By Steve Byas

Soon after Ryan Walters settled into his position as Superintendent of the Public Schools in Oklahoma, I penned a column, entitled, “Clone Ryan Walters.”

At that point, Walters seemed intent on preventing Woke progressive philosophy being imposed upon Oklahoma school children and their teachers. I had personally seen some of the material being pushed to be included in our school curriculum, and I was appalled. Teachers were being instructed to “affirm” all sorts of anti-Christian ideas, such as transgenderism, and Walters had spoken against such garbage.

I applauded.

In those early months of Walter’s term of office, I was taken aback at some of the accusations being made against him, accusations that I found, after further research to be gross distortions. For example, a long-time leader of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in Oklahoma ridiculed Walters when he attempted to remove what Walters called “pornographic” materials from the public school libraries, demanding that Walters send him examples.

Walters responded by having examples hand-delivered.

Why should pornography be in the libraries of elementary schools? For all the talk about removing certain materials from libraries being “censorship,” the dirty little secret is that left-leaning librarians censor books and magazines all the time – by not placing conservative and Christian books into circulation.

I also had no problem with Walters criticizing a school district for employing a principal who performed as a “drag queen” in his off hours.

The noise around Walters really picked up when he allegedly demanded that teachers in public schools “teach the Bible,” with the implication that students will be receiving verse-by-verse doctrinal instruction. I certainly did not want some of the public school teachers I have known teaching their version of biblical interpretation, so I decided to look deeper into this charge.

What I found was that the truth was quite a bit different. Was Walters really ordering that public schools be turned into tax-supported Sunday School classrooms? After all, many Bible-believing Christians would rightly be concerned that atheists, agnostics, and skeptics of various sorts teaching the Bible could not be good, that children might be told the Bible is just a book of fables and myths. A Presbyterian teacher might teach Baptist kids that their belief in “believer’s baptism” is a false doctrine, a Catholic might teach the Petrine Doctrine, or a Pentecostal might teach speaking in tongues.

I obtained the actual document, however, that Walters sent out to the schools. “The Bible has played a significant role in the development of western civilization and American history,” the document read, adding that its “incorporation” is to be in a manner that “emphasized only its historical, literary and secular benefits.” In a famous case, Murray v. Curlett, the U.S. Suprme Court said much the same thing.

Examples are given throughout the document as to how the Bible is to be incorporated, none of which directed any teacher to push a particular religious doctrine. In fact, the document explicitly stated, “The Bible must be used in student instruction for its historical, literary and secular value and is not to be used for religious purposes such as preaching, proselytizing or indoctrination.” The document advised that parents should be informed that the Bible’s use “is not an endorsement of any religious belief.”

Furthermore, the guidelines stated that teachers should “incorporate perspectives from other religious and secular traditions to provide a balanced view while remaining mindful of all rules for grade level and age level appropriate material.” Finally, the instruction is to be conducted in a “neutral and objective manner,” and “must not promote or favor any religious beliefs, focusing solely on the historical and literary aspects of the Bible.”

I cannot see how any fair person could object to any of that. I suspect that is not what most Oklahomans have been led to believe about Walters’ guidelines by the left-leaning, secularist Oklahoma media.

Toward the end of Walter’s tenure, we were treated to days on end by that same media to the horrors of a movie on a TV set in Walters’ office during a meeting of the state board of education. Two board members, appointed by Governor Kevin Stitt – who had turned against Walters – expressed outrage. It should be noted that recent State Department of Education board members, picked by the governor, were asked by the governor’s staff if they would be mere puppets of Walters before their being put on the board.

One board member chosen by Stitt, Becky Carson, quickly filed a complaint about nude women in the movie with the Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES), which in turn asked the sheriff’s office to investigate. Carson said that she filed the report with OMES because she believed neither what she saw on the TV was OK, nor Walters’ response to it was OK. She also described the women’s bodies in unnecessarily graphic terms.

“When I decided to file a report with OMES, criminal charges didn’t cross my mind,” she said. “What did cross my mind was accountability.”

In short, she was out to get Walters.

Logic demands that Walters would not have deliberately played pornography on a TV set that could be viewed by board members who were put on the board to oppose him. That would require that Walters had a death wish.

The investigation concluded that the “porn” was an old movie that included a brief scene of nudity. It was on a channel that the TV set automatically tuned to when turned on. While not good, it was obvious that this was not something that Walters intentionally played during a meeting of the state board.

Carson’s intention was made clear, however, when the results of the investigation were finally revealed. “After careful review, it has been determined there is insufficient evidence to file criminal charges,” the Oklahoma County district attorney’s office said in a statement.

“It doesn’t change the facts of what happened,” Carson responded. “It doesn’t change the fact that Oklahoma is still 50th in education.”

What Oklahoma’s ranking in education had to do with Carson’s complaint is unclear. But what is clear is that this whole episode is an example of how a public official that the liberal media in Oklahoma does not like can be condemned, regardless of the actual facts.

The lesson for all Oklahomans should be to take these media attacks with a very large grain of salt.

Having said all of that, I would not write a column again saying “clone Ryan Walters.” Actually, I would retract it. I am also getting tired of elected officials quitting before the end of their term of office. Walters took a job with an organization that is an alternative to the teachers’ unions. But, there already is a fine alternative to the OEA and the AFT, known as Professional Oklahoma Educators (POE).

Why would I no longer write for cloning Walters? Because, after his initial good start, Walters came to believe he was a dictator, when it came to Oklahoma education. For example, one can agree or disagree with his push to have “free lunches” in the public schools for all students (of course, there is no such thing as a “free lunch,” as someone pays for it), such a directive was not based on any law passed by the Legislature. Walters’ position was an executive job, not a legislative position. His job was to implement the laws, not make them.

Same thing with ordering a special test for teachers coming from states like California. And while suggesting a moment of silence for Charlie Kirk would have been fine, ordering a moment of silence is like something a progressive would do, only it would be for some left-winger. It disappointed me that conservatives cheered Walters’ ordering of things he had no legal authority to do, but if a progressive state school superintendent had ordered something left-wing, they would have argued he (or she) had no such authority. We should have principles, regardless.

The end does not justify the means.

It seems that Walters went out of his way to order things that he had to know he had no constitutional authority to order. He seemed to thrive on the hate of the Left. But that is not the job of the state school superintendent. I don’t blame Walters that Oklahoma is rated 50th in education. He inherited that standing. But he also did little to change it, being caught up in those things that would get him cheers from some who would jeer a left-wing school superintendent who issued decrees to the local school districts. And I thought conservatives believed in local control of schools.

Part of the problem is the way the state’s role in public education is set up. It makes no sense to elect a state school superintendent, who can then be over-ruled by a board appointed by the governor. Do we need a board to oversee the governor’s executive decisions? Of course, this was because of the state Constitution, crafted during the crazy days of the progressive era in 1907. They wanted to elect all sorts of executive officials, including state school superintendent; labor commissioner; and insurance commissioner. Some progressives even wanted to elect bank presidents!

Oklahoma should make the position of state school superintendent an appointed position, by the governor. Then, accountability would be on the governor. As it stands now, who is responsible, the governor-appointed board or the elected state school superintendent?

We don’t need any more elected secondary office holders running in front of the TV cameras, like Gentner Drummond has done for the past four years, with an eye on the governorship.