Sen. Brent Howard: $33M in Outside Spending—and What Oklahoma Did About It

$33 million in outside spending. Anonymous attack ads. Misinformation shaping local elections.

Oklahoma State Senator Brent Howard joins For Our Freedom to explain how dark money is impacting his state, and why Oklahoma became the 24th state to push for a constitutional amendment on election spending.

From rural hospitals to statewide races, this episode breaks down what’s happening on the ground, and why a growing number of states are working to restore transparency and voter control.

Transcript

SPEAKER_00 0:05

Hey everybody, I'm Jeff Clements, and we're back with the For Our Freedom podcast. And this one's an exciting one. We've been talking with Americans across the country about the growing challenge of money in our elections and the constitutional amendment solution that puts voters and our elected representatives back in control of the rules, as the founders intended and as almost every American wants to see. And I am really delighted today to talk with Oklahoma State Senator Brent Howard of District 38. It's in Southwest Oklahoma. Senator Howard is a fifth-generation Oklahoman, an attorney with a background in tax law. He's chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and he is one of the leaders behind the exciting news that Oklahoma became the 24th state that has called formally on Congress to move a constitutional amendment on election spending forward and back to the states for ratification that gets a solution by putting the power back in the hands of the American people in the states on this problem. Senator Howard, thank you so much for joining us today and for your leadership. Congratulations on the 24th state. As I mentioned before, we started rolling, uh even since you did that, which was quite recently, just a few weeks ago. Idaho, inspired perhaps by Oklahoma and the other states, has moved forward. And so there's now the 25th state. But we're going to talk about Oklahoma today. We'll get Idaho on here for sure in the future. But um, Oklahoma has now uh become the 24th state to call on Congress, get the constitutional amendment moving that restores the authority of the states. So I want to zero in on Oklahoma and the record levels of outside spending you've seen. So let me start there, turn it over to you. Tell us what concerns you most about what you've seen in Oklahoma elections uh that led you to take leadership on this issue.

SPEAKER_01 2:16

Well, thank you, Jeff, for having me. I appreciate it. Anytime we can actually get the voice of representatives out there, that's that's what I'm looking for. And uh ultimately what this bill is about and what the whole movement is about. Uh glad to hear that Idaho has passed it. Maybe we can get every state with a panhandle in before the end of this session to pass this resolution and call on Congress to make sure that we're corrected. You know, here locally and how it got brought to me uh really started last session. So about a year ago, right about this time, uh, actually probably was about a year and two weeks ago, there was a bill that came over from the House uh and it was a you know, basically trial lawyers dream. And it's not something that we would typically think in Oklahoma would be something that would be passed, that uh that our businesses would want because it really just focused on on expanding uh lawsuits and really undid a lot of tort reform that's been done over the past decade within the state of Oklahoma. Well, as chair of judiciary, as you mentioned, uh I have the purview of deciding what gets put on an agenda within the committees that that I oversee, which was judiciary, and this tort bill was in there. And uh when it came out that I was not going to hear that bill, there was immediate, immediately uh tens of thousands of dollars that was spent in ads, in uh, you know, mailers to my district, uh, Facebook. I yeah, I had a lot of people that were constituents that like me and say, why are you why are you siding with the insurance companies? Well, it's not about the insurance companies, it's about tort lawyers and and what they're doing and how those costs come in. And so that really got me digging into it and and got me uh at least exposed to who is it that's actually sending these out? And it turns out it was a Virginia-based company that had been created just for the basis of dark money spending. And so um looking into it further, you know, it's not just about me, but it's about how is this influence going across the state? What's that look like? We started uh looking up what this resolution could be, why why that dark money is able to be spent, and ultimately how far does it go? And it goes all the way to the top, and uh able to get this passed and hopefully be able to get some reins in on this you know extraordinary amount of spending that doesn't represent the voice of the people, doesn't represent the uh the actual constituents, and actually can probably do more harm than good whenever that information's out there, or misinformation, I should say.

