In about-face, Senate leader agrees to carry nomination of state Board of Education member
In a political about-face, Oklahoma Senate President Pro Tempore Lonnie Paxton now will carry the executive nomination of state Board of Education member Michael Tinney.
Paxton's decision to speak on behalf of Tinney became evident on Monday, May 19, when the agenda for the Tuesday, May 20, Senate Education Committee meeting was made public. Among others, the committee will hold confirmation hearings for three of the four recent state Board of Education nominees made by Gov. Kevin Stitt. Paxton is listed as the Senate sponsor for Tinney.
Paxton wasn't available for comment Monday about why he changed his mind.
No matter the reason for Paxton's decision, Stitt said he was pleased Tinney would receive a hearing.
'Mike Tinney is a great conservative and a great Oklahoman who is willing to serve his state in this capacity,' Stitt said. 'I'm glad that we're getting politics out of the way so board members can get to the business of serving our kids.'
What caused Paxton's change of heart? It remains uncertain. But during a confirmation hearing for board nominee Chris Van Denhende on Thursday, May 15, Paxton took an unusual step for a Senate president pro tempore. He spoke out against what he and others believed to be an orchestrated email campaign against Van Denhende from far-right sources. Some of those emails compared Van Denhende to Mikhail Gorbachev, the former leader of the Soviet Union, and others attacked Van Denhende's family members.
Paxton spoke about his disgust with the campaign and said the messages were written 'by people who feel empowered by a keyboard' who 'send emails at 2 or 3 in the morning' and called their content 'unfair, hateful opposition.'
'If you shared those things … then you are part of the problem,' he said.
Van Denhende's nomination was approved by the committee and sent to the full Senate for a final vote.
Stitt had named Tinney and Van Denhende to the board along with Ryan Deatherage on Feb. 11. He named a fourth new member, Becky Carson, on April 28. The governor said in February the board shakeup was due to 'ongoing controversy' at the state Education Department and disappointing standardized test scores.
The overhaul also came amid increasing tension between Stitt and state schools Superintendent Ryan Walters, who is the board's chair by nature of his elected position. Stitt is credited with bringing Walters into Oklahoma government, but the two Republicans ― once friends and political allies — now are at odds, as Walters has taken public political positions opposite those of Stitt.
During his first two years in office, Walters received no pushback from the board on multiple controversial decisions, such as issuing a statewide Bible-teaching mandate or seeking to create an administrative rule that would allow the Oklahoma State Department of Education not just to ask for the immigration status of students, but of their parents, as well.
That's changed since Stitt appointed Tinney, Deatherage and Van Denhende to the board. During two meetings, the three men have challenged Walters on multiple occasions. Carson's first meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, May 21, the day after her confirmation hearing.
Major executive appointments require confirmation by the Senate, which typically holds such hearings in May, near the end of the legislative session. Senate tradition requires the nomination be carried by the senator for the district in which the nominee resides, or by the Senate president pro tempore.
Sen. Lisa Standridge, R-Norman, declined to carry the nomination of Tinney, who lives in her district. Standridge has cited her friendship with Kendra Wesson, one of the three board members ousted by Stitt in February, as her reason.
"I denied that because Kendra is a friend," Standridge told The Oklahoman on May 1. "She's also a constituent. I felt like she was doing a great job, and she was fired unceremoniously. Had Mike been treated in that way, I would deny someone else's confirmation, if they were doing a great job.
"It's a horrible decision to have to make, but I felt that at the end of the day, doing what is right is standing up for my friend."
At that time, Paxton had also opted against carrying Tinney's nomination, despite considerable political pressure from Stitt's office to do so.
This article originally appeared on Oklahoman: OSBE member Michael Tinney will get confirmation hearing after all
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
2 hours ago
- Business Insider
Scott Bessent dismisses Jamie Dimon's debt concerns, saying none of his past predictions have been right
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said on Sunday that he doesn't agree with Jamie Dimon's prediction that the bond market will crack. "I've known Jamie a long time and for his entire career he's made predictions like this. Fortunately, none of them have come true. That's why he's a banker, a great banker. He tries to look around the corner," Bessent said in an interview on CBS' "Face the Nation." Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan, told attendees at the Reagan National Economic Forum on Friday that the US "massively overdid" spending and quantitative easing during the COVID-19 pandemic. Dimon predicted this will lead to a "crack in the bond market." "It is going to happen," Dimon said on Friday. "I just don't know if it's going to be a crisis in six months or six years, and I'm hoping that we change both the trajectory of the debt and the ability of market makers to make markets," he added. Bessent said the government is working on shrinking its deficit, and the administration intends to "leave the country in great shape in 2028." "So the deficit this year is going to be lower than the deficit last year, and in two years it will be lower again. We are going to bring the deficit down slowly. We didn't get here in one year, and this has been a long process," Bessent told CBS. Last month, House Republicans passed President Donald Trump's " big beautiful bill." The bill, in its current form, is expected to raise the deficit by $2.5 trillion over the next 10 years, per the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. The bill is now with the Senate, and GOP lawmakers hope to have it on Trump's desk by July 4. Dimon isn't the only one who has raised concerns about the US deficit. Last week, Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk said in an interview with "CBS Sunday Morning" that he was " disappointed to see the massive spending bill." A clip from Musk's interview was released on Tuesday. The full interview aired on Sunday. "I was, like, disappointed to see the massive spending bill, frankly, which increases the budget deficit, not just decrease it, and undermines the work that the DOGE team is doing," Musk said. Musk was the leader of the White House DOGE office from January to May. He announced his departure from the Trump administration on Wednesday. "I think a bill can be big or it could be beautiful. But I don't know if it could be both," Musk told CBS.
