By KATELYNN BALL, Staff Reporter
State Question 779, also known as the Oklahoma One Percent Sales Tax adds a new Article to the Oklahoma Constitution to a limited purpose fund to improve public education. The tax will levee a one cent sales and use tax to improve public education, by increasing teacher salaries, addressing teacher shortages, implementing programs to improve reading in early grades, increase high school graduation rates and college and career readiness and college affordability, improving higher education and career and technology education, and increasing access to voluntary early learning opportunities for low-income and at-risk children.
It requires an annual audit of school districts’ use of monies from the fund and prohibits school districts’ use of these funds for administrative salaries. It provides for an increase in teacher salaries. It requires that monies from the fund not supplant or replace other education funding. The Article takes effects in July after its passage.
State Question 779 would also require an increase in teacher salaries of at least $5,000. The measure would mandate an annual audits of school districts’ use of the revenue.
Northwestern Oklahoma State University graduate and former superintendent of Tulsa Pulblic schools, Keith Ballard said that he doesn’t think that the $5,000 would make a large dent in Oklahoma’s teacher pay gap, but that in his opinion, it would still be extremely helpful in providing an adequate living to underpaid educators.
Northwestern Associate Dean and professor of Education Christee Jenlink, who holds a doctorate in educational administration said:” To not adequately fund education, Pre-K through higher education, is to hinder the economic growth and subsequent quality of life for Oklahoma families. The citizens of Oklahoma have to make it clear to our governing bodies that inadequate funding of education is not an option, and it is time to change. The way that occurs is up to the people. Investing in education is an investment in people. Ultimately, that is the only investment that matters.”
Ballard said as an example, an education graduate from NWOSU who decides to go out and teach, that student will start at a salary of $32,000 per year. If that same student were to leave Oklahoma to teach in Dallas, Texas, they would start teaching at a beginning salary of $50,000 a year.
That $18,000 difference in pay is enough for many educators to leave Oklahoma for the same positions in surrounding states like Texas, Kansas and Arkansas.
“It is unfair to ask for people to be called into a profession that is 50th in the United States and it is not fair,” Ballard said. We absolutely must do all that we can to see to it that our teachers are payed a good wage and we must attract quality teachers.It is plain wrong to ask people to invest in an expensive education and then not pay them a living wage.”
Early Childhood Education major and senior at Northwestern, Nicole Marema said that as a new teacher, having this measure in place would be necessary to ensure that quality teachers can make a living wage, and continue their career in education.
Ballard said that common ed would be most effected by the state question, because the bulk of the money from the one percent tax would go toward teacher salaries.
State Question # 776
State Question 779 would increase the statewide sales tax to from 4.5 percent to 5.5 percent. Localities in Oklahoma can add an additional sales tax as well. These additional local sales taxes can overlap. A yes vote is a vote in favor of this measure, while a no vote is a vote against it. Most Oklahoma educators are in favor of the article’s passing. There are some, however, that think Oklahoma taxes are already too high.
The creation of 776 came about because in Oklahoma, on the October of 2015 after several executions gone wrong all executions were put on hold, even though legally speaking the death penalty is accepted in Oklahoma. BallotPedia clearly states that, “A review of the methods and protocols used during execution is ongoing.” To ensure that after the questions about protocol are answered that the executions will resume, State Question 776 was designed.
Representative Mike Christian is a republican who represents district 93 and was first elected to the chamber in 2008. He is a sponsor of state question 776 and he had this to say about it: “With the current method of executions under attack and judicial scrutiny, it is imperative that we find an alternate way of delivering justice. Through an in depth interim study, we have found that death by nitrogen hypoxia is the easiest, most humane, and cost effective way of carrying out the death penalty.” Christian holds a strong belief that it is critical for 776 to ensure the state’s ability to carry out the death penalty.
