The Weleetkan

Jul
22
2016
Page
0006
Clip
resized
39%

Property of OPS News Tracker and members of the Oklahoma Press Association.

The Miami News-Record

OKLAHOMA EDITORIAL ROUNDUP

Protecting right to change laws

Jul
31
2016
Page
A004
Clip
resized
55%

The Associated Press

news@miaminewsrecord.com

Here are excerpts from recent editorials in Oklahoma newspapers:

The Journal Record, July 25, 2016

Oklahoma is home to 78,000 farming
operations that cover 34.2 million acres,
more than three-fourths of the total area.
Those farms produce more than $7.1 billion
of products each year, more than $5.2 billion
of that in livestock and poultry, making Oklahoma the 11th-largest livestock producing
state and 23rd-largest ag-producing state.
Most farmers will support State Question
777 in November. The measure would add
a new section to Article II of the Oklahoma
Constitution. It would be four sentences long.
The rst sentence says the intent is to protect farmers and ranchers and ensure that
they can keep farming and ranching forever.
The third and fourth sentences talk about
what the amendment does not do: modify
laws relating to trespass, eminent domain,
the dominance of mineral rights, and so forth.
There is little in those three sentences with
which one might take issue.
The devil is the second sentence, which
reads: The Legislature shall pass no law
which abridges the right of citizens and lawful
residents of Oklahoma to employ agricultural
technology and livestock production and
ranching practices without a compelling state
interest.
According to Merriam-Websters Dictionary of Law, a compelling state interest is,
a governmental interest (as in educating
children or protecting the public) which is so
important that it outweighs individual rights.
A compelling state interest is an extraordinarily high standard to meet that requires
the strict scrutiny test. If the state were to
adopt a law regulating agriculture and it was
challenged, the state would have to prove
that the policy was necessary and narrowly
tailored to accomplish the specic task. Its
the same standard that was applied in Roe
v. Wade when the court found a persons
privacy rights could not be quashed by laws
outlawing abortions.
The law was not written by local farmers;
ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange
Council, approved the model legislation in
1996 and again in 2013.
The state has a model; the Legislature
can add, subtract and update laws as the
world changes. In 1776, no one imagined a
need for laws governing self-driving cars,
but the public certainly can imagine the
value of those today. No one knows how the
agriculture industry will grow and change in
Oklahoma, but the public representatives at
the Capitol must be allowed to help the law
adapt to whatever might surface.
We must not cede governance of an industry to the industry. Voters must defeat State
Question 777 in November
Tulsa World, July 22, 2016

Boren tax proposal appears headed to

the ballot Good!
The last substantial hurdle in the way of
David Borens proposed 1 percent sales tax
increase has been cleared.
On Monday, the Oklahoma Supreme Court
threw out a legal challenge against State
Question 779 because it was not led at the
appropriate time.
That appears to clear the way for the issue
to go to Novembers ballot.
Good.
More than 301,000 Oklahoma voters
signed Borens petition to raise taxes in support of education. With that kind of popular
support, it would have been a travesty for the
high court to prevent a vote.
The challenge was thrown out on technical grounds, but in our view the challenge
was made on technical grounds: whether
the petitions gist a description of the
measure that appears on signature sheets
was properly worded. There was a time
and a place to raise such an issue, and the
opponents missed it. This late in the game,
it should not have been allowed to block
the progress of popular sovereignty, and it
wasnt.
At the same time, the high court rewrote
the ballot title for SQ 779 to make it clearer
that the Legislature wont be able to shufe
appropriations ingeniously so that a tax
increase for education becomes a general tax
increase.
Thats also good. The new ballot language
is more informative and clearly describes
how the process of supplanting is
prevented.
There are strong arguments on both sides
of SQ 779, and we look forward to a substantial public debate on its merits. Were glad the
Boren proposal seems headed to the ballot.
The Oklahoman, July 25, 2016
Employment gures show Oklahoma
government is far from gutted
After the past few years of budget cuts,
some activists contend Oklahoma government is now cut to the bone. Government
employment gures highlighted by Governing magazine undermine that claim.
Based on U.S. Census Bureau 2014 Annual
Survey of Public Employment & Payroll data,
Governing magazine estimates Oklahoma
has 231 state and local government employees for every 10,000 people in the state
(excluding education).
Thats nowhere near the highest ratio in
the country. But its also nowhere near the
bottom. Twenty-four states had higher ratios
of government employment, while 25 had
lower.
Somehow, numerous states are getting
by with lower effective levels of government
employment than
Oklahoma. To cite just one notable
example, in Texas there are 209 state-local
government employees for every 10,000
people.
Even if government employment numbers

have declined in the two years since the

census data was collected, its still unlikely
Oklahoma is among the states with the
lowest levels of government employment.
As noted, the above employment gures
exclude education jobs. Governing magazine
accounted for those gures separately.
Oklahoma is often criticized for having
more than 500 school districts, far more than
most states of comparable geographic size
and similar population. In fact, Oklahoma
has more districts than states that are
much larger in geography and population.
Critics argue the high number of Oklahoma
districts fuels administrative bloat and waste.
The data collected by Governing magazine
bolsters those claims.
Oklahoma has 245 elementary-secondary
school employees for every 10,000 residents,
a rate thats higher than all but 11 states.
However, Oklahomans pay $160 in monthly
payroll for those school employees for every
$100,000 in personal income in the state.
That ranks lower than all but nine states.
This suggests Oklahomas system prioritizes quantity of school employees (including
administrators) over higher wages for school
employees. Inefciency plays a signicant
role in lower teacher pay in Oklahoma.
The number of people employed in
Oklahoma colleges and universities ranks
in the middle of the pack, with 24 states
having higher ratios per 10,000 population
than Oklahoma. This is surprising, given that
Oklahoma has also been criticized for having
an excessive number of colleges, including
several so small that few people are aware
they even exist.
Payroll at Oklahoma colleges is also in
the middle tier of the national pack, with 26
states paying more per $100,000 in personal
income.
In Oklahoma, government jobs have often
been treated as a form of welfare spending.
Too many positions were either created, or
have since been preserved, simply to provide
someone assistance. Less emphasis has
been placed on ensuring that the public is
being well-served as a result of the increased
government payroll.
Thats a failed model for economic development, and it actually detracts from growth.
Oklahoma lawmakers should consider how
government is structured in other states that
employ fewer people per capita.
Ghost employee scandals in the past
have highlighted the worst abuses in Oklahoma, but the more damaging practice may
be the preservation of government positions
simply because weve always done it that
way.
Apathy and inertia have fueled government waste in Oklahoma. No doubt the
suddenness of budget cuts in recent years
has negatively impacted some agencies. But
the data highlighted by Governing magazine
suggests Oklahoma government could still
operate more efciently without harming
service quality.

Property of OPS News Tracker and members of the Oklahoma Press Association.

The Anadarko Daily News

e
e
Aug
08
2016
Page
001
Clip
resized
116%

g
l
s
g
-

t
r
o
y
f
s

powwos in and out of state and enjo

Hgh court rules

SQ 777 stays
on the ballot

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP)

The Oklahoma Supreme Court has
ruled that the so-called "Right to
Farm" ballot initiative can remain
on the general election ballot in November.
In a ruling handed down Monday,
Justices Douglas Combs and
Yvonne Kauger also said the time to
challenge a ballot issue should be
tighter. A coalition known as Save
the Illinois River, Inc., filed a lawsuit that challenged the constitutionality of the proposal, which
calls for a statewide vote on
whether the right to farm and ranch
in Oklahoma shall be "forever guaranteed." Opponents allege the
measure could allow large farming
corporations to set state agricultural
policy instead of voters and their
elected representatives. In its ruling,
the Supreme Court let stand a decision by Oklahoma County District
Judge Patricia Parrish in May to
dismiss the lawsuit.

Delta resumes

Property of OPS News Tracker and members of the Oklahoma Press Association.

Ada News

Aug
09
2016
Page
A002
Clip
resized
105%

Oklahoma Supreme
Court lets stand Right
to Farm initiative
Associated Press
OKLAHOMA CITY
The Oklahoma Supreme
Court says voters can
consider the so-called
Right to Farm ballot
initiative this fall, but
some members of the
court say state lawmakers should require that
challenges to ballot
PHDVXUHVEHOHGHDUlier.
A coalition known as
Save the Illinois River,
,QFOHGDODZVXLW
challenging the constitutionality of the
proposal in March,

more than eight months

after Gov. Mary Fallin
issued an order placing
the matter on the ballot.
On Monday, Justices
Douglas Combs and
Yvonne Kauger suggested legislators consider
imposing deadlines for
challenges.
In its ruling, the Supreme Court let stand a
decision by Oklahoma
County District Judge
Patricia Parrish in May
to dismiss the lawsuit.
Opponents allege the
measure could allow
large farming corporations to set state agricultural policy instead of
voters and lawmakers.

Property of OPS News Tracker and members of the Oklahoma Press Association.

Aug 2016 Page

09
A001

Clip
resized
63%

The Ardmoreite

Property of OPS News Tracker and members of the Oklahoma Press Association.

The Ardmoreite

Aug
09
2016
Page
A003
Clip
resized
91%
From
A001

Property of OPS News Tracker and members of the Oklahoma Press Association.

Aug 2016 Page

09
A002

Clip
resized
64%

Claremore Daily Progress

Oklahoma Supreme Court lets stand

controversial Right to Farm initiative
By TIM TALLEY
Associated Press

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP)

The Oklahoma Supreme
Court ruled Monday that voters can consider the so-called
Right to Farm ballot initiative during the general election this fall, but some members of the states highest
court said state lawmakers
should require that challenges
to ballot measures be filed
earlier.
A coalition known as Save
the Illinois River, Inc., filed a
lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the proposal
in March, more than eight
months after Gov. Mary
Fallin issued an order placing
the matter on the Nov. 8 ballot. In a unanimous ruling, the
nine-member court let stand a
decision by Oklahoma
County
District
Judge
Patricia Parrish in May to dismiss the lawsuit.
But in a concurring opinion, Justices Douglas Combs

and Yvonne Kauger said legislators should consider

imposing deadlines for challenges of legislative ballot
initiatives.
The Legislature has not
provided any statutory timeframe for a pre-election constitutional challenge to legislative referendums, the
opinion states. This court
has previously stressed the
important of timeliness in
election and ballot-related
measures.
The decision says that the
lengthy time between Fallins
June 2015 proclamation that
placed the measure on the
ballot and the time the lawsuit
was filed prejudices the
courts.
This court cannot permit
potential challengers to bide
their time until the ballot
printing and election deadlines loom, in an attempt to
force an adjudication quickly, the concurring opinion
says. We cannot permit a
flood of late-filed suits that

The opinion states: The Legislature has not

provided any statutory timeframe for a pre-election constitutional challenge to legislative referendums. This court has previously stressed the
important of timeliness in election and ballotrelated measures.
must be resolved before ballot printing lest the state be
forced to reprint the ballots at
significant expense.
Passed by the Legislature
last year, the measure calls for
a statewide vote on whether
the right to farm and ranch in
Oklahoma shall be forever
guaranteed.
Supporters say the proposed constitutional amendment was prompted in part by
a California proposal that
placed restrictions on the size
of cages housing egg-laying
hens and that the measure
would prevent animal rights
groups from changing agriculture
practices
in
Oklahoma.
In addition to the nonprof-

it Save the Illinois River, Inc.,

the proposal was challenged
by state Rep. Jason
Dunnington, D-Oklahoma
City, and two private citizens.
Dunnington did not immediately return a telephone call
seeking comment.
Opponents allege the measure could allow large farming corporations to set state
agricultural policy instead of
voters and lawmakers.
Among other things, the proposal would prohibit the
Legislature from passing laws
that would take away the
right to employ agricultural
technology and livestock production and ranching practices without a compelling
state interest.

Property of OPS News Tracker and members of the Oklahoma Press Association.

Aug 2016 Page

09
A001

Clip
resized
50%

Enid News & Eagle

Oklahoma Supreme Court lets stand Right to Farm initiative

ballot initiatives.
The Legislature has not provided any
statutory timeframe for a pre-election
OKLAHOMA CITY The Oklahoma constitutional challenge to legislative refSupreme Court ruled Monday that vot- erendums, the opinion states. This court
ers can consider the so-called Right to has previously stressed the important of
Farm ballot initiative during the gen- timeliness in election and ballot-related
measures.
eral election this fall, but some
The decision says that the
members of the states highest Passed by the
lengthy time between Fallins
court said state lawmakers should Legislature last
June 2015 proclamation that
require that challenges to ballot year, the
placed the measure on the balmeasures be filed earlier.
measure calls
lot and the time the lawsuit was
A coalition known as Save the for a statewide
filed prejudices the courts.
Illinois River, Inc., filed a law- vote on
This court cannot permit
suit challenging the constitution- whether the
potential challengers to bide
ality of the proposal in March, right to farm
their time until the ballot printmore than eight months after and ranch in
ing and election deadlines loom,
Gov. Mary Fallin issued an order Oklahoma shall
in an attempt to force an adjudiplacing the matter on the Nov. be forever
cation quickly, the concurring
8 ballot. In a unanimous ruling, guaranteed.
opinion says. We cannot permit
the nine-member court let stand
a flood of late-filed suits that
a decision by Oklahoma County
District Judge Patricia Parrish in May to must be resolved before ballot printing
lest the state be forced to reprint the baldismiss the lawsuit.
But in a concurring opinion, Justices lots at significant expense.
Passed by the Legislature last year,
Douglas Combs and Yