A sensible look at Oklahoma’s state questions

There are seven state questions on this year’s ballot, and undoubtedly, some folks are confused about how to vote.

Some state questions are necessary to make changes to the constitution, such as State Question 792 which deals with changing state liquor laws. However, other state questions are put on the ballot through initiative petitions organized by groups that have some type of special interest in seeing new laws passed.

Below are my opinions on how to vote for each of the questions. These opinions are based on research and experience I have with the topics, and they are my own. I based these opinions on how I believe they will impact the state and the economy. Many will disagree with my opinion, and that’s OK. But, what I’ve tried to do is take a common-sense approach to the way I believe voters should go on these questions.

Let’s get started on the questions, in numerical order.

SQ 776: This measure adds a new section to the Oklahoma Constitution that deals with the death penalty.

The section establishes state constitutional mandates relating to the death penalty and methods of execution. Under these constitutional requirements:

The Legislature is expressly empowered to designate any method of execution not prohibited by the United States Constitution.

• Death sentences shall not be reduced because a method of execution is ruled to be invalid.
• When an execution method is declared invalid, the death penalty imposed shall remain in force until it can be carried out using any valid execution method, and
• The imposition of a death penalty under Oklahoma law­—as distinguished from a method of execution—shall not be deemed to be or constitute the infliction of cruel or unusual punishment under Oklahoma’s Constitution, nor to contravene any provision of the Oklahoma Constitution.

I believe a NO VOTE is the correct way to go on this issue. This is a “checks and balances” issue. We know of the issues with some high -profile lethal injection cases in Oklahoma. A bipartisan death penalty review commission is currently examining Oklahoma’s death penalty law, and they have not completed their work yet. It is the court’s constitutional role to interpret laws regarding capital punishment, and that should be protected. It will also open the state up to costly legal challenges.

SQ 777: Known as Right to Farm, the new section creates state constitutional rights for the agriculture industry. It creates the following guaranteed rights to engage in farming and ranching:

• The right to make use of agricultural technology
• The right to make use of livestock procedures, and the right to make use of ranching practices.

These constitutional rights receive extra protection under this measure. This extra protection is a limit on lawmakers’ ability to interfere with the exercise of these rights. Under this extra protection, no law can interfere with these rights, unless the law is justified by a compelling state interest-a clearly identified state interest of the highest order. Additionally, the law must be necessary to serve that compelling state interest.

This is another question in which a NO VOTE is in the best interest of the state. There is a lot of rhetoric about how this law protects corporate interests and Big Ag. It’s also an overreaction to some wild-headed attempts by anti-agriculture and neo-environmentalist groups to enact laws that obstruct agricultural practices. I am no fan of the Humane Society of the United States or PETA, which oppose this question.

However, the bottom line for my opposition is this law would give special protection to the agricultural industry that no other industry has.  It makes it nearly impossible for the Legislature to implement any laws on agricultural production. That’s as foolhardy has passing a law that exempts the oil and natural gas industry from any environmental regulation. SQ 777 is looking to solve a problem that doesn’t exist, and it could, quite frankly, create problems.

SQ 779 is constitutional amendment that would raise the state sales and use tax by one percentage point with the money directed toward education.

Pushed extensively by University of Oklahoma President David Boren, this initiative responds to the very real concerns among educators, parents and others about teacher salaries and education funding.

The state Legislature has mishandled state education funding for decades. Governors and Legislatures – both Democrat and Republican – have kicked this can down the road for years. There are many reasons education tax dollars aren’t being used appropriately, but it would take thousands of words to explain that history.

Most Oklahomans support teacher pay raises. But, raising the state sales tax by a penny places a huge burden on cities that rely on sales tax revenue to fund most of their government services and community capital improvements. (Think MAPS) And, it’s another quick-fix measure to line up with other quick-fix measures (lottery) that just haven’t worked because the Legislature and the education establishment have not made crucial choices.

The additional penny sales tax will also hurt Oklahoma’s poorest citizens the most. As much as we all want to see this education funding crisis fixed, a NO VOTE is the most sensible way to go. Instead, Oklahomans must elect and hold accountable their legislators to make the tough decisions that will finally put Oklahoma on the path to proper education funding.

SQ 780 and 781. I take these two together because they are related to changes under criminal justice reform and are aimed at reducing the state’s prison population.

SQ 780 would reclassify some low-level offenses, such as simple drug possession and property crimes under $1,000, as misdemeanors instead of felonies. SQ 781, would create an account with money saved from having fewer offenders incarcerated and put that money toward programs that treat drug addicts and offenders who suffer from mental health issues.

Oklahomans should VOTE YES on both these initiatives. There’s no doubt that “get-tough-on-crime” laws passed over the years have incarcerated more people than the state can afford. Putting people in jail is supposed to be a last resort, and it is very difficult for someone with a prison record to ever move forward in life when they are released.

Oklahoma incarcerates more women, per capita, than any state, and its overall incarceration rate is among the highest in the country. One in three Oklahoma prison inmates needs mental health treatment, and one-fourth of inmates are doing time for non-violent drug offenses.

Passage of these questions will help offenders with drug abuse or mental health concerns to get the assistance they need to avoid winding up in prison. Both questions would be a start to reforming a broken criminal justice system and eventually reducing prison overcrowding, cutting costs and increasing community mental health services.

SQ 790 is a constitutional amendment that would repeal Article 2, Section 5 of the Oklahoma Constitution and addresses the use of public resources for religious purposes.

It came about after a recent Oklahoma Supreme Court decisions that ruled that a Ten Commandments monument on the State Capitol grounds was an unconstitutional use of public property.

This is another issue in which Oklahomans should VOTE NO. Separation of church and state is important, and the Legislature seems to continually get in hot legal water in trying to thwart that concept. Even if voters approve it, there is some possibility that the United States Supreme Court will rule that the Ten Commandment monument’s display on public grounds violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

SQ 792 would amend the Oklahoma constitution to allow grocery and convenience stores to sell wine and high-point beer. It would also allow liquor stores to sell cold beer and alcohol accessories (i.e., sodas, corkscrews).

The measure would allow multiple beer and wine stores to be owned by one corporation (ownership would be limited to two stores per person if spirits are sold). Currently individual liquor store owners are not allowed to have more than one store.

This is a consumer choice issue and one that deserves a YES VOTE. Oklahoma’s current liquor laws are inconvenient and outdated. This is a first step in modernizing the state’s liquor laws.

Opponents say it puts too much power in the hands of corporations (Wal-Mart) and will put some small stores out of business because of their inability to compete with bigger operations. However, Oklahoma’s liquor laws have always protected “somebody’s” interests, except for the consumers’ interests. Other states have cold beer and wine in grocery stores, and their liquor stores have survived. Oklahoma’s market will figure it out as well.

So, that’s it. Thanks for wading through all of this. If you got to the end of this post, no matter how you vote, I hope this information has been helpful in either confirming your own opinion or changing your mind.

Thanks for taking the time to read it. Here’s a good resource to study up on the questions more.