Representative Mike Ritze was elected for the first time in 2008 as well, as a Republican member of the Oklahoma House of Representatives to represent district 80. Ritze is also a sponsor of state question 776 in the Oklahoma Legislature. Representative Ritze explained how 776 would make it possible for the legislature to determine methods of execution. He also explained that 776 specifies how if an executional method is found to be invalid the death sentence would remain until another valid method could be used. Representative Ritze goes on to explain that “Article 2, Section 9 of the Oklahoma Constitution, just like the Eighth Amendment in the U.S. Constitution, prohibits cruel or unusual punishment. S.Q. 776 would add new language to Section 9, clarifying that capital punishment is not cruel or unusual punishment.” The Impact 776 would have in the state constitution, is to reiterate that in Oklahoma capital punishment is in fact not unconstitutional, while also giving the power to determine methods of execution to the legislature rather than the judges. This is important because according to Ritze “When both the U.S. and Oklahoma constitutional prohibitions against “cruel or unusual punishment” were adopted, they were understood not to prohibit capital punishment.” Since then however, the death penalty has been claimed as well as held as unconstitutional by some advocates and even some judges.
Elected for the first time in 2006 representing district 24, Sen. Anthony Sykes is the amendments chief sponsor, and according to BallotPedia he says “We have an obligation to the people of Oklahoma to ensure that we can effectively enforce the death penalty. Oklahomans strongly support the death penalty, and it is critical that we protect our ability to enforce it.” He also explained how state question 776 is designed to accomplish the preservation of capital punishment for the worst criminals. Sykes spoke of the same key points as Ritze when he said, “I feel this is a necessary amendment to our Constitution to number one, establish that the death penalty is not cruel and unusual punishment, to number two, to make it clear that the legislature has the authority to alter those death penalty statutes, and to also ensure that, if a method of execution is declared unconstitutional, then the sentence can still be carried out by another method.”
Taking another human being’s life may not be as simple as one might think.
The Oklahoma Death Penalty Act will be on the November, 8 ballot to be voted on in the state of Oklahoma. The act will give the state of Oklahoma the power to inflict capital punishment as well as setting execution methods.
Many Oklahomans feel that in many cases that person that will be capitally punished may or may not be taken away for justified reasons. Obviously the process to convict someone of the death penalty is an extremely long and tedious process, but that long and tedious process has in the past proven to be ineffective, not to mention costly.
The State of Oklahoma has carried out 195 executions since its first one in 1915. Of those 195 convictions there has yet to be a wrongful conviction proven, but many Oklahomans still believe that the threat of the idea that a person may be wrongfully punished for a crime they didn’t commit is reason enough not to pass the bill.
“Corruption of power is a real thing in our justice system, therefore the risk of possible wrongful convictions resulting in the death penalty should be eliminated by not allowing the death penalty all together,” said Keith Wear, Assistant Athletic Trainer for Northwestern Athletics.
Granted the trials that involve the death penalty are extremely thorough and tedious, over time there have been instances where those trials are just not enough. Not to mention trials that involve the death penalty take a lot of time, they are also costly for our tax payer’s dollars.
The system of checks and balances that our government is founded on might also be challenged if this bill passes. Terminating a person’s life by capital punishment effectively ends the possibility of reviewing that person’s case.
Even though keeping those inmates in the prison system for an extended period of time can prove very costly, some citizens believe that is a risk they are willing to take if it means justice is served. “I think it makes sense to keep someone alive and in prison instead of paying my tax dollars to keep him alive through a trial that could take years to happen, just to see him eventually killed,” said Aaron Ford, head women’s golf coach at Northwestern Oklahoma State University.
The high cost of these trials stems from the fact that there are essentially two trials that go on for death convictions, one for the verdict and one for the sentencing. So even though our tax dollars are only being spent for a few years, it can actually match the price that can keep an inmate alive for multiple years.
Others believe that giving the government the power of capital punishment essentially gives them the power of revenge on its citizens. This will support the traditionally-feared view that the states are becoming too powerful over it’s citizens.
“I just don’t believe in the eye-for-and-eye theory, I don’t think killing someone because they killed a human creates justice in society,” said graduate student Clayton Garcia. Passing the death penalty bill will not create justice for those families that have suffered the tragedy of having a loved one taken from them by another member of society.
