By Rep. Leslie Osborn
When the founding fathers decided on a system of procuring money from the citizens against their will, which is taxation, it was with the caveat that the amount of money procured would never be more than was needed for core essential needs of the populace.
Those needs are usually defined as public safety of the citizens, a system of infrastructure to move goods and services, a public education system for a well-educated citizenry, and the caring for of individuals who could truly not care for themselves.
Over the years government spending has grown into a huge monster of appropriating for everything from public art; television; theatres; museums; superfluous travel for elected officials, agency members and faculty; pet projects; special interests; and even paying individuals to lobby for more money for the agencies.
In total we have 78 appropriated agencies in our state and I think we can all agree there are probably not that many core essential needs of Oklahoma citizens.
American frontiersman and Tennessee Congressman Davy Crockett is famous for a quote he made while serving our country. A military widow was in dire need after a tragedy and a bill came before Congress to appropriate $10,000 to her aid. Crockett replied, “We have rights as individuals to give as much of our own money as we please to charity; but as members of Congress we have no right to appropriate a dollar of public money.”
How in the world have we gotten to the place where we are denounced for running legislation to slow the growth of government, to defund philanthropic endeavors, to better fund actual core services of government?
What gives us as legislators the right to take citizens’ money and spend it on benevolent projects without their approval?
I believe we have a duty to our state and constituents to spend on those core services and ensure they are maintained in the best way to serve Oklahomans, but not to procure or spend a dollar more than is needed in that endeavor.
Does that mean that these other worthy projects will cease? As long as the public dollar is paying for these projects there is no need for the private sector to step up and fund them. When the public dollar is removed, the free enterprise and spirit of the citizens will show which of these projects will continue in the private sector, where they should always have remained.
As we talk about phasing out our state income tax we will see that Oklahomans will get to keep and spend more of their own money on what they choose to spend it on, not what we choose to spend it on for them. I believe that Oklahomans will still support the arts and culture, but it will be of their own free will as it was always intended.
State Rep. Leslie Osborn, R-Mustang, represents House District 47.
Not only will the private sector support many of these things, they will support them more enthusiastically and spread the news concerning the focus of their support. Without a perceived governmental “safety net”, charitable contributions will increase significantly among the working class who are thankful for what they have and are more than willing to help others.
Based on their performance and the number of christian and other private schools I have serious doubts that public education is a core need. Their never ending caterwauling for more money and refusal to take responsibility for sub standard results are offensive to me. Their unions are only interested in raising salaries and have no interest in fulfilling their responsibilities to educate. I think we should just remove Public education from the area of support with school choice and see if they could survive in a system where consumers are given a choice? Want to bet the teachers unions will rush to support the idea?