Weekly Opinion Editorial
SWEEP THE
STATE CONSTITUTION
DOWN THE PLAINS!
by Steve Fair
By now most Oklahomans know the State
Supreme Court ruled the state had to remove the Ten Commandments monument from
the Oklahoma State Capitol grounds.
Immediately several legislators said the ruling was wrong and proposed
impeaching the Justices who voted for the removal. Attorney General Scott Pruitt said he would
appeal the decision and Governor Mary Fallin said the monument will stay put
through the appeal process. Here are
three points about this ruling:
First, if the Justices are strictly
interpreting the state constitution (a first for them), then the ruling was
probably correct. Doesn’t mean it was
right, but correct. You see Oklahoma’s
constitution has what is known as a ‘Blaine amendment.’ It is named after former U.S. Speaker of the
House and U.S. Senator James Blaine from Maine who proposed an amendment to the
U.S. Constitution in the 1870s that was supported by his fellow Republican
President Grant. The real objective of Blaine’s amendment was to make sure that
religious schools didn’t get any public funding. It failed to pass the Senate, but groups
supporting the concept were successful in getting it included in thirty-eight
state constitutions State
Representative Kevin Calvey, (R-OKC) has indicated he will run a Joint
Resolution in the upcoming legislative session that if passed would send a
proposal to repeal the Blaine amendment to a vote of the people. Calvey noted that the
US Supreme Court approved a Ten Commandments monument on the Texas State
Capitol grounds, and that the U.S. Supreme Court building itself has a
depiction of the Ten Commandments. The
Decalogue has not only religious, but secular significance, so it is very
possible that Pruitt wins the appeal.
Second,
Oklahoma needs judicial reform. While
the Supreme Court Justices may have ruled on the Ten Commandments issue in a
strict legal sense, they failed to do that on issues like tort reform and workers
comp reform. The inconsistency and
political activism of the Oklahoma Supreme Court is revealed in their
unpredictable, illogical rulings. They
seem to only rule ‘by the book’ when it advances their personal political
agenda, which is more liberal than the average Oklahoman. So how do we get rid
of them? Currently Supreme Court
Justices candidates in Oklahoma submit their names to the Judicial Nominating
Commission. The Commission is a fifteen
member board, six appointed by the Governor, six by the law profession, one appointed by the Speaker of the House and one by the President
Pro Tempore and one at large member selected by the commission themselves. Half the commission must be non-lawyers. The commission submits their recommendation of three candidates
to the Governor, who makes the appointment without further approval
needed. Justices serve six year terms
and face voters on a ‘retention’ ballot.
Since Oklahoma went to the retention system, no judge has been removed,
even though a couple have come close. It
is probably because every Justice has done such a stellar job in the past fifty
years that none needed to be sent home. The
legislator should consider judicial term limits and requiring more information
on a judge’s rulings be given to the public before they are on the retention
ballot. It is easier to find Jimmy Hoffa’s
body than to get information on an Oklahoma Justice.
Third, the Supreme Court ruling revealed
one of many flaws in the Oklahoma Constitution.
The US Constitution has 8,700 words- the Oklahoma state constitution is
50,000 words- twice the average length of a state constitution. Our founding document has been amended over
150 times, six times more than the federal constitution. One of the provisions in the state constitution
is the people of Oklahoma vote every twenty years as to whether a state constitutional
convention is convened. The last time
Oklahomans voted on that issue- in 1970- convening a state constitutional convention
was defeated 3 to 1. No vote was taken 1990
or 2010 as required by law. It is well
past time to fix our state constitution.
State Representative Gary Banz, (R-Midwest City) and State Senator Kyle
Loveless, (R-Moore) are planning to run a bill in the upcoming session to put
the issue back in front of the people.
Loveless says, “As the Legislature
deals with detailed and complicated issues each year, the level of detail in
our constitution is cumbersome — beyond what anyone would want, right down to
the flashpoint of kerosene. A constitution is supposed to set the boundaries,
principles and skeleton upon which the government sits.”
I would urge support for both Calvey’s
Joint Resolution to amend the constitution and Loveless and Banz’s proposal to
convene a state constitutional convention.
It’s time to send the old constitution sweeping down the plains.
No comments:
Post a Comment