The Oklahoma State Capital

The events of the past few days have nicely highlighted the great scam—the smoke and mirrors of the legislative process—coupled with the astounding arrogance with which an elite political class despises the average taxpayer and holds the utmost disdain for their intelligence.

This scam takes on many forms, but once in a while the politicians make an epic misstep that pushes it into public view so clearly that all can see it. It’s the game by which legislators get their way—whatever that is—knowing that the action is so unpopular as to be toxic should the people find out about it and try to hold them accountable; but, that notwithstanding, the legislators insult the intelligence of the voter, by statutorily authorizing a set of compliant shills to accomplish this goal for them.

In this case, it was House Speaker Kyle Hilbert’s initiative to strip the Legislature of its authority to set the salaries of Oklahoma’s statewide elected officials and hand that power to a board of unelected appointees—people who don’t have to care about what the taxpayers think and who were more than willing to do the inexplicable. In an era when Oklahomans struggle to meet their financial obligations, pay soaring property taxes, and shoulder ever-rising costs, these unelected appointees granted massive raises to an array of Oklahoma politicians.

It’s also an issue the nicely highlights the utility of the soon-to-be-released People’s Audit from The Oklahoma State Capital: ranking at #16 out of 93 graded votes is Hilbert’s proposal, House Bill 2674—a bill so significant that Hilbert carried it himself, personally, in both committee and on the House floor, causing the curious observer to ask, “Who is he trying to carry water for?”

Was it Gentner Drummond—the AG and would-be future governor of Oklahoma? Or was it any number of the other epically unpopular candidates for statewide office—the worst crop, in terms of merit, that the voters have been forced to choose from, perhaps in our lifetimes?

One has to conclude that most legislators aren’t curious enough to ask this question because as Hilbert presented his proposal, and seemingly gas lighted the house appropriations committee into believing that statewide elected officials haven’t received raises since the late ninetys—their salary has approximately doubled since that time—he faced few who were willing to go on the record against the powerful House Speaker. In the era of Hickman, McCall, and Hilbert, power has increasingly been concentrated to the point that finding a legislator courageous enough to ask the tough question and vote against the Speaker becomes a difficult task.

In this instance, there were just four with the requisite bravery to not go along with the crowd. If you are a regular reader of these articles, you probably know their names already—the heroes of the people who refuse to play the special-interests game: Gann, Jenkins, Shaw, and Rick West.

The rest either stood silent, excused themselves from the vote, or joined in—casting their vote for divesting their own power to do the unpopular and allowing the Speaker of the House, the Senate Pro Temp, and the increasingly institutionally-minded Governor Kevin Stitt to appoint the requisite shills who would do the dirty work.

The result was complete chaos. Soon after the law went into effect, the newly charged, unelected board held multiple meetings in which they voted and then re-voted on the same questions. They met in secret, met with an ineligible board member, who was actually a lobbyist who had been appointed to the Board by Kyle Hilbert, and the appointing authorities clearly swapped out the board members who were unwilling to comply with legislative pay raises for those who were. The chaos revealed that certain board members didn’t have any connection to the requisite knowledge base, and others did not appear to have any sense for the actual real money they were being asked to spend: other peoples’ money, which as Calvin Coolidge opined, is easy to spend because “it does not appear to belong to anyone.” Those board members were just there to play their role, give out fat paychecks and get out of town for the next two years when they will once again return to no doubt do the dirty work of the politicians.

The outcome?

Not only massive raises to statewide elected officials—running from 23% to 40% pay hikes—but also, in their capacity as the constitutionally created Legislative Compensation Board, large raises to what are already some of the nation’s highest-paid part-time legislators. Yes, the same legislators who just divested their own power and accountability, also got big raises.

It’s an epic abuse of the taxpayer that can’t easily be put into words. There’s just no way for me to do this justice. And in my view—due to the fact that the board met in secret—it stands as a complete violation of the spirit of Oklahoma’s Open Meeting Act, if not outright illegal, which in my view, it probably was, and certainly should be.

Of course, there are some who will suggest that the people of Oklahoma will “get what they pay for”—a line of thought that incentivizes the ongoing lack of performance of the current group of elected officials, i.e., do a terrible job, and ask for more pay.