SPEAKER_00 4:58

Yeah, and and uh and you confirmed it turned out it wasn't even from Oklahoma, it was coming from uh Virginia. Um and I understand you've seen a lot of that in Oklahoma, as has you know every state, every American is facing this sort of onslaught of outside money, nobody knows where it's coming from half the time. And and I uh I understand Oklahoma, $33 million spent by outside groups in recent elections, um, a record. Um, what is that like for you? Tell us, you're there, you're on the ground. What and for your voters, what does that do to sort of the Oklahoma civic culture, the politics of Oklahoma, when you get that outside force coming in?

SPEAKER_01 5:41

But I really think that it's more timely now. So we're more of an off-cycle. Uh our governor enact, in fact, all of our statewides are up for election here in 2026. And as you said, if you get uh you get mailers from the candidates, typically whenever you're seeing something from a candidate, from a party, from pushing a uh a specific issue, it's generally going to be positive. Whenever you start seeing negative things, that's almost always gonna be something that's uh from that dark money group that you're they're really just against the idea. And you start trying to trace back to it of well, maybe I can be against it too, but I want to know where is this actually coming from. And that's that's not possible. Uh the example you know that I'd given, it was uh a very uh grassroots sounding name as to who is sending this out, but you start digging into it and it's multi-states away. The regulations on that, uh whether it's even from within the United States uh on where those fundings are. So I think as we pull into the the overall and 60,000-foot view of everything, we're really looking at we've got division in politics already. People have probably different ideas on how you can get somewhere. But ultimately, as Americans and Oklahomans, I think we're trying to pull towards the same goal. Uh, our governor has been pushing us to make be a top 10 state in aspects all the way. And even our Democratic colleagues are saying that yes, we would like to be a top 10. We might not agree on how we want to get there, but you have dark money that you can't even trace it to. You can't find out who originates these ideas. And then that starts really driving more divisiveness as to we can't even agree on the same goal. So we start seeing that, and as we come into this election cycle where we have every statewide officer up, uh, that 33 million is probably going to be blown way past again this year if we don't have some right to act and some right to the knowledge and transparency of who's behind it.

SPEAKER_00 7:47

Yeah. Let's dig into another example. I've heard you talk about working on legislation around local hospitals, pharmacies, and then seeing ads coming in. Like you talk about the trial lawyers one, and here's one in the in the healthcare uh space, something that is hits every American's uh uh but family budget, um and and and uh obviously health, uh, which is is really important at the local level. Um tell us more, if you would, on that, uh, your experience and and and what happened with around the local hospital and pharmacy effort you were trying to do.

SPEAKER_01 8:21

Well, even another another aspect, you you'd think that uh whenever you get elected, you get to know everything about everything. And unfortunately, there's a lot that you don't know. But um this goes back even a few further years back. Uh my local hospital administrator had come to me with an issue as to um basically the regulation had been repealed at the federal level as to the number of pharmacies that can contract related to 340B. And 340B is a program that ensures that the re-im the rate that the 340B qualified entities or covered entities pay is set at the federal level, and then the margins that they actually sell it for uh gets to be able to refund and uh fund the different programs within those hospitals that are otherwise covered entities. Some of them are uh qualified healthcare centers and other aspects. My hospital came to me, small rural hospital. I mean, not big, but provides the needs for our community and really the only provider in about a 50-mile radius. And their cost through this administrative change was going to be somewhere in the neighborhood of about, I think, $1.7 million of a hit to their operating, uh, which is the expansion of their maternity ward, the expansion of being able to have two oncologists so that the one oncologist isn't always on call in support of the ER staff. And so we started looking into it and ultimately found that uh again, there's no it just did away with the the mandatory requirement of covering all agencies that were willing or pharmacies that were willing providers with those 340B covered entities. So I started pushing that and um had multiple mailers out on it of Senator Howard wants to uh uh and more egregiously on this one, Senator Howard wants to support medical care for illegal aliens within the state of Oklahoma. Um Senator Howard has no uh no limit on the amount of checks that he wants to spend for the hospital lobby, those type of things. And if you look into it, you know, the distortion of facts within the first one was the the reason medical provisions were for illegal immigrants is because hospitals can't turn away somebody that comes into the ER. So uh they were taking something that ultimately the the proceeds support of making sure that there's an operating ER emergency room within a hospital and saying that that was a support for illegal immigrants getting those healthcare coverage. So again, just a blatant distortion of what this is. It was uh it's an operating budget within our local hospital that 95% of my constituents want to ensure is there for themselves, their children, their their aged parents. Uh, but you get these mailers coming out of a different state, possibly funded by uh somebody from out of state or or the exact industry that's lobbying to Kimwai Bill directly up here, and then it takes a long time to uh explain what it is that we're actually doing. And if you're explaining, you're losing ultimately on the on the long term of it. Um so uh as to that aspect of it, yeah, it's uh skewing of the facts and mislevel misrepresentation, and I don't have, even as a state senator, the same bully pulpit or the resources to be able to get the truth out there. And so if I am going to have to be able to tell the truth, I need the transparency to say who's telling you these lies, and then I I'm more than happy to have a face-to-face debate, but ultimately we've got to have that knowledge of who's behind every aspect of it.

