Weekly Opinion/Editorial
STATE QUESTIONS AND JUDGESby Steve Fair
Voters usually have less information about the state questions and the judges on the ballot than they do about the elective races. This year’s ballot has eleven (11) state questions and six(6) judges.
*****
The proposal getting the most attention is SQ #744, which if approved, would tie common education funding to a ‘regional average’ of Oklahoma’s surrounding states. If approved, this proposal would result in increased taxes and/or reduced funding to other state agencies. The problem with SQ #744 is it does not provide a funding mechanism- only a spending one.
*****
You have probably seen the pro 744 TV commercials that imply by cutting state legislator’s perks and benefits the money to fund 744 would be there. That is simply not true. If all of the 149 legislator’s perks and benefits were given to common education it would only provide three days worth of funding. Passage of 744 would be devastating to other state agencies and take funding decisions out of Oklahoma legislators hands and give it to the surrounding state’ lawmakers. In my opinion, of the eleven state questions SQ 744 is the only one that should be voted down, the others should be approved. Now a quick look at the judges.
*****
Up until 1966, Oklahomans elected judges in partisan statewide elections. Voters knew the judge’s Party affiliation, convictions and values. Judges had opponents and campaigned just like the other statewide elected officials. Using the excuse that elections cost the judges a lot of time and money and was undignified for the judiciary, they effectively lobbied the Oklahoma legislature to place a State Question on the ballot. That proposal was approved by the voters and amended the State Constitution to the current ‘judicial retention’ system. Since Oklahoma implemented the judicial retention system, not one Oklahoma appellate judges has failed to be retained. Obviously, the lack of information on their performance in office has given the judges an advantage at the ballot box.
*****
The truth is most voters don’t know anything about the judges. Bear in mind that every one of the six judges were appointed by a Governor. It stands to reason they reflect the values, views and opinions of the Governor who appointed them. Keep that in mind when you cast your vote on whether to retain or remove.
*****
There are six judges on the 2010 retention ballot. The two Oklahoma Supreme Court justices up for retention are Steven Taylor and James Winchester. There are four justices on the Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals on the ballot- Deborah Barnes, Doug Gabbard, John Fischer, and Larry Joplin. Governor Blackjack Henry appointed all but Winchester and Joplin. Winchester was appointed by Governor Keating, Joplin by Governor Nigh. In my opinion, all but Winchester should be removed.
*****
Finding information on the judges is difficult. None of them published a flyer of how they voted on key rulings, or a statement of their judicial philosophy. In my opinion, that should be the very least they are required to do. That would help voters make an informed decision on these important offices. I have published a brief bio of each of the six judges on the blog http://stevefair.blogspot.com/search?q=here+come+the+judges. The Norman League of Women Voters has published the six judges’ answers to some survey questions on their website. You can access that information at http://norman.ok.lwvnet.org/2010_judicial_retention.html .
*****
Voting gets underway this week in Oklahoma. According to the US Census Bureau, the most common excuse people give for not voting is they didn’t have time. Oklahoma has made it more convenient for voters to cast their ballot in recent years. You can vote in-person absentee on Friday from 8am to 6pm, Saturday 8am-1pm, or Monday 8am-6pm at the County Courthouse. On Tuesday November 2nd, all regular polling places are open from 7am-7pm.
*****
One of my favorite quotes about voting comes from John Quincy Adams who said, “Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.”
*****
The proposal getting the most attention is SQ #744, which if approved, would tie common education funding to a ‘regional average’ of Oklahoma’s surrounding states. If approved, this proposal would result in increased taxes and/or reduced funding to other state agencies. The problem with SQ #744 is it does not provide a funding mechanism- only a spending one.
*****
You have probably seen the pro 744 TV commercials that imply by cutting state legislator’s perks and benefits the money to fund 744 would be there. That is simply not true. If all of the 149 legislator’s perks and benefits were given to common education it would only provide three days worth of funding. Passage of 744 would be devastating to other state agencies and take funding decisions out of Oklahoma legislators hands and give it to the surrounding state’ lawmakers. In my opinion, of the eleven state questions SQ 744 is the only one that should be voted down, the others should be approved. Now a quick look at the judges.
*****
Up until 1966, Oklahomans elected judges in partisan statewide elections. Voters knew the judge’s Party affiliation, convictions and values. Judges had opponents and campaigned just like the other statewide elected officials. Using the excuse that elections cost the judges a lot of time and money and was undignified for the judiciary, they effectively lobbied the Oklahoma legislature to place a State Question on the ballot. That proposal was approved by the voters and amended the State Constitution to the current ‘judicial retention’ system. Since Oklahoma implemented the judicial retention system, not one Oklahoma appellate judges has failed to be retained. Obviously, the lack of information on their performance in office has given the judges an advantage at the ballot box.
*****
The truth is most voters don’t know anything about the judges. Bear in mind that every one of the six judges were appointed by a Governor. It stands to reason they reflect the values, views and opinions of the Governor who appointed them. Keep that in mind when you cast your vote on whether to retain or remove.
*****
There are six judges on the 2010 retention ballot. The two Oklahoma Supreme Court justices up for retention are Steven Taylor and James Winchester. There are four justices on the Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals on the ballot- Deborah Barnes, Doug Gabbard, John Fischer, and Larry Joplin. Governor Blackjack Henry appointed all but Winchester and Joplin. Winchester was appointed by Governor Keating, Joplin by Governor Nigh. In my opinion, all but Winchester should be removed.
*****
Finding information on the judges is difficult. None of them published a flyer of how they voted on key rulings, or a statement of their judicial philosophy. In my opinion, that should be the very least they are required to do. That would help voters make an informed decision on these important offices. I have published a brief bio of each of the six judges on the blog http://stevefair.blogspot.com/search?q=here+come+the+judges. The Norman League of Women Voters has published the six judges’ answers to some survey questions on their website. You can access that information at http://norman.ok.lwvnet.org/2010_judicial_retention.html .
*****
Voting gets underway this week in Oklahoma. According to the US Census Bureau, the most common excuse people give for not voting is they didn’t have time. Oklahoma has made it more convenient for voters to cast their ballot in recent years. You can vote in-person absentee on Friday from 8am to 6pm, Saturday 8am-1pm, or Monday 8am-6pm at the County Courthouse. On Tuesday November 2nd, all regular polling places are open from 7am-7pm.
*****
One of my favorite quotes about voting comes from John Quincy Adams who said, “Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.”
No comments:
Post a Comment