Weekly Opinion Editorial
ROADBLOCK
AHEAD!
by Steve Fair
On Friday, the Oklahoma Supreme Court ruled the initiative petition to
repeal House Bill 1010XX was invalid, saying the petition was misleading. "The
gist of Referendum Petition No. 25 is misleading for multiple reasons, any of
which would suffice alone to declare it insufficient. Combined, these flaws
leave no doubt that signatories are not being put on notice of the changes
being made," the ruling states. "Further,
the failure to include an exact copy of the text of the measure to be referred
violates a strict statutory mandate that exists to ensure signatories and
voters are put on notice of exactly what law is potentially going to be
submitted for their approval."
Of the nine Justices, five concurred
(Combs, Kauger, Edmonson, Reif, and Wyrick), one dissented (Winchester), two
were recused (Colbert and Darby) and one concurred and dissented(Gurich). Four of the five who voted to strike down the
petition were appointed by Democrat governors.
Six of the nine current Supreme Court Justices were appointed by a
Democrat. Of course, they are non-political and Party affiliation doesn’t mean
a thing-right!
In his dissent opinion, Winchester said the flaws were minor and that it
is not the court’s job to prevent taxpayers from voting on legislation they
disagree with. "While this Court's duty is to guard against fraud, corruption or
deception in the referendum, our decisions should not serve as a roadblock for
the people to voice their objection to legislation," Winchester wrote. The group that ran the petition-Oklahoma
Taxpayers Unite!- now will determine if they want to run another initiation
petition, which would have to be completed by July 18th to get on
the November ballot. Three points:
First, the number of signatures needed to get on the ballot is only
41,000. That is a low threshold and very
doable if the Repeal group decides to amend and circulate. There are clearly more than 41,000 Oklahoma
voters not pleased with the legislature passing the largest tax hike in state
history and would relish the opportunity to vote on repealing it. The challenge any group circulating an initiative
petition in the Oklahoma is the hoops and hurdles they have to jump through to gain
approval for circulation. That is not by
accident- it is to discourage citizen involvement.
Second, the Supreme Court’s decision was political. As Winchester pointed out the errors were
minor and it’s not the court’s job to protect the legislature. If this would have been an issue the court politically
agreed with, no doubt it would have been approved. The high court’s action should concern
everyone in Oklahoma, no matter their political leaning. Recent rulings from the Oklahoma Supreme
Court have been inconsistent, political and partisan.
Third, five of the nine Oklahoma Supreme
Court Justices will be on the November ballot.
Justices James Edmonson, Yvonne
Kauger, Norma Gurich, Patrick Wyrick, and Richard Darby will face voters on a
retention ballot. Since Oklahoma went to
the retention ballot system, no judge has been turned out. Guess they all have done such a flawless
job. Perhaps it’s time to change that
and send some of them home. The job of
the court is not to be a roadblock for citizen involvement in their government.