Black America Web
3 hours ago
- Black America Web
Redistricting: Majority Black Voting Maps Rejected In Louisiana
Source: Mario Tama / Getty One of the most innocuous yet insidious ways voter suppression rears its head is through redistricting, a process by which a state legislature draws up voting maps along political lines. Despite a federal judge finding that their current legislative map violates the Voting Rights Act, Louisiana lawmakers have rejected a new map that would've included eight new, majority Black districts. The Louisiana Illuminator reports that Bill 487 and Bill 488, which would've redrawn the legislative maps for the Senate and House of Representatives, respectively, were struck down in a 9-6 and 9-5 vote that fell along party lines. The current maps were drawn in 2022 and utilized census data from 2010, despite the fact that the state's Black population has only increased over the last decade. Black voters make up a third of Louisiana's population, but the current voting maps only have one majority Black district. Rep. Edmond Jordan (D-Baton Rouge), ithe chairman of the Louisiana Legislative Black Caucus, authored both bills. He explained the changes were necessary to address a ruling by a federal judge last year that found the current map disenfranchised Black voters. 'By us not upholding our obligation and redrawing these maps … I think it sends a signal that we are unwilling to do so,' Jordan told his fellow legislators. 'Rather than wait on the court to come up with a decision, I think it's incumbent upon us to get ahead of that and maybe draw these maps and show the court that we're willing to comply with Section 2' of the Voting Rights Act. The Republican opposition explained that they didn't feel the need to update the maps as the ruling is currently under appeal, and they believe that the courts will rule in their favor. They also brought up concerns that the new district lines would require current elected officials to move in order to still represent their district or possibly have to run against another incumbent to maintain their seat in the legislature. Jordan understood those concerns but stated his priority was giving Black voters an equal voice in determining who represents them. 'What we're trying to do is attempt to unpack and uncrack these districts so that they would comply with Section 2,' Jordan said. Source: Juan Silva / Getty From the Louisiana Illuminator: Packing is a type of gerrymandering that forces a large number of voters from one group into a single or small number of districts to weaken their power in other districts. Cracking dilutes the power of those voters into many districts. Jordan's plan would have added new majority Black House districts in Natchitoches, Lake Charles, Shreveport and Baton Rouge, and Black Senate districts in Baton Rouge, Shreveport and Jefferson Parish. In what can only be described as saying the quiet part out loud, state Republicans added that they found Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act to be outdated. For clarity, Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act prevents any voting law or measure 'which results in a denial or abridgement of the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color.' Considering that they're actively using legislative districts to curb the power of Black votes, it's clear Section 2 is still a necessity to maintain voting rights within majority Black communities. Redistricting is always a partisan affair, with the legislative map being drawn by whatever party has power. Far too often, though, the redistricting efforts by state Republicans are largely built around minimizing Black voting power to keep Republicans in office. This isn't only an issue in Louisiana, as several states have drawn legislative maps that explicitly undermine Black votes. Redistricting plans in the state of Texas are also facing legal challenges due to allegations of racism. There's an ongoing fight in Texas's Tarrant County over redistricting plans that several state legislators believe violate the Voting Rights Act, and there's currently a federal case underway against the Texas state government over its 2021 voting map that was believed to have 'diluted the power of minority voters.' One of the worst offenders is Alabama, whose redistricting efforts have been deemed racist by federal judges several times. State Republicans have said that if they don't receive a favorable ruling in their appeal on the decision, they won't update the voting map until 2030 to avoid federal oversight. There is nothing more on brand for the modern GOP than having a temper tantrum when being told to be less racist. If anything, this is a reminder that in America, the boring, procedural racism is often the worst kind. SEE ALSO: Poll Shows Companies Maintaing DEI Intiatives Have Better Reputations MIT Becomes Latest University To Back Away From DEI Initiatives SEE ALSO Redistricting: Majority Black Voting Maps Rejected In Louisiana was originally published on Black America Web Featured Video CLOSE
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump's tax bill has a long way to go in the Senate as Republicans mull major changes
