Bill would make it more difficult for Oklahomans to get issues on the ballot, critics say
OKLAHOMA CITY – Critics say a bill that would put additional restrictions on the initiative petition process is unconstitutional and will make it virtually impossible for citizens to get issues before voters.
But Sen. David Bullard, the author of Senate Bill 1027, said it includes “reasonable guardrails” and provides “transparency.”
Senate Bill 1027 attempts to change how signatures are collected, by limiting how many can be collected in the state’s most populous counties and requiring a minimum be collected in the least populated.
Under Bullard’s measure only 10% of the signatures could come from counties with a population of 400,000 people, while 4% must come from less populated counties.
Currently, signature gatherers are going to two or three counties, leaving the remainder of the state’s 77 counties out, the Durant Republican, said.
It also would prohibit payment of petition circulators based on the number of signatures gathered, but does allow for compensation, the source of which must be reported to the Secretary of State.
It would bar out-of-state contributions except from those who do business or reside in the state.
Critics of the measure say it amounts to an effort to stifle citizen participation.
Oklahoma law allows residents to place their own measures on the ballot if they follow a complex set of requirements and collect a certain number of signatures from registered voters. If a statewide measure appears on the ballot, every voter has a chance to weigh in on it.
It’s extremely difficult for citizens to place measures on the ballot, but in recent years Oklahomans have used the initiative petition process to successfully circumvent the Republican-controlled Legislature by expanding Medicaid and legalizing medical marijuana.
State Question 832, a citizen-led measure that proposes to increase the minimum wage to at least $15 an hour, is set for a June 16, 2026, vote.
Meanwhile, supporters of eliminating the state’s closed primary system are trying to get the issue on the ballot in the form of State Question 836.
Sen. Michael Brooks, D-Oklahoma City, said the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that campaign donations are free speech, which the measure could violate.
It would require signature gatherers to be qualified electors in the state and to have read the petition.
The measure calls for the Secretary of State, a political appointee, to approve the gist of the petition, or description at the top of the signature page, something which is currently not done.
“By making it harder for citizens to bring issues to the ballot, lawmakers are silencing the voices of everyday Oklahomans and limiting public participation in policymaking,” said Margaret Kobos, founder of Oklahoma United, which is backing State Question 836.
The bill would make it nearly impossible for grassroots efforts to succeed, she said.
Attorney Robert McCampbell, who is representing the three petitioners for State Question 836, said he did an analysis of the bill.
He found the bill unconstitutional on a number of fronts.
It violates the First Amendment by banning out-of-state circulators and prohibiting per-signature pay, and it unconstitutionally limits political contributions by banning out-of-state contributions, he wrote.
It unconstitutionally limits political contributions by banning out-of-state contributions, he wrote.
It gives judicial powers to the Secretary of State, another constitutional violation, McCampbell wrote.
“The government is not free to impose burdensome roadblocks to the citizen initiative process,” McCampbell wrote.
Bullard said Senate legal staff has looked at the bill and has not told him there were any legal problems with it.
Senate Bill 1027 last week passed the Senate Judiciary Committee and is available for consideration in the Senate. The vote was 7-2.
Oklahoma Voice (oklahomavoice.com) is an affiliate of States Newsroom, the nation’s largest state-focused nonprofit news organization, supported by grants and donations. Oklahoma Voice provides nonpartisan reporting, and retains full editorial independence.