Ballot Measure Restrictions Advance to House Floor

HJR 1054 and HB 1105 would constrict Oklahomans’ constitutionally guaranteed right to propose new laws via the initiative and referendum process.

March 1, 2024

The Oklahoma State Legislature has advanced several restrictive ballot measure reform bills out of committee in a blatant power grab that could seal off one of the last remaining avenues for voters to pass legislation outside the Republican supermajority’s stranglehold on the Capitol. If successful, the maneuvers would nearly silence voters who want to propose new laws that do not align with the political views of an increasingly rural and Christian nationalist state Republican party.

Meanwhile, sensible reform bills that would bring Oklahoma’s initiative and referendum process closer to on-par with the other twenty-five states that offer direct democracy sit languishing in committees chaired by supermajority leadership members.

Here’s a recap of what’s happening as it relates to ballot measure reform at the Capitol.

HJR 1054 and HB 1105 would disenfranchise state voters

A joint resolution that would require ballot measure proponents to collect petition signatures from all seventy-seven Oklahoma counties passed committee on February 20.

Representative David Hardin (R-Stilwell) told House Rules Committee members that HJR 1054 would give rural voters a chance to have their voices heard on proposed initiative and referendum measures. “If the effort had been made to come to rural Oklahoma, we may not be looking at this,” said Hardin, who represents House District 86, which covers all or part of Adair, Cherokee, Delaware, and Mayes counties in Eastern Oklahoma. “I think it will help democracy.”

Representative Andy Fugate (D-Del City) questioned the fairness of requiring signatures from counties with wildly varying populations. “Why is it appropriate then that we use this irregular numbered county distribution instead of something like legislative districts where each (member) represents roughly 40,000 people?”

Hardin replied that voters in his district asked for the per-county requirement because signature gatherers don’t travel outside the state’s metropolitan areas. “I’m sixty-five years old, grew up in Stilwell. I can’t say that they’ve never been there. I’ve never seen anyone gathering signatures in Adair County.”

HJR 1054 would make an already difficult and expensive initiative and referendum process all but useless. Since 1940, only thirteen ballot measures initiated by citizens have become law, Fugate said. “The county with the least amount of registered voters, Harmon County, there’s about 1,300 people there. Do you think it’s appropriate for 1,300 people to hold hostage the rest of the state?”

Hardin repeated his intent that the bill—which would be put to a vote of the people as it would change the Oklahoma Constitution—give “rural people their chance.”

Currently, new laws proposed through the state question process must gather a percentage of petition signatures from Oklahoma registered voters before qualifying to be placed on the ballot. To advance a constitutional amendment, proponents must gather petition signatures totaling at least 15 percent of the number of votes cast in the last gubernatorial election, currently 172,993. To advance a statute, 8 percent, or 92,263 signatures, must be collected. To repeal an existing law, 5 percent, or 57,664 signatures, must be collected. To propose a previously rejected initiative or referendum measure, 25 percent, or 288,321 signatures, must be collected. Hardin’s joint resolution would require the same percentage of signatures but from every county instead of statewide.

House Speaker Charles McCall’s HB 1105 advanced from the House Rules Committee on February 22. The measure would charge proponents a $1,000 fee to file ballot measure paperwork with the Oklahoma Secretary of State. The fee would be reimbursed if the ballot measure qualifies for the ballot but acts as a deterrent to the process. The bill would also lengthen the protest period for challenges to a ballot measure’s constitutionality from ten business days to ninety days, giving ballot measure opponents the same amount of time to challenge a state question as the petition signature gatherers have to collect signatures.

HB 1105 would also require that every signature gatherer pass a criminal history investigation performed by the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation. While it’s fair to want to keep the public safe, the added expense of vetting volunteers and employees hired to gather signatures makes the process even more difficult. Analysts currently estimate it costs about $2 million to gather enough signatures to put a constitutional amendment on the ballot. Filing fees, background checks, and requiring signatures from every county would make the process much more expensive.

Op-ed alert!‍

The supermajority claims restrictions like these are necessary to preserve election integrity, but they amount to roadblocks thrown in front of a coughing, sputtering car. Oklahomans have a constitutionally guaranteed right to propose new laws via the initiative and referendum process. Legislative members represent their constituents. Do Hardin’s and McCall’s constituents really want to take away their own power in Oklahoma’s democratic process? Seems unlikely, but uninformed citizens often vote against their own best interests.

On the other side, reasonable bills to extend the signature gathering period from ninety to 180 days, to help disabled voters fill out petition paperwork, and to require that proposals requiring supermajorities for ballot measure passage be held to the same standard have foundered in House committees. Language from these bills could be inserted into other ballot measure reform legislation, if only the supermajority would entertain such action.

____________________  

‍