By Constitution Staff

On November 2, Oklahoma voters found eleven state questions on the ballot. One of the measures, SQ 744, reached the ballot by initiative petition, while the others were placed before voters by the Legislature. There were some gaps in the numbering of the State Questions since two proposed State Questions, 745 and 749, were legislative referendums which were later removed by the Legislature. Also, 753 was deleted from the ballot after a bill doing the same thing was approved.

Voters approved nine of the eleven measures on the ballot. But, legal challenges have been filed against three of the approved measures. The election results and explanation of the legal challenges are described below.

744: Spending on Common Education

Although proponents of this initiative spent over $3 million, voters overwhelmingly rejected the proposal, 81% to 19%. The Oklahoma Education Association (OEA), the state's largest teacher's union, circulated an initiative petition to get the measure placed on the ballot. It would have required the state to spend on common schools as much per pupil as the average of surrounding states. Common schools offer pre-kindergarten through the twelfth grade. The average would be verified by the State Equalization Board as part of the revenue certification process. The additional funding would have been used for day-to-day operations of the schools and school districts, and not for buildings or other capital needs. It was estimated that it would have required an additional $1 billion per year to be spent on common education. There were no provisions in the bill directing how the state would fund the increased spending. The additional funds would either come from increased taxes, or funds diverted from other programs or functions of state government. Beyond increasing taxes or hurting other areas of state government, critics said it would be wrong to let legislators in surrounding states determine how much money was spent on education in Oklahoma. It was also argued that simply pumping more money into education, without addressing needed reforms to the government school system, will not improve education. The proposal would not have allowed the Oklahoma Legislature to spend less if the regional average went down, but only more if the regional average went up.

746: Voter ID

Voters approved this measure aimed at combating election fraud, 74% to 26%. In order to vote, a person will need to present either a valid unexpired photo identification, such as a driver's licence or passport, or the voter identification card issued free by their county election board. Those without valid ID could still cast a provisional ballot which will be counted once they confirm their identity. This measure was placed on the ballot by the Legislature after Gov. Brad Henry vetoed a bill with similar requirements. Oklahoma would join 22 other states with similar voter ID requirements if finally enacted, however, it must first survive a court challenge.

On November 16, a lawsuit was filed in Tulsa County District Court by James C. Thomas, a Tulsa attorney and a University of Tulsa professor. Thomas said he filed the lawsuit on behalf of Delilah Christine Gentges, a Tulsa County resident and the League of Women Voters of Tulsa. Thomas said in the lawsuit that the measure imposes undue limits on the right to vote, and is unconstitutional under Article 3 of the state constitution, which reads: "All elections shall be free and equal. No power, civil or military, shall ever interfere to prevent the free exercise of the right of suffrage."

Sen. John Ford (R-Bartlesville), author of the legislation that placed the state question on the ballot, said he was disappointed by the lawsuit. He said the measure was carefully crafted to withstand a legal challenge and that the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld more restrictive voter identification measures in other states.

747: Term Limits for Statewide Elected Officials

With this measure, approved by voters 70% to 30%, all statewide elected officials will now be limited to only two terms in a specific office. Under the old law, the governor could not serve more than 8 consecutive years. However, he could have sought election again after a 4-year period had passed. Now office holders will be limited to a lifetime total of 8-years in office for Governor, Lt. Governor, Attorney General, Treasurer, Labor Commissioner, Superintendent of Public Instruction, State Auditor, and 12-years in office for Corporation Commissioners (six year terms). Partial terms would not apply to the limit. Also, those already in office at the time of passage will not have the prior time counted against them.

748: Election District Apportionment Commission

This question was approved by voters, 58% to 42%. If the Legislature and the governor fail to agree upon an election district map following a census, a seven-person Apportionment Commission is empowered to complete the task. Under the old law, the commission was composed of just three members: the Attorney General, Superintendent of Public Instruction, and the State Treasurer. In the interest of making the commission bipartisan, this measure was placed on the ballot by the Legislature. It increases the number of members from three to seven, with the President Pro Tempore of the Senate, Speaker of the House of Representatives, and the Governor each required to appoint one Democrat and one Republican. The seventh member of the commission would be the Lieutenant Governor, who would chair the Commission, but would be a nonvoting member. Orders of Apportionment must be signed by at least four members of the Commission..

