Oklahoma state leaders renew pledge for budget transparency, but may end public negotiations
While the public had front row seats to the process of determining Oklahoma's budget in 2024, access may look different this year. The Oklahoma State Capitol is pictured. (Photo by Kyle Phillips/For Oklahoma Voice)
OKLAHOMA CITY – Leaders of the Oklahoma House and Senate made renewed vows Thursday for transparency in determining the state budget, although the process may look different this year.
Legislative leaders made major changes to the budget process for the 2024 session, including giving the public direct access to negotiations, after criticisms that it was 'too secretive.'
This year, House and Senate leaders said they remain committed to transparency but these public negotiations may not continue.
House Speaker Kyle Hilbert, R-Bristow, said he's had conversations and is working 'diligently' with Gov. Kevin Stitt, who has released his own budget proposal, the leader of the Senate, and the chairs of the House and Senate budget committees.
'I don't anticipate you'll see a live stream like what you saw in last year's budget negotiations,' Hilbert said. '… I don't think you'll see quite the breakdown, like what you experienced in 2024 just because the two chambers, we are working together, not to say that we agree on everything. … We're working through those discussions to figure out, really, not just what's a House priority, what's a Senate priority, but what's good for the people of Oklahoma.'
In a historic move last session, the Legislature livestreamed hours of budget negotiations with most of the parties present. The budget negotiations revealed specific details about what was being discussed, along with intraparty fractures about policy and funding priorities. At times, the public watched budget talks break down. The public conversations helped give Oklahomans insight into issues facing the state that the they might not have seen otherwise.
Hilbert said the House plans to continue using the House Transparency Portal, which was also launched last year, to maintain a transparent budget process.
'I don't want to get ahead of the appropriations chairs and vice chairs on how and when, because you know that that's always subject to the negotiations and where we are,' Hilbert said. 'And so I don't want to set an arbitrary date on when we would update that portal with the House position, but that's something they're working on with their members.'
Senate President Pro Tem Lonnie Paxton, R-Tuttle, also said the process would look different from last year.
'Last year was the first shot out of the box on the transparency,' he said. 'We're not at all backing off of transparency. We're just trying to find the right way to do it. … I'm not sure what the 'different' is, just the fact we're trying to make it a more workable process without ever taking away the transparency and even building on that transparency.'
Paxton said one improvement he has pledged to make concerns the Joint Committee on Appropriations and Budget process. He said he has promised his caucus, and now the public, that there will be a minimum of a few days' notice for the chambers to consider and figure out budget legislation before they vote on it.
'Coming up in the Senate, there was many times I voted on very large pieces of legislation that I learned about the day before,' he said. 'And if your state senator is learning about something 24 hours before you're voting on a $200 million package, that means none of you all have the opportunity to see it as well. That's not right, and that's what we're correcting.'
The Governor's Office did not respond to requests for comment.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Michael Goodwin: Democrats with Trump Derangement Syndrome are undercutting Israel
One way to look at the first six months of Donald Trump's second term is that the wily president has managed to trick Democrats into fighting common sense and adopting bizarre and unpopular positions. Consider how he lured them into wildly protecting waste, fraud and abuse in the budget simply by having a plan to cut it. Then the president, by keeping a campaign promise, fooled his opponents into engaging in violent riots and trying to block his deportations of illegal immigrants, including those who had committed serious crimes here. And now comes Trump trick No. 3, which is unfolding before our eyes. Because the president's support for Israel is ironclad in its war with Iran, those infected by Trump Derangement Syndrome are reflexively pulling away from the Jewish nation. Already there are signs that Dems and their media handmaidens are moving toward condemning Israel for daring to protect itself from Iranian aggression. The left's budding resistance is camouflaged in squishy, both-sidesism mush. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries began by saying that 'Iran should never be allowed to become nuclear capable,' but quickly called for 'a reduction in hostilities.' 'I'm hopeful that cooler heads will prevail in the Middle East and the situation is de-escalated,' Jeffries told MSNBC. Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, the doofus Dems thought was veep-ready, addressed the initial Israeli strike by bemoaning that America is no longer a 'neutral arbitrator' and added: 'Who is the voice in the world that can negotiate some type of agreement and hold the moral authority? It might be the Chinese.' His fellow Minnesotan, Rep. Ilhan Omar, chimed in with her usual antisemitic dog-whistles. 