Republican leaders spent months carefully crafting the 1,038-page megabill advancing President Donald Trump's agenda, engaging in grueling negotiations and backroom dealings to unite competing GOP factions just enough to squeeze the package through the House. Now, several of those provisions that ensured its passage could be on the chopping block. The Senate is set to begin consideration of Trump's 'big beautiful bill' as Republican leaders scramble to finalize the massive budget framework before the Fourth of July. But Republican senators — including Utah Sens. Mike Lee and John Curtis — are unsure about some of the contents, warning some provisions go too far while others don't go far enough to reduce the nation's deficit. 'There are solid victories in the bill,' Lee said in a statement to the Deseret News. 'But in its current form, the (Big Beautiful Bill Act) won't pass the Senate. It simply doesn't do enough to address the government's spending crisis. But we can make it better.' One of the most controversial provisions tucked into the budget resolution is language repealing clean energy tax credits that were passed in the Inflation Reduction Act under the Biden administration with only Democratic support. That language was demanded by a group of fiscal conservatives in the House who threatened to vote against the full package if it was not included. However, some Republicans have been wary to fully repeal the green energy tax incentives, arguing it could raise utility costs for all Americans. Curtis is among those pushing to preserve some of those clean energy policies, particularly those dealing with nuclear energy, net-zero emissions, battery storage and more. The first-term senator has long centered his climate policies on clean energy solutions, suggesting earlier this week he will push for those changes as the Senate considers the bill. 'My friends in the House kind of called me up to say, 'Listen, we're counting on you to fix it,'' Curtis said at an event in Tooele last week. 'So I think even many of them knew that what they sent over did need some work, and that's now our job in the Senate to put our stamp on that and have it speak for our will.' 'And I think if I have anything to say about it,' he added, 'I'll make sure that we're taking into account our energy future.' On the other hand, Lee has previously suggested he wants a comprehensive repeal of the Inflation Reduction Act, telling the Deseret News it should be overhauled 'lock, stock, and barrel.' 'There are some simple ways we can improve the bill,' Lee said. One way is to 'end Biden's politically motivated subsidies under the so-called 'Inflation Reduction Act' and end the Green New Scam once and for all.' While the two Utah senators have competing visions for the future of green energy tax credits, the pair have similar views on how to address proposals paring back government spending to reduce the deficit. Both Curtis and Lee have pushed for deeper spending cuts and reforms to certain government programs. While Republicans have vowed not to slash necessary benefits under Medicaid and other welfare programs, Curtis has repeatedly urged lawmakers to engage in conversations about reining in fraudulent spending. If not, the senator has warned, drastic cuts will be necessary in the future. Lee has also been vocal about searching for deeper spending cuts in the budget framework, arguing it does not go far enough to reduce the deficit. Those calls have been echoed by some fiscal hawks in the House, who say they are counting on the Senate to implement deeper spending cuts they couldn't secure with their slim majority. Another key deal that was made in the reconciliation package is an expansion of federal deductions for state and local taxes paid, also known as SALT. That provision was demanded by blue-state Republicans who threatened tanking the package if it wasn't included. Republican leaders offered to increase the current deduction cap to $40,000 — up from the current $10,000 limit — for individuals who make $500,000 or less a year. That cap would then increase by 1% every year over the next decade and remain permanent after that period. However, that increase may not be met with open arms in the Senate — and Lee is already hinting at its removal. 'Right now, it unfortunately contains big SALT cap increases, which are basically subsidies for high-tax blue states paid for by hardworking families in Utah and the rest of the country,' Lee said. Another provision that could find itself on the cutting room floor: a debt ceiling increase. The debt limit is the total amount of money the federal government is authorized to borrow in order to pay off existing obligations, tax refunds, interest on the national debt and other payments, according to the Treasury Department. House Republicans tucked a $4 trillion debt ceiling increase into the budget resolution to avoid a default later this summer, arguing that by doing so, they would strip Democrats of the chance to use the impending deadline as leverage to attach some of their own policies. However, some Republicans are staunchly opposed to a debt limit increase in any fashion. 'I think the problem for conservatives is they lose their high moral ground. These will be their deficits,' said Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who is currently opposed to the package. 'These will be GOP spending bills, GOP deficits, and there is no change in the direction of the country.' House GOP leaders are pleading with their counterparts in the Senate not to make changes to the massive reconciliation package, warning any edits could tank the megabill before it even makes it to Trump's desk. Meanwhile, the president is telling the Senate to 'make the changes they want' — sending mixed messages as Republicans consider alterations to the budget framework advancing policies on the border, energy, national defense and tax reform. Some of the hard-to-convince lawmakers hope their stubbornness will ward off any of their Senate colleagues from making drastic changes, noting the drawn-out process in the House should deter them from doing so. 'I think after seeing how painful of a process this is and how difficult it is to get anything through this side, I think that will send a strong message in the Senate that you can't really change it,' Rep. Eric Burlison, R-Mo., a member of the Freedom Caucus, told the Deseret News.