750: Ballot Initiative Access

This measure squeaked by with just 50.4% of the vote. It changes the formula which determines how many signatures are needed on an initiative or referendum petition to place State Questions on the ballot. The old formula was a percentage of the number of votes cast in the last General Election which occurs every two years. Under this measure, the formula will be based solely on the last Governor's race. Since more people typically vote in presidential years, those circulating a petition in the two years following a Presidential election had a greater burden than those after the off year, or mid-term election. It also lowers the percentage of signatures required for a constitutional amendment from 15% to 10% and for a statutory change from 10% to 8%.

751: English the Official Language

This measure was strongly approved by voters, 76% to 24%, but faces a court challenge. If it survives the legal battle, Oklahoma would join 30 other states in requiring that all official actions of the state be conducted in English. The Oklahoma measure includes an exemption for the use of Native American tribal languages or other languages required under Federal law. It also states that no lawsuit based on State law could be brought on the basis of a State agency's failure to use a language other than English. Nor could such a lawsuit be brought against political subdivisions of the State. Supporters say the measure will save money by not having to translate and print forms into other languages and would help unify the Oklahoma by reducing language barriers.

James C. Thomas, a Tulsa attorney and a University of Tulsa professor who made the legal challenge to SQ746, also filed a lawsuit in Tulsa County District Court on SQ 751. Thomas claims the measure infringes on free speech and violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and the free speech clause of the Oklahoma Constitution.

State Rep. Randy Terrill (R-Moore)said the filing of the lawsuit is just another example of frivolous litigation promoted by fringe groups. "Since Official English passed with the largest margin of any state question, it is clearly the will of an overwhelming, bipartisan majority of voters," said Terrill, who authored the Official English measure. "This is just another frivolous lawsuit filed by a liberal law professor trying to forum shop for a judge willing to thwart the will of the people. I believe this bogus lawsuit will not succeed, and the democratic will of the people of Oklahoma will not be undermined by judicial activism."

752: Judicial Nominating Commission

This measure was approved 63% to 37%, and adds two members to the Judicial Nominating Commission. Previously, the commission had 12-members: 6 lawyers appointed by the Oklahoma Bar Association and 6 non-lawyers appointed by the Governor. This measure adds two more non-lawyers, one each appointed by the Speaker of the House and President Pro Tempore of the Senate.

The passage of the state question resulted in a controversy, with the existing commission proceeding with the process to nominate a replacement for an Oklahoma Supreme Court vacancy after passage of the measure, but before the new legislative leaders were elected. Until the new leaders were elected, the new members could not be appointed. At the end of December, Gov. Brad Henry received the nominations for the vacancy which resulted from the death of Justice Marian Opala on October 11. On the Friday before leaving office, Henry appointed Oklahoma County District Judge Noma Gurich.to the vacancy, in spite of a pending lawsuit that asked the high court to block the appointment until the Judicial Nominating Commission is restructured. The Supreme Court refused to block the appointment but set oral arguments for February 1.

The new leaders have now made their appointments and future nominations will be made by the expanded commission. On January 7, House Speaker Kris Steele named David K. Hill, chief executive officer of Kimray in Oklahoma City. Senate President Pro Tempore Brian Bingman selected Dr. Don Murray of Edmond.

754: State Spending

This proposal was rejected, 63% to 37%. But, since it was primarily intended to block the effect of State Question 744, the school spending measure which was also rejected, its passage was not needed. This proposal would have disallowed a provision added to the Constitution from mandating legislative appropriations based on predetermined formulas, or on how much other states or other entities spend on a function. While agreeing that SQ 744 should be blocked, some warned that SQ 754 had the potential to eliminate spending in counties, transportation, health care and all agencies that received guaranteed amounts on a pre-determined formula, such as the allocation of the motor vehicle tax to counties, or aid for schools.

755: State Courts to Follow State and Federal Laws

Voters strongly approved this measure, 70%to30%, but it is being challenged in court. It would change the Constitution to specify that Oklahoma courts can only use state and federal laws to make decisions. It specifically forbids decisions based on international or Islamic (Sharia) law. Judges in other states and on the federal bench have increasingly turned to citing international law in their court decisions. There have also been attempts to even allow Sharia or Islamic law to be considered in cases, such as family law.