'Israel knows America will do whatever they want and feels confident about their ability to get into war and have the American government back them up,' she posted. She also insisted Americans should be ready to 'either see their tax dollars being spent on weapons supplies to Israel or be dragged into war with Iran.' Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy plowed similar ground when he bizarrely insisted Israel's attack 'was clearly intended to scuttle the Trump Administration's negotiations with Iran, and risks a regional war that will likely be catastrophic for America.' Amid all the crazy talk on the left, there are a few voices of sanity. One is Sen. John Fetterman, with the Pennsylvania Dem telling Jewish Insider he was shocked by his party pals' views. 'It was just astonishing to see colleagues criticizing these things. It's like, do you think you can negotiate with that regime? Do you think you want to run that scenario and allow them to acquire 1,000 pounds of weapons-grade uranium?' 'I can't understand, I can't even begin to understand that,' Fetterman said. Exceptions to the rule In the same vein, Bronx Congressman Ritchie Torres scoffed at an article in The Economist that doubts Iran was actually racing toward a nuke. Noting that the mullahs expanded their stockpile of 60% enriched uranium by 50% — a level far beyond any plausible civilian use, Torres writes on X that 'To cast doubt on Iran's nuclear ambitions at this point requires not just skepticism, but a willful suspension of one's functioning cerebral cortex.' Unfortunately, Fetterman and Torres are exceptions. For the vast majority of Dems, including those with press passes, the rule that Trump must be relentlessly resisted is forcing them into a corner that looks and sounds like a political loony bin. It's not a new phenomenon, but the shocking thing is that neither his second election nor the seriousness of America's problems at home and abroad have cured their derangement. Instead of being selective in their opposition to Trump, they are embracing their madness across the board with increasing intensity. Whatever he's for, they instantly and mindlessly are against. The Iran nuke issue is an especially strange example. As Fetterman and Torres note, the criticism of Israel ignores the crucial point: Iran is seeking a nuclear weapon, has hidden its enrichment facilities for years and lied to UN inspectors. On its face, that would be troubling enough. But the most egregious element is that Iran has pledged not only to develop a nuke — but to use it on Israel. Keep up with today's most important news Stay up on the very latest with Evening Update. Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters An enemy of the US The quivering Dems presumably are saving their full support of Israel for the day after it gets nuked. Then they'll wail and somehow blame Trump. Fortunately, the Jewish state is not in the mood for suicide and so it struck first, hitting enrichment facilities, degrading weapons systems and taking out the military leadership along with top scientists. The refusal of so many on the left to join Trump and back Israel wholeheartedly is all the more absurd when you remember that Iran pledges that after it destroys Israel, which it calls 'the little satan,' it will go after the US, the 'great satan.' That means Israel is attacking a sworn enemy of America, and displaying why it is one of our best and most important allies. Yet still most Dems can't see the moral imperative and national interest in Israel's action. Nor do they understand how the horrible events of Oct. 7 affect Israeli decisionmakers. That was the deadliest day for Jews since the end of the Holocaust, and it would be unforgivable if Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and others did nothing to stop Iran's race for nukes. Imagine if one of the ballistic missiles that hit Tel Aviv Saturday was carrying a nuclear warhead. That's the nightmare scenario, and it is reason enough to justify the Israeli strikes. Trump gets that, which is why he and Netanyahu adopted a good cop, bad cop routine. The president sincerely wanted Iran to voluntarily give up its nuclear ambitions and tried to make it happen through two months of direct negotiations. At the same time, he warned repeatedly there would be hell to pay if the Ayatollah said no. How much hell now depends on whether the Supreme Leader faces reality and tries to save himself and his regime by making a deal. If he doesn't, it's entirely possible the US, with its unique 30,000-pound buster bombs, will join Israel in obliterating the nuclear sites. Trump's calibrated, forceful stance is a welcome break with Joe Biden's many missteps after the Hamas attack in 2023. Initially, he was completely in Israel's corner, but, faced with criticism from within his party in an election year, Biden began threatening to withhold munitions unless Israel agreed to limit its responses. He even had Secretary of State Antony Blinken attend Israel's military cabinet meetings to decide which Gaza targets Israel could hit. All the while, Biden, who had lifted some of Trump's oil and banking sanctions on Iran, tried to sweet-talk the regime into another weak nuclear pact. Instead, Iran shifted much of the money to Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis and kept working on developing the bomb. Thankfully, for both Israel and America, those days of Oval Office weakness are over.