It’s a faux argument, demonstrated simply by asking: “Now that Oklahomans will be forced to pay so much more for their politicians, will a new crop of candidates suddenly step forward?”

Perhaps someone has been waiting, thinking: “I would challenge these awful candidates for statewide office, but the pay just isn’t enough for me.”

Of course, that’s not the case.

There will never be a shortage of politicians, even if the taxpayers do the right thing, and stop paying them altogether.

As a proponent of the “don’t pay the politicians” compensation model that emphasizes a public-service mindset—and based on long exposure to the inner workings of government and the mindset of politicians—I can tell you that, as a general rule of thumb, there are two classes of politicians.

The majority are motivated by ego and narcissism. These are the true politicians who tell everyone exactly what they want to hear and believe they can get away with it without ever facing a day of reckoning. And to some extent, the most practiced among them do get away with it. The vast majority of the current crop of Republican statewide candidates fit this profile right down to the last detail. You could pay these personalities a penny and they would still run, because they are motivated by their narcissism, and money is no object. Of course, they’ll be the first to take—or make—the big raises happen, as they just did, because in their narcissistic minds you could never pay them enough for what they believe themselves to be worth: the perfect example of this was Hilbert’s illegal appointment to the board, politician-turned-lobbyist James Leewright who aggressively pushed board members to raise the paychecks of the legislators. When they didn’t, Stitt replaced them with those who did.

Then there are the handful of good elected officials—those motivated by the realization that there is a calling for true public service, serving the greatest people of a state that’s part of the greatest republic in the history of the world. They would pay for the opportunity to serve, to preserve what so many have given so much to give to us. For those individuals—the few who successfully embrace and keep this mindset throughout their entire time of service—you could never pay them enough, and it would be an insult to try. They don’t want the excessive pay and to them, Oklahoma’s nearly leading the nation in part-time-legislator pay, and trailing the nation in many other indices, is rightfully embarrassing.

Today’s Oklahoma government is a government of narcissists, including Kyle Hilbert—the House Speaker who likely believes he has successfully gaslit the public into thinking that the legislators had nothing to do with the big raises. And now, as Oklahoma taxpayers—already struggling under inflation, property taxes skyrocketing, utility bills driven up by green-energy schemes, and insurance rates of all kinds spiking—must deal with one more financial burden: an ever-growing bill for their politicians, the same politicians who have overseen the circumstances that have allowed the costly spikes just described, and failures all across state government from the mental health disaster, to the out-of-control Department of Human Services, and the absolute ineptness of the public education system.

And worse—when the people of Oklahoma try to hold their legislators accountable for this, those legislators will likely respond: “It wasn’t me. It was those unelected members of the State Compensation Board. I’m against it.”

This—this is the ultimate insult. In this epic example of the smoke-and-mirrors games constantly played so that the people can never hold the elite accountable for their elitist, out-of-touch actions—Hilbert found a way to go full Pontius Pilate, washing the legislators’ hands of accountability for the unthinkable. If we were to poll the “Republican” House members with the question: “Does Gentner Drummond deserve a 25-percent pay raise?” their answer would be, “Of course not.” But with their votes, those same House members have found a way to—if Drummond is elected as Governor, an outcome one can’t help but believe Hilbert seeks—accomplish exactly that.

And that’s the great value of The Oklahoma State Capital’s audit. Well before the chaos of the last few days, the audit—soon to be released to the public—had designated this bill as its #16 ranked “What Are You Thinking?” vote of 2025.

The audit captures not only these votes—votes that fall between the cracks and which legislators likely believe they will never be held accountable for—but even unrecorded votes, votes on motions that can’t be found in the official House journal. They are the votes that when properly explained to the normie voters, will cause them to exclaim, “What was my legislator thinking?”

For these dastardly lawmakers, a day of accountability approaches—a day when the people of Oklahoma will take back the “People’s House” for the people. It may not arrive quickly, but with examples such as HB 2674 to point to, I remain the eternal optimist: that day will arrive.

Did you find this information insightful? Much more is to come so subscribe and if you can, upgrade to a paid subscription to keep this work viable.