Monday, November 1, 2010

In My Backyard


Both our D and R gubernatorial candidates here in Oklahoma are women, which is pretty exciting because it means that whoever wins, we will be electing our first female governor. We can all slap ourselves on the back and congratulate ourselves for being so forward-thinking, cutting-edge, new-world-orderish, say just like electing a “black man” as POTUS – we’re so cool and evolved. But unlike the electing of Obama, let’s now take that irrelevant bulls*** off the table and focus on the credentials, character, and intelligence of the candidates.

I really do want to like the Democrat Jari Askins, pictured here to the right of Republican Mary Fallin. My eldest son loves her, says she gives great hugs, she’s kind and concerned, like a grandmother. I’ve noticed some of my stalwart conservative friends supporting her, so I definitely want to give this lady a good looky-loo…

Let’s look at their responses to questions posed by the local newspaper. I chose this on which to focus my “issues” analysis because of the stringent Q&A format the media outlet has followed. (I believe future campaign reform is going to have to push the media into strict Q&A to overcome its current rampant bias. They just can’t seem to stop interjecting themselves into the story whether the question itself is worded in a ridiculous manner or editing candidates’ responses, shifting context, etc.) I was also drawn by the “sexy” headline: “Gubernatorial candidates answer science, technology questions.”

Q: Do you support the state's continued investment in EDGE Fund and if yes, what options would you choose to fund expansion of the trust fund?

Jari Askins:
In 2003, when Governor Henry first announced his comprehensive economic development plan, Economic Development Generating Excellence, I served on one of the committees formed to study and make recommendations for strengthening Oklahoma's economy. One of the results of this effort was the proposal to create a $1 billion research and development endowment as an investment in Oklahoma's science and technology. In 2006, I authored the bill creating the EDGE Fund and also voted to provide the initial funding. It is one of the important components, along with OCAST and i2E, which combine to make a successful technology-based economy.

Mary Fallin:
I do support the continued investment in the EDGE fund. Before we can consider expanding that fund, however, we need to grow our revenue base and get out of this recession we are currently in. I can't promise to spend money the state of Oklahoma does not have, which is why as governor I will immediately work to eliminate government waste and grow our economy. When we do that, we'll have the tax revenue base we need to properly fund EDGE.

Now, let’s analyze. Did Jari answer the question? No. I’m going to assume her answer would be yes to the first part, and IDK to the second part. What she did say was: she was appointed to ONE of many committees formed by our current D guv to STUDY how to improve economy, three years later she wrote a bill to spend $1 billion to form a STATE fund to give money out in the name of “science and technology.” Okay, I support this sort of economic development. But it’s now 2010. Four years later, what has her EDGE fund done? If there were great results, why wouldn’t she have enumerated them? Can I assume there have been none? Actually, I did read in the paper a few days ago that despite our best efforts to get a piece of the bio-tech action, we’re still laughably small potatoes. But she wanted us to know her role in all this, and yet, side-stepped actually answering. Why are we not getting a bigger piece of that pie? Is it “under-funded” actually? Does she have the nerve to suggest it needs MORE money to successfully compete against other states, etc.? Just tell me…

Mary’s response: Answers both parts of the question directly and immediately. Continue, yes; expand, not until other things happen first. She then suggests it’s not properly funded and needs this expansion eventually. What I heard loud and clear: I will not spend money we do not have and perhaps we can identify some wasteful spending and shift it to this.

Move on to Question 2.

Q: The state reaps a greater return in taxes paid by companies in the Presbyterian Health Foundation Research Park than it gives out in tax credits and state sponsored grants to these companies. Under your administration, will tax incentives play a role in encouraging technology-based economic development? What creative ideas do you have for how the state can invest in research and make the state more attractive for investors?

Jari Askins:
Eliminating tax incentives has the potential for creating unintended consequences. However, there is a demand for more transparency and more accountability in order to make them useful for encouraging technology-based economic development. We need to consider ways to help our state's research institutions and our startup technology companies in an effort to strengthen our economy by providing more high quality, high wage jobs. We need to stimulate local investment as well as provide ways to attract federal dollars. I would utilize the collective know-ledge and experience from existing resources to provide impacts, funding recommendations and new creative ideas for how the state can further invest in research to make the state more attractive for investors.

Mary Fallin:
Yes, tax credits will play a role in encouraging the development of technology based companies in my administration. However, each and every tax credit I support must be creating jobs and leading to long-term growth and investment that would not otherwise occur. If a tax credit does not meet those criteria, it is a handout, not an investment.

Jari’s reponse: WOW. Okay, now is when I’m going to have get a little harsh. She starts speaking a foreign language which I don’t speak, politician-buzzword-BS. She has no creative ideas (which is the second part of the question) – she’s going to “utilize collective know-ledge (sp) and experience from existing resources” (in other words, ask everybody else at some point in the future)…as to the first part of the question, she does not answer. Tax incentives – yes or no? Her answer is rambly and weird: A demand for more transparency and accountability will make the incentives more “useful”? Huh? This poor lady has not a clue how economic development works…didn’t she sit on a governor’s committee for ED?

This is the deal: OK and TX go head to head for the locating of a new tech start-up. The company picks whoever comes with the best pitch, the best package in incentives. It’s usually not us. I don’t see where transparency and accountability have diddly-squat to do with it, unless to make the ED person’s job harder, because now they have to explain to the OK public how TX had more and better incentives, better infrastructure, better worker base, less taxes, a more business-friendly environment regarding law suits, etc. One thing did stand out in Jari’s answer: ATTRACT FEDERAL DOLLARS. That’s her answer to economic development? Otay….it’s a typical idiotic answer in the ED world that does not involve a real company with a real market demand and real customers and real value and real revenue and profit… Geez. The sweet lady is over her head and needs a life preserver. I know I’m being harsh, but in Texas, I worked with the technology incubators in Israel to find real markets for real technologies with real value creating real jobs. The endless merry-go-round of government funding should NOT be relied upon and should NOT be sustainable.

Mary’s answer: Simple and to the point. Yes, but it better meet criteria because I’m not in the business of government hand-outs. Awesome. She has got the message loud and clear from the people. I think Mary is smarter than Jari, based on these two questions.

I have watched Mary criss-cross this state relentlessly campaigning for the last year. One Saturday morning, she tried to attend five events in five little towns, renting a plane to make it happen. I just have not seen the same sort of effort from Jari, and even wondered at one point if Jari had health problems preventing this same level of effort.

Okay, I’ve given Jari every opportunity I can to change my mind. Mary is smarter. Mary has campaigned harder, wants it more. What about character? I am disappointed in Mary’s clumsy attempt to say in one of the recent debates something like this: “You should vote for me because I’ve raised a butt-load of kids and Jari has never been married and has no kids.” Very clumsy, earned her a little national notoriety in the media, too. I happen to agree with her, though, privately, because it’s not PC to say it out loud. I don’t think you should hold it against people if they’ve never been out there on the edge of madness as a parent, but really, it’s a special kind of battle stress. When I find out people have never had kids, I’m kind of taken aback…and my head starts spinning, wondering what THAT would be like, to not have huge obstacles to navigate, huge responsibilities to shoulder, huge stress to manage…anyway.

Credentials: They’re both politicians. Jari is a judge-type, focusing in the pardons and parole area, then became a state lej. Mary had a real job at the beginning – hotel management. Then a state lej, then our first female Lt. Guv, then a federal lej. Mary has worked in D.C. – had a front-row seat to the BS. Feels our pain. She gets it.

Mary wins for me, hands-down. Analysis over.

No comments:

Post a Comment