Axios
2 hours ago
- Axios
Police make arrest after Texas capitol evacuated over threat to lawmakers
The Texas Department of Public Safety arrested a person in connection with threats against state lawmakers that saw the state capitol briefly evacuated on Saturday, the DPS said. The big picture: The threats against the lawmakers whom officials said planned to attend Austin's anti-Trump " No Kings" protest came hours after after two Democratic Minnesota legislators and their spouses were shot in what police described as "targeted attacks." Minnesota state House Democratic Leader Melissa Hortman and her husband fatally shot during the attack at their Twin Cities home. Details: The state capitol was evacuated due to a "credible threat" against the lawmakers, the DPS said just after 1pm local time. A DPS trooper later took one person into custody in connection with the threats, per a later DPS post. Texas Lieutenant Gov. Dan Patrick wrote spoke out against threats to lawmakers on X as he confirmed the "credible threat" that was made "to possibly kill members of the Texas legislature at the capitol":
Hamilton Spectator
5 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Political violence is threaded through recent US history. The motives and justifications vary
The assassination of one Democratic Minnesota state lawmaker and her husband, and the shooting of another lawmaker and his wife at their homes, is just the latest addition to a long and unsettling roll call of political violence in the United States. The list, in the past two months alone: the killing of two Israeli embassy staffers in Washington, D.C. The firebombing of a Colorado march calling for the release of Israeli hostages, and the firebombing of the official residence of Pennsylvania's governor — on a Jewish holiday while he and his family were inside. And here's just a sampling of some other disturbing attacks before that — the assassination of a health care executive on the streets of New York City late last year, the attempted assassination of Donald Trump in small-town Pennsylvania during his presidential campaign last year, the 2022 attack on the husband of former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi by a believer in right-wing conspiracy theories, and the 2017 shooting by a liberal gunman at a GOP practice for the congressional softball game. 'We've entered into this especially scary time in the country where it feels the sort of norms and rhetoric and rules that would tamp down on violence have been lifted,' said Matt Dallek, a political scientist at Georgetown University who studies extremism. 'A lot of people are receiving signals from the culture.' Politics behind both individual shootings and massacres Politics have also driven large-scale massacres. Gunmen who killed 11 worshippers at a synagogue in Pittsburgh in 2018, 23 shoppers at a heavily Latino Walmart in El Paso in 2019 and 10 Black people at a Buffalo grocery store in 2022 each cited the conspiracy theory that a secret cabal of Jews were trying to replace white people with people of color. That has become a staple on parts of the right that support Trump's push to limit immigration. The Anti-Defamation League found that from 2022 through 2024, all of the 61 political killings in the United States were committed by right-wing extremists. That changed on the first day of 2025, when a Texas man flying the flag of the Islamic State group killed 14 people by driving his truck through a crowded New Orleans street before being fatally shot by police. 'You're seeing acts of violence from all different ideologies,' said Jacob Ware, a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations who researches terrorism. 'It feels more random and chaotic and more frequent.' The United States has a long and grim history of political violence, from presidential assassinations dating back to the killing of President Abraham Lincoln to lynchings and violence aimed at Black people in the South to the 1954 shooting inside Congress by four Puerto Rican nationalists. Experts say the past few years, however, have likely reached a level not seen since the tumultuous days of the 1960s and 1970s, when icons like Martin Luther King, Jr., John F. Kennedy, Malcolm X and Robert F. Kennedy were assassinated. Ware noted that the most recent surge comes after the new Trump administration has shuttered units that focus on investigating white supremacist extremism and pushed federal law enforcement to spend less time on anti-terrorism and more on detaining people who are in the country illegally. 'We're at the point, after these six weeks, where we have to ask about how effectively the Trump administration is combating terrorism,' Ware said. Of course, one of Trump's first acts in office was to pardon those involved in the largest act of domestic political violence this century — the Jan. 6, 2021 assault on the U.S. Capitol, intended to prevent Congress from certifying Trump's 2020 election loss. Those pardons broadcast a signal to would-be extremists on either side of the political debate, Dallek said: 'They sent a very strong message that violence, as long as you're a Trump supporter, will be permitted and may be rewarded.' Ideologies aren't always aligned — or coherent Often, those who engage in political violence don't have clearly defined ideologies that easily map onto the country's partisan divides. A man who died after he detonated a car bomb outside a Palm Springs fertility clinic last month left writings urging people not to procreate and expressed what the FBI called 'nihilistic ideations.' But, like clockwork, each political attack seems to inspire partisans to find evidence the attacker is on the other side. Little was known about the man police identified as a suspect in the Minnesota attacks, 57-year-old Vance Boelter. Authorities say they found a list of other apparent targets that included other Democratic officials, abortion clinics and abortion rights advocates, as well as fliers for the day's anti-Trump parades. Conservatives online seized on the fliers — and the fact that Boetler had apparently once been appointed to a state workforce development board by Democratic Gov. Tim Walz — to claim the suspect must be a liberal. 'The far left is murderously violent,' billionaire Elon Musk posted on his social media site, X. It was reminiscent of the fallout from the attack on Paul Pelosi, the former House speaker's then-82-year-old husband, who was seriously injured by a man wielding a hammer. Right-wing figures theorized the assailant was a secret lover rather than what authorities said he was: a believer in pro-Trump conspiracy theories who broke into the Pelosi home echoing Jan. 6 rioters who broke into the Capitol by saying: 'Where is Nancy?!' On Saturday, Nancy Pelosi posted a statement on X decrying the Minnesota attack. 'All of us must remember that it's not only the act of violence, but also the reaction to it, that can normalize it,' she wrote. Trump had mocked the Pelosis after the 2022 attack, but on Saturday he joined in the official bipartisan condemnation of the Minnesota shootings, calling them 'horrific violence.' The president has, however, consistently broken new ground with his bellicose rhetoric towards his political opponents, who he routinely calls 'sick' and 'evil,' and has talked repeatedly about how violence is needed to quell protests. The Minnesota attack occurred after Trump took the extraordinary step of mobilizing the military to try to control protests against his administration's immigration operations in Los Angeles during the past week, when he pledged to 'HIT' disrespectful protesters and warned of a 'migrant invasion' of the city. Dallek said Trump has been 'both a victim and an accelerant' of the charged, dehumanizing political rhetoric that is flooding the country. 'It feels as if the extremists are in the saddle,' he said, 'and the extremists are the ones driving our rhetoric and politics.' Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