SPEAKER_00 12:20

Yeah, that's the uh the infamous dark money problem. They don't show up to actually debate. That's just outside who knows where it's coming from, um, confr you know, misleading information and the voters not actually getting more informed to make choices. It's simply uh uh the the division and confusion.

SPEAKER_01 12:43

And and so and for the last 20 years, you know, politics has been based off bumper stickers more than it has been policy. And ultimately, as we go forward, uh I want to make sure that we go back to policy and not just who has the most money to run the most bumper stickers. Yeah.

SPEAKER_00 13:01

Well, I think a lot of Americans would welcome that, Senator, um, for sure. And, you know, in in a lot of our state constitutions, we we have that notion. I know Oklahoma, uh, the constitution was written with a strong emphasis on accountability, keeping power close to the people. Um, tell us you you know, we have a national audience, and uh I think people like actually hearing what it's like in the different states. That's one of the beauties of our American Republic, is it's a federalist system with, you know, unique, unique places. So tell us about the Oklahoma constitutional approach, how that shapes um your thinking about this issue and the constitutional amendment solution.

SPEAKER_01 13:44

Well, uh, Oklahoma, since we're talking to a national audience, maybe a little bit of history, Oklahoma became a state in 1907, uh, which, if you look back at what was going on within the nation around that time, uh, very populist all the way across. And so we have the longest constitution uh within the United States and potentially one of the top five in the entirety of the world because of how many populist aspects were put into that constitution, not when it was, not just when it was enacted, but even in the uh 118 years since then. Uh, in addition to that, uh, it was a lot about spreading out the governance side of it. Uh, we have, I believe, 13 statewide offices that are elected by the people. Uh, our governor is a pretty strong governor system, but he has a lot more checks and balances that are put on to him by the legislature, uh, as well as we've got a state auditor that's up for elections, state superintendent of public schools. Basically, every aspect that you can think of within the business has some elected official that's at the top to really oversee those. And the governor doesn't have direct oversight over those uh different aspects of the HC boards and commissions that have come through. So uh going into that part of the history lesson and where we're bound within our constitution, uh, I think that as it was set up 120, 18 years ago, and it's still in effect today, people want to have that direct voice. Uh, that's why we still have these elections. We've not repealed any of those, we've not even put it to the people in most of those aspects. And in fact, in the 60s, even expanded within our constitution that judges are elected, and they have to stand for election every four years. Um, because we want the voice of our people heard, and it's their actual voice, not that that's being distorted through through abuse, misinformation, uh, fake narratives or anything else that would be out there from the outside parties.

SPEAKER_00 15:49

Yeah. Wow, that's really uh great to hear that about the historical context. So thank you for that. So um, so you all in Oklahoma are used to constitutional lawmaking in order to protect your freedom and uh keep keep government close to the people. That's uh what you're helping to bring national with a constitutional amendment solution that all the states can get behind. Um, let's turn to the solution that you're focused on. Um, why and it was, I believe, uh not didn't just pass in Oklahoma, it passed unanimously in in your state senate and house. And so uh share a little bit under the dome, if you will, uh, in the legislature, why did lawmakers on both sides uh come together on this issue, um recognizing that this is something that everyone could agree on?

SPEAKER_01 16:42

Yes. Uh well, I think because everybody is is aware of the harms that are coming in. Uh as I put this forward and explain it on the floor, the minority leader, uh, so the minority party, she came in and she was in favor of it, not just on the voting side of it, but signed on as a co-author. Uh, had other leadership that joined me on on our side, on the majority side, to make sure that this was in. And I think that it comes in because everybody that's involved at some point in this process, and even at the grassroots level, realizes that false information can go around the world three times before you know truth gets its pants on. Uh, and so I think that that was the aspect of making sure that this was reaching across the aisle. We're not trying to silence anybody's vote. We're not trying to silence anybody's voice. Uh, we want those heard in there. And so our minority party as well as our majority party, we're open for those debates. We just want honesty in those debates. We want to be able to know who we're debating. And I bring that up within my own profession, the the as an attorney. You have the right to confront your accuser anytime that you're going to have your liberties taken away from by the state. And ultimately, you go into the history of this, the expansion through Citizens United at the U.S. Supreme Court level, we don't know who our accusers are in many instances. So I think that as we move forward, this will foster a better political system of knowing who's out there and who's who's our accuser and how can we address, and if not even just to refute, but work with those other parties to make sure that policies work for, in our case, all 4 million Oklahomans, but all 50 states, everybody that's represented, even though we might not be in the same party.

SPEAKER_00 18:39

Well, that's that's encouraging. It's encouraging as we approach our 250th anniversary of independence next July 4th. And I want to ask you, Senator, as we close this uh conversation, um, if you would share a reflection on uh the ideals, uh, what we call the American Promise over here at American Promise of freedom, self-government, government of the people. Um, we've got 27 amendments from the Bill of Rights uh to term limits for the presidents to uh you know election of U.S. Senate, how what Americans have done over and over again. And now you are and your colleagues and counterparts in other states and in Congress are showing that we still have the capacity to amend the Constitution when we need to. Share your reflections, if you would, as we approach this 250th anniversary of how you see this issue fitting in and others you may see uh for the future of this great country.

SPEAKER_01 19:39

Yes, sir. Um as we go forward, I just try to organize my thoughts on that aspect of it too. Um yeah, I want to have a country here in 250 years, and I believe that you know the oath of office that we take is very similar to that at the federal level of we will defend our constitution from those enemies, both domestic and foreign. And I think that ultimately uh the constitution can change, societies can change, but the process for it is what we're going through. We're we're proposing these ideas uh because we think they're better ideas, and ultimately because during the time of the founders, uh very much I'm an originalist. I I want to try to look at what were our founders thinking whenever what were they suffering from, what were they trying to accomplish as they went through these things uh and and put into what I believe is the the best governing document in the world. Um and I think a lot of it is just at that time if you wanted to reach a lot of people, you either had to set up your own printing press or you went into the public square and you had your ideas that you were directly able to be questioned on, that you were directly able to defend, to, to a spouse, to reach out to those people and feel their direct their direct interaction as your town hall meeting, your public square was going on. And technology, which is always a boogeyman, anytime we're talking about what the next generation holds or what they're going to face as a generation, technology has significantly changed that. Right now we're we're in a social media phase and we're right at the start of an AI phase. Uh, and so we need to have disclosures of who you're talking about, where are these ideas coming from? Because in the next five to ten years, there's a distinct possibility some of these ideas aren't even going to be coming from people. They're not there's not going to be a face behind it because the artificial intelligence will. Be able to generate and overload what we otherwise would consider the public square. And so the disclosures behind this, the reining in, the making sure that we know who is speaking, I think is becoming more challenged than it ever could have been brought forward by our founding fathers 250 years ago. And for us to make sure that we have a nation for the next 250 years, we're going to have to know whose ideas are we following, and we're going to have to select those best ideas based upon who it is that it's expressing them.

SPEAKER_00 22:37

Senator, uh, thank you. It's why we call it the For Our Freedom Amendment. And uh, we're so glad to have your leadership and all of your colleagues in Oklahoma and around the country. Um Senator Brent Howard, Oklahoma, the 24th state to back a constitutional amendment solution to the crisis of money in our elections, uh returning power to the states, to the people, um, and our elected representatives uh to address this great problem. Um, as the senator says, so that we can have another 250 years of American freedom and self government ahead of us. Senator Howard, thank you so much for your time today. Thank you, Jeff. It's been a pleasure to be here.