STATE QUESTION ANALYSIS
PROTECTED CONTENT
If you’re a current subscriber, log in below. If you would like to subscribe, please click the subscribe tab above.
Username and Password Help
Please enter your email and we will send your username and password to you.
Two state questions will appear on the November 3 general election ballot. State
Question 805 was placed on the ballot by gathering signatures from citizens; State
Question 814 was referred to a vote of the people by the Oklahoma Legislature.
Each question is reprinted here as it will appear on the ballot followed by a brief
summary.
STATE QUESTION ANALYSIS
STATE QUESTION NO. 805
INITIATIVE PETITION NO. 421
This measure seeks to add a new Article II-A to the Oklahoma
Constitution. This new Article excepts and does not apply to
persons who have ever been convicted of a violent felony. It
would prohibit the use of a former felony conviction to increase
the statutorily allowable base range of punishment for a person
subsequently convicted of a felony. Individuals who are currently
incarcerated for felony sentences that were enhanced based
on one or more former felony convictions, and whose sentences
are greater than the maximum sentence that may currently be
imposed for such felonies, may seek sentence modification in
court. The new Article sets forth a detailed process for such sentence
modification, including but not limited to requirements for a
hearing, appointment of counsel for indigent petitioners, and notification
of victims, and requires that the court impose a modified
sentence no greater than the current maximum sentence which
may be imposed on a person convicted of the same felony with
no former felony convictions, and which results in no greater time
served in prison than under the original sentence. It establishes
an appeal procedure, provides an effective date, and contains a
severability clause.
SHALL THE PROPOSAL BE APPROVED?
FOR THE PROPOSAL – YES
AGAINST THE PROPOSAL – NO
SUMMARY: State Question 805 will be on
the Nov. 3 ballot after nearly 250,000 Oklahoma
voters signed an initiative petition. It was
billed as a “smart on crime” measure that could
result in up to $186 million prison cost savings.
The measure prohibits Oklahoma judges from
using previous nonviolent felony convictions as
a reason to increase prison sentences for defendants
convicted of new nonviolent crimes. Current
inmates who received enhanced sentences
for nonviolent felony convictions could ask
the court for sentence reductions. If approved,
new guidelines require the court to impose a
sentence no greater than the current maximum
sentence given for a person with no former nonviolent
felony convictions for the same crime.
The Constitutional Amendment establishes a
hearing process, appointment of counsel for indigents,
notification of victims and an appeals
procedure. Proponents say Oklahoma inmates
convicted of property and drug crimes currently
spend more than 70 percent more time behind
bars than the national average. Opponents, including
some law enforcement groups, anti-domestic
violence advocates, and the state district
attorneys association, say the measure is a misguided
attempt to give repeat offenders multiple
chances. In reality, they say, the measure is
a get-out-of-jail card for career criminals who
could return to their communities and commit
more crimes. They say non-violent offenses
could include domestic violence in the presence
of a child, animal cruelty, home burglary, arson,
DUI or soliciting sex from a minor using technology.
STATE QUESTION NO. 814
LEGISLATIVE REFERENDUM NO. 375
This measure seeks to amend Article 10, Section 40 of the
Oklahoma Constitution (Section 40), which directs proceeds
from the State’s settlements with or judgments against tobacco
companies. Currently, Section 40 directs 75% of proceeds to the
Tobacco Settlement Endowment Trust Fund (TSET Fund), where
earnings may only be used for tobacco prevention programs,
cancer research, and other such programs to maintain or improve
the health of Oklahomans. Meanwhile, the remaining 25% of proceeds
are directed to a separate fund for the Legislature (Legislative
Fund). The Legislature can also direct some of that 25% to
the Attorney General.
This measure amends Section 40 to reduce the percentage of
proceeds that go into the TSET Fund from 75% to 25%. As a result,
the remaining 75% will go to the Legislative Fund and the
Legislature may continue to direct a portion to the Attorney General.
The measure would also restrict the use of the Legislative
Fund. Section 40 currently states only that the Legislative Fund is
subject to legislative appropriation. If this measure passes, money
from the Legislative Fund must be used to get federal matching
funds for Oklahoma’s Medicaid Program.
SHALL THE PROPOSAL BE APPROVED?
FOR THE PROPOSAL – YES
AGAINST THE PROPOSAL – NO
SUMMARY: State Question 814, referred
to voters by the state legislature, changes the
amount of money directed to the state’s Tobacco
Settlement Endowment Trust (TSET Fund)
from 75 percent of the annual payments to 25
percent. Currently TSET receives 75 percent of
the annual payment and the remaining 25 percent
is directed to the legislature and the Attorney
General. Oklahoma voters created TSET
to manage smoking cessation, cancer research,
obesity and other healthy living programs from
the 1998 master settlement agreement between
tobacco companies and 46 states. Only earnings
on the state’s accumulated $1.3 billion fund are
used each year. That amounts to between $70
million and $75 million payments to divide
between TSET and the legislature. A yes vote
on Nov. 3 would let lawmakers redirect TSET
funds to pay for the current Medicaid program
and the expanded program Oklahoma voters approved
when they narrowly passed State Question
802 in June. If passed Nov. 3, the money
from the Legislative portion of TSET would be
used to get federal matching funds. Gov. Kevin
Stitt, who opposed the Medicaid expansion,
supports State Question 814 as a way to pay the
state’s portion of Medicaid costs. A Constitutional
amendment is required to change the settlement
proceeds formula as voters earmarked
the funds in 2000 by approving SQ 692 by
nearly 69 percent. Some health groups, such as
the American Cancer Society’s Cancer Action
Network, oppose SQ 814 on the grounds that it
diverts funding from programs that improve the
health of all Oklahomans.
