with the vain hope that the people will see the errors in this idiodic scheme and tell the Legislature to do away with it because, in the long run, this WON’T help parents like the Legislature REDUCING OUR TAXES IN THE FIRST PLACE. The idea that the government overtaxes me and then wants to return money to me – most of it that it stole from OTHER PEOPLE to give me (redistribution of wealth) in the first place – is anathema because the government’s ‘gift’ gives it so much more control over me than if the taxes weren’t taken from me (by force) in the first place.

Believe me, as a Christian, I HATE being the one to stand up and say, “You can’t give my taxes to a private school”, but I’m only doing it because I firmly believe that this whole “school chioce” scheme is to make sure that the public money going to private schools will make private schools public so that NO PARENT HAS A CHOICE as to how their child/children is/are educated.

WHAT SHOULD WE DO NOW?

According to the OTC website, “Written comments will be accepted until 4:30 p.m. on October 12, 2023, at the Oklahoma Tax Commission, Oklahoma City, OK 73194, Attn: Lisa Haws, or by email to parentalchoice@tax.ok.gov.”

So, I’m sending an email to Lisa Haws that says,

Dear Ms. Haws,

Please consider the following comments regarding the Oklahoma Parental Choice Tax Credit Act rules:

There are two versions of “Taxpayer” in the rules. One called “Taxpayer” that copies the definition from the Act, and another called “Oklahoma Taxpayer” that defines that OTC verbiage for a tax payer. These two should be combined because it is confusing to have two “Taxpayer” definitions.

Under the definition of “Eligible Student“, the OTC adds to the Act’s definition by including the words, “and is registered with the Oklahoma Tax Commission”. Why would a child under 18 be registered with the Tax Commission? Their taxpayer parents/guardians are registered, not the child. This designation needs to go in my opinion (IMO). The designation of “taxpayer” already covers who pays taxes.

The Act’s definition of “Warrant” says, “means an order for payment directing the State Treasurer to disburse funds to a designated payee. A warrant operates like a paper check.” (page 2 near the bottom of the page)

3D (top of page 5), says this, “Payment of the credit shall be made by the Tax Commission with an individual warrant made payable to the taxpayer and mailed to the private school where the eligible student is enrolled or expected to enroll. The taxpayer shall restrictively endorse the warrant to the private shcool for deposit into the account of the school, unless the tuition and fees for the eligible student have already been paid by the taxpayer.”

Why would the OTC send a paper check two places? Why does the school get it and the school ALSO get a warrant mailed to them? The taxpayer has to ‘restrictively’ (meaning they can’t endorse it for personal use – but then, how many people are going to have to be hired to check up on this?) endorse the check they receive to the school. Why doesn’t the parent just take the warrant to the school and not have the OTC issue two warrants?

This makes no sense IMO. In fact, the only reason I can see this ‘procedure’ being used is to make it seem as though the payment is coming from the family to the private school – which it is not. According to Forbes Oklahoma Income Tax Calculator, a married couple filing jointly have to make $180,000 before their Oklahoma income tax is $7500 (it’s $7,497) – the ‘reimbursement’ provided by the state for each child to go to private school. Therefore, the state pays the tuition to the private school for every child who applies for the ‘credit’ in a family that earns $180,000 or less.

Thank you so much for your consideration of my comments.

Sincerely,

Jenni White

Education Coordinator

Reclaim Oklahoma Parent Empowerment (ROPE)

jenni@rope2.org

CLOSING

Please feel free to make any changes to my letter – also, feel free to examine all the information for yourself to see if I missed something or if you don’t particularly agree with my criticisms of the Rules.

Please watch the ROPE Report LIVE video for more information on the OPCTCA.

October 5, 2023 0