State war memorial planned near Capitol

By Michael McNutt
The Oklahoman

A memorial to Oklahomans killed in the war on terrorism will be developed off Lincoln Boulevard north of the state Capitol, members of a committee reaffirmed Wednesday.


Your views inside Oklahoma government. Track all the bills and find your representatives.

The memorial will be built either on the north or south side of a new state Veterans Affairs Department building proposed to be built on the east side of Lincoln between NE 30 and NE 32.

Plans call for moving the statues and memorials honoring veterans in front of the Wiley Post Building east of the Capitol to the site of the new Veterans Affairs building, members of the War On Terror Memorial Design Committee were told during their meeting at the Capitol.

The building is part of a proposed $196 million bond issue, said John Richard, director of the state Central Services Department.


The bond issue will pay for about six projects, including a laboratory for the state Transportation Department, a couple of new office buildings and refurbishing the 50-year-old Jim Thorpe Building, headquarters of the Oklahoma Corporation Commission.

Legislators have not approved the bond issue but could take up the measure when they return in special session this month to approve a budget for the state's 2007 fiscal year, Richard said.

If legislators don't act on the proposal this year, the measure will be brought up next year, he said.

The terrorism memorial committee, which includes legislators and representatives of several state agencies and veterans groups, was created by legislation passed last year.

The committee now will oversee a method to seek designs for the memorial and raise money for the project. No state money is set aside for the memorial.

Betty Price, executive director of the Oklahoma Arts Council and a committee member, showed designs from other memorials being built across the country.

The price of those memorials ranged from $1 million to $2.2 million.

What's the war on terrorism? Does this include anyone who dies in an effort to end the use of the tactic or just conflicts that have been labeled as such by politicians?

It may seem like a silly question to some who take the label at face value, but it could cause some very ugly battles about who deserves inclusion in the memorial down the road.

I suppose it means every conflict fought since 9-11. I personally only hold Afghanistan to be the "war" on terrorism. But I do not think it matters either way. Those who die for this country should be honored no matter what someones view on the war is.

Those who die for this country should be honored no matter what someones view on the war is.

I 100% agree, which is why I would rather we erect a memorial that functions outside of the political rhetoric. I think something that honors those of a specific conflict or for war services in general is much more appropriate. And since you can't really declare war on a tactic outside of political speak, I don't know how they will decide who to include in the memorial.

The article isn't very specific, so maybe it will be a symbolic memorial without names, which mitigates the need to define what the "war on terrorism" is. Really, my main concern would be that people who die in service to our country in conflicts that may have not been sold as part of this effort would not be included, even though just about every hostile organization we could engage these days uses some form of terrorism as a tactic.

I'm just worried about the political can of worms overshadowing the real need to honor those who have made the greatest sacrifice in service to their country. Would it be possible to have, or do we not already have, a memorial that simply honors all Oklahomans who have died in military service?

This war memorial is being used as something to make this horrible idea palatable to the general public. Bonds are probably the absolute worst way to finance government. In the end, this $196 million will probably cost the state around $600-$800 million due to the debt service which will accrue.

If these things must be built, the only morally right thing to do would be to raise taxes now to pay for it now. Unless inflation goes through the roof, this bond is a terrible move. All it does is effectively require the next generation to pay for benefits received today.

By the time the bond debt is retired, anything it was used to pay for will generally be in need of replacement/repair.

This war memorial is being used as something to make this horrible idea palatable to the general public.

That's disgusting, if true.

Bonds are probably the absolute worst way to finance government. In the end, this $196 million will probably cost the state around $600-$800 million due to the debt service which will accrue.


I couldn't agree more. But, hey, without those bonds, we wouldn't have something good and stable to invest in! LOL!