State Sen. Anthony Sykes (R-Moore) said he was extremely pleased by the overwhelming support voters gave for the Constitutional amendment. Sykes was the Senate author of the legislation placing this measure and State Question 751, making English the Official Language, on the ballot. "Certainly each of these measures had critics, but the crushing margins by which these Constitutional amendments passed shows without a doubt that those critics are deeply out of touch with the values and views of Oklahomans, just as Washington D.C. is out of touch with America," Sykes said.

In November, Chief Judge Vicki Miles-LaGrange of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma blocked the state from certifying the amendment until a final determination is made on a lawsuit brought against it by Muneer Awad, the new director of the Oklahoma chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).

Four groups have joined with Oklahoma in defending the state question. The groups have filed a friend-of-the-court legal brief saying that the ban of Islamic law in state courts is needed to protect women from such practices as honor killing, polygamy, marital rape and underage marriage. The four groups include the U.S. Border Control, the U.S. Border Control Foundation, the Lincoln Institute for Research and Education, and the Conservative Legal Defense and Education Fund.

756: Block National Healthcare Mandate

This measure was approved 65% to 35% and is designed to protect Oklahomans from the federal mandates included in the Healthcare bill passed by Congress and signed by President Obama. It states that a person can't be forced to enroll in health insurance and an employer can't be forced to provide health insurance for its workers. It also allows for an individual to pay directly for treatment and for providers to accept payment directly for treatment. This measure is based on model legislation prepared by the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and similar measures were on the ballot in other states. In the August primary election, Missouri voters passed a similar measure with 71 percent support and a like measure was approved on the November ballot in Arizona by 55percent.

"As the primary House author and co-author of the legislation that sent this state question to the ballot, I was proud to see it approved,"said Rep. Mike Ritze (R-Broken Arrow). "The citizens of Oklahoma have chosen to opt-out of ObamaCare and not be subjected to federal fines, higher taxes and prison sentences. This is the first step of the "3 R's' -- to Resist, Reject and Repeal ObamaCare." Ritze is a board-certified family practice physician and surgeon.

Supporters of the measure were disappointed that the Attorney General's office (headed by outgoing AG, Drew Edmondson), which wrote the summary for the ballot, injected language that questioned if the measure is constitutional. However, in January, Oklahoma's new Attorney General, Scott Pruitt, announced the state of Oklahoma will file an independent lawsuit against the federal government to challenge the unconstitutionality of the Obama administration's federal health care law. He said that because Oklahomans passed State Question 756, which amended the state Constitution to say that Oklahomans cannot be forced to purchase insurance, those two laws cannot coexist. Preemption does not apply when a federal law is deemed unconstitutional. "The most logical way to defend our state Constitution is in an Oklahoma federal court not in another state," said Pruitt.

Pruitt expressed his sole desire in filing the lawsuit was to successfully defeat the requirement of the federal health care act that will force Oklahomans to purchase a product or face fines and penalties by the federal government. In legal terms, this is known as the individual mandate, which Pruitt believes to be unconstitutional.

The Attorney General also explained that Oklahoma has the advantage of learning from the arguments the federal government put forth in the legal proceedings with Virginia and Florida, which will allow Oklahoma to introduce new and strengthened arguments to counter those. Additionally, by filing in Oklahoma, the state will add another circuit of the federal court system considering arguments on the constitutionality of the act.

757: Rainy Day Fund Expansion

Voters narrowly approved this measure, 51% to 49%, which increases the amount of money that can be placed in the Constitutional Reserve Fund, also called the Rainy Day Fund. The prior maximum was 10% of the previous year's General Fund revenues. This question raises that to 15%. Supporters said that a larger fund is needed to see the state through troubled times. Opponents said the increase would allow the Legislature to avoid returning excess revenues to citizens in the form of tax relief in the good revenue years, and also avoid reductions in wasteful government spending in the down revenue years. They charged that the up and down government revenue cycle is a huge tool for restraining the size of government.