State Question #779
State question 779 talks about the education and of what the tax dollars will go to help out in the schools by giving a 1 percent sales tax. But there are some that do not believe that 779 will be able to help Oklahoma schools and it would only take away from small businesses. For some people it is hard to decide on this state question since it is said that 779 would be able to give teachers a raise but at what cost? Last Friday as reported from KOCO, Oklahoma City Mayor Mick Cornet and Tulsa Mayor Dewey Barlett are one of many Oklahoma mayors that are opposed to the state question. While some are agreeing to 779 there are some that are against the state question. Some say that while teachers do deserve a raise but there is a way to do that without raising taxes and to commit to spending on higher education. The sales tax is regressive which means that it will affect low and moderate income households more than wealthier homes. With this reference from okpolicy.org/state-question-779-sales-tax-education/
With many going to the polls this November, it will be difficult to decide on which to go for on this election. To decide on which to vote yes or no in this state question is up to the voter come November 8. “While there are those that do agree to the state question, some would disagree on what the state question because of what the outcome would be if the 1% tax does come into effect where it will cost some small businesses and also cut on some small families that are already struggling in this economy.” From the Guthrie newsletter there is some saying that it wouldn’t be about the state but about the nation and it would go to the legislature where it would increase for multiple projects other than dealing with education. NewsOK.com even has some articles about what some people are saying for the 779.
By dealing with the cons of this state question it is hard to decide if the voter wants to vote yes or no on this one but after hearing about what the cost would be of this state question and of how the raise of tax will effect some families and small businesses it wouldn’t be hard to decide on how the outcome will be once the elections are over and the full results come in this November.
State Question #780 and #781
“The state’s prisons are badly overcrowded, holding around 110 percent of their rated capacity. Further, Oklahoma has the second-highest rate of adults with serious mental illness, but ranks 44th in the U.S. for funding the treatment of mental illness” according to okpolicy.com. State Question 780 and 781 go hand in hand because they both have to do with reducing prison population and transforming money for crimes to better fund mental health illnesses.
“State Question 780 changes the classification of simple drug possession crimes from felony to misdemeanor. It also raises the dollar amount that determines whether property crimes are a felony or misdemeanor from $500 to $1,000. Anticipating fewer prison receptions for drug possession, Sate Question 781 directs the cost savings from State Question 780 to a fund that would be distributed to counties to provide mental health and substance abuse services. The state Office of Management and Enterprise Services is directed to determine the annual savings, which will be distributed to counties in proportion to their population.” According to “The Gist” on okpolicy.com.
State prisons are struggling to keep up with the bad overcrowding that has come to this point. Prisons aren’t just at full capacity they are at about 110 percent capacity.
“Oklahoma’s high incarceration rate has not led to safer communities; we still have above average rates of crime, while other states have seen bigger drops in their crime rates in recent years.” Says supporters of State Question 780.
Opponents of state question 780 say “Without felony drug possession charges, defendants are less likely to complete substance abuse treatment. Prosecutors would no longer be able to use the threat of felony drug possession charges to compel gang members to testify against one another.”
Oklahoma is ranking number two in the rate of adult’s incarceration with mental illnesses but without adequate funding. Oklahoma ranks 44th in funding for mental illnesses. Mental illnesses are real illnesses that deserve better funding for the health of the people of Oklahoma.
“By directing the cost savings back to communities, the state can address the substance abuse and mental health issues that cause crime in the first place” stated by supporters of State Question 781.
Opponents of state question 781 state “SQ 781 leaves the calculation of cost savings to the Office of Management and Enterprise Services, but there is no guidance on how the calculation should be made. Counties that may have more people in jail or on community supervision will be responsible for more offenders but may not have sufficient funding to handle them.”
As for State Question 780, this year 2016 state legislature has already taken steps to lesson penalties for drug offences. “HB 2479 reduces the minimum mandatory punishment for drug offenders charged only with possession. However, simple drug possession can still be charged as a felony. SQ 780 would reduce the penalty for all drug possession offences to a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in jail and/or a fine of up to $1,000” according to okpolicy.com.
Oklahomans for Criminal Justice Reform (OCJR) submitted both ballot initiatives and gathered over 110,000 signatures for each question, well over the 65,987 required. These State questions will be on November 8th 2016 ballot this year.
State Question #790
Election Day is November 8th, and there are many items on the ballot this year, one of them being state questions 790.
According to okpolicy.org, SQ 790 repeals Article 2, section 5 of the state constitution. The language to be repeated prohibits the use of state money or property for religious or sectarian purposes. Article 2, Section 5 reads: “No public money or property shall ever be appropriated, applied, donated, or used, directly or indirectly, for the use, benefit, or support of any sect, church, denomination, or system or religion, or for the use, benefit, or support of any priest, preacher, minister, or other religious teacher or dignitary, or sectarian institution as such.” The repeal of Article 2, Section 5 is supported by school choice advocates who believe it may interfere with proposed and existing voucher programs.
The proposed question arose from a state Supreme Court decision ordering the removal of a Ten Commandments monument from the Capitol grounds, and from concerns the ban could affect the eligibility of certain institutions for school vouchers, Oklahoma’s Promise scholarships, Medicaid, and other state-funded programs.
SQ 790 was placed on the ballot by a majority vote in the Oklahoma Legislature. Supporters of the state question in the Legislature said they were motivated by a recent Oklahoma Supreme Court decision, Prescott v. Oklahoma Capitol Preservation Commission, where the court ruled that a Ten Commandments monument on the State Capitol grounds was an unconstitutional use of public property based on Article 2, Section 5.
Even if voters approve SQ 790, there is some possibility that the United States Supreme Court will rule that the Ten Commandment monument’s display on public grounds violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Previous U.S. Supreme Court decisions have prohibited some Ten Commandment monument displays while allowing others. The Court’s reasoning has depended on the history and context of each monument.
People supporting SQ 790 say that Oklahoma Supreme Court’s interpretations of Article 2, Section 5 ban the Ten Commandments monuments on public grounds and this, in turn, makes Oklahoma hostile to religion.
People opposing SQ 790 say that repealing Article 2, Section 5, would threaten to allow taxpayer support of sectarian religion in ways that would threaten the separation of church and state and divide Oklahomans along religious lines.
If SQ 790 passes, it would remove Article 2, Section 5 of the Oklahoma Constitution. This has been interpreted by the Oklahoma courts as requiring the removal of a Ten Commandments monument from the grounds of the State Capitol. If this measure repealing Article 2, Section 5 is passed, the government would still be required to comply with the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution, which is a similar constitutional establishment that prevents the government from endorsing a religion or becoming excessively involved with religion.
What needs to be remembered during election time, however, is to be informed on all sides of the questions on the ballot. SQ 790 is just one of many and everyone has an opinion. Voters need to do research, which will allow them to make an informed decision.
State Question #792
The Oklahoma legislative voters in November will vote on a bill to change Oklahoma’s alcohol laws, specifically targeting beer sold in grocery and convince stores.
Bill 383 would essentially allow for more lenient alcohol laws in Oklahoma. Currently the highest percentage of beer Oklahomans can by in a convenience or grocery store is a beer at 3.2% or less. Convenience and grocery stores also can only sell beer, if bill 383 is passed, these stores would be allowed to sell full strength beer up to 8.99% and also be allowed to sell wine and spirits for the first time at 15%. In Oklahoma only liquor stores are allowed to sell full strength beer, however even these stores have strict rules that will be affected if bill 383 is passed. Liquor stores are only allowed to sell beer and wine warm and between the hours of 10 a.m. and 9 p.m. Monday through Saturday. If bill 383 is passed this will allow all liquor stores to sell cold beer and wine, as well as increase the hours that liquor and beer can be purchased to 10 a.m. to midnight Monday through Saturday.
Bill 383 only has one more vote to go through to be finalized, as it has already gone through senate and won with a vote of 33 to 12, and then gone through the house by a closer vote of 52 to 45. A majority vote will pass Bill 383 in this upcoming Oklahoma legislature vote.
Northwestern business administration student, 22 year old, Christian Hammerl said “I think the it’s a good idea. They already sell liquor in stores that are of higher percent than beer, and the higher alcohol content beer just tastes better, which is why most people buy beer in the first place.” Bill 383 will be passed or rejected this upcoming month by the Oklahoma legislator, if passed; the rule change will be in effect November 1st, 2018.