State Questions

[Frederick]

I think we've(probably) already decided who we are going to vote for in local and national elections, but what about the several important state questions coming on the ballot?

Ballotpedia Article

State Questions(official website)

State Questions in plain English(slideshow)

How do you guys feel about these questions?

• LRCA SQ 776 Death Penalty Provides constitutional justification for death penalty statutes
• LRCA SQ 777 Agriculture Add a "right to farm" to the state constitution
• CICA SQ 779 Taxes Increase the state sales tax by one percent
• CISS SQ 780 Law enforcement Reclassification of some drug and property crimes as misdemeanors
• CISS SQ 781 Law enforcement Fund rehabilitation programs with funds from SQ 780
• LRCA SQ 790 Religion Repeal prohibition on public money being spent for religious purposes
• LRCA SQ 792 Alcohol Grocery and convenience stores may sell full-strength beer and wine

I'll probably say No to the death penalty, No to the agriculture. I'm not sure about SQ 779. It does make sure that none of the money raised goes to superintendents or such, but a one percent hike on the sales tax is pretty huge. especially if you live in OKC where the sales tax rate is already like ~8-9%.

I'll probably vote yes on 780 and 781, to help lower the nonviolent offenders in Oklahoma jails. Yes on 792 and no 790.


I also recommend you check the ratings of people running for office in Oklahoma with the NRA here:
https://www.nrapvf.org/grades/oklahoma/

 

[mr ed]

779 May be tagged as not going to administration pay but they will give it to teachers then give property tax and lottery money to admins. Better to consolidate the 450+ independent school districts into about 75-80 consolidated school districts and save a bunch of money.
780 Raises the prosecutable minimum dollar amount so high it will devastate businesses. We already have professional shoplifting gangs that are killing businesses daily.
Would you submit to a search every time you go to the store? It will close local businesses and force everything to be sold over the internet. Once that happens the internet won't be cheap anymore.
This will definitely lead to an internet sales tax.

 

[magna19]

Would you submit to a search every time you go to the store? It will close local businesses and force everything to be sold over the internet. Once that happens the internet won't be cheap anymore.
This will definitely lead to an internet sales tax.

Where does it say someone searches you every time you go to the store????

 

[KOPBET]

 

[Okie4570]

That's a cool sign and all, but why?

 

[DavidMcmillan]

I used to be solidly in support of the death penalty, but have begun to question if it is actually the right thing to do.

It seems that there are more stories of folks being convicted, and then years later found to actually be innocent.

Does it really serve as a deterrent (other than to the one executed)?

Is it worth the heavy costs involved in housing these folks while they wade through the endless appeals?

I inclined to let things continue as they are, and have knowledgeable people answer all the questions before we commit something to the state constitution.

 

[KOPBET]

That's a cool sign and all, but why?

Best thing to do is to read pro and con opinions and come to your own conclusion.

https://ballotpedia.org/Oklahoma_Right_to_Farm_Amendment,_State_Question_777_(2016)


Last thing I want to do is agree with the Tulsa World, but it is what it is.

The Journal Record editorial board wrote the following in opposition to State Question 777:[26]

“The law was not written by local farmers; ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council, approved the model legislation in 1996 and again in 2013. The state has a model; the Legislature can add, subtract and update laws as the world changes. In 1776, no one imagined a need for laws governing self-driving cars, but the public certainly can imagine the value of those today. No one knows how the agriculture industry will grow and change in Oklahoma, but the public representatives at the Capitol must be allowed to help the law adapt to whatever might surface. We must not cede governance of an industry to the industry. Voters must defeat State Question 777 in November.[4] ”

The Norman Transcript said:[27]

“In effect, SQ 777 would freeze any new legislation directed at farming or ranching. The industry should certainly be allowed to develop and utilize new technologies, methods and practices, but the state and cities should be able to pass laws and ordinances when necessary. Restricting them from doing so takes power away from leaders elected by Oklahomans.[4] ”

The Tulsa World said:[28]

“The first rule of constitutional amendments should be: First, do no harm, and in its potential for unintended consequences — especially in the state’s ability to protect its own environment — we fear harm in SQ 777. Farming is very important, but SQ 777 doesn’t solve any real Oklahoma problems, and its potential to create new problems in the future makes it bad policy.[4] "

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

That's a cool sign and all, but why?

There is one line that says why we shouldn't vote yes on 777. Its the line where it says, "The Legislature shall pass no law which abridges the right of citizens and lawful residents of Oklahoma to employ agricultural technology and livestock production and ranching practices without a compelling state interest."

I ask what is a compelling state interest? No such interest is listed in this proposed amendment. There are not even any parameters listed. It's an open ended grab for power masked in florid prose.

As an example of what a 'compelling state interest' could be is a measure that would shut down farming of any section of land that the legislature would gain more tax from if it were divided up into house lots. It brings the Kelo v. City of New London to mind. Don't fall for this blatant grab for extended legislative power.

Woody

 

[Okie4570]

Best thing to do is to read pro and con opinions and come to your own conclusion.

https://ballotpedia.org/Oklahoma_Right_to_Farm_Amendment,_State_Question_777_(2016)


Last thing I want to do is agree with the Tulsa World, but it is what it is.

The Journal Record editorial board wrote the following in opposition to State Question 777:[26]

“The law was not written by local farmers; ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council, approved the model legislation in 1996 and again in 2013. The state has a model; the Legislature can add, subtract and update laws as the world changes. In 1776, no one imagined a need for laws governing self-driving cars, but the public certainly can imagine the value of those today. No one knows how the agriculture industry will grow and change in Oklahoma, but the public representatives at the Capitol must be allowed to help the law adapt to whatever might surface. We must not cede governance of an industry to the industry. Voters must defeat State Question 777 in November.[4] ”

The Norman Transcript said:[27]

“In effect, SQ 777 would freeze any new legislation directed at farming or ranching. The industry should certainly be allowed to develop and utilize new technologies, methods and practices, but the state and cities should be able to pass laws and ordinances when necessary. Restricting them from doing so takes power away from leaders elected by Oklahomans.[4] ”

The Tulsa World said:[28]

“The first rule of constitutional amendments should be: First, do no harm, and in its potential for unintended consequences — especially in the state’s ability to protect its own environment — we fear harm in SQ 777. Farming is very important, but SQ 777 doesn’t solve any real Oklahoma problems, and its potential to create new problems in the future makes it bad policy.[4] "

Thanks, I've read it long ago, I just like hearing everyone's reasoning on yes/no votes as to why they lean one way or the other. I struggle with supporting many of the groups that back the "NO" coalition.

 

[ConstitutionCowboy]

State question 779 raises the state's take of sales tax by more than 22%! It earmarks that this tax shall be applied to education but does not put any such guarantee on any other taxes spent on education except that none of this 22+% increase can supplant tax money appropriated otherwise, but does not lock what the otherwise appropriations are set at.

As in all other 'earmarks', the money always ends up going to other purposes and we are once again propositioned for more tax money to support education 'for the children'. Measures such as 1017 and the State Lottery have failed to 'solve' anything. It seems that year after year we are bombarded with heart wrenching rhetoric saying we are not doing enough to educate our youth.

The Oklahoma Legislature does not follow the Oklahoma Constitution as it stands, and there is nothing to show the Oklahoma Legislature will follow any amendments to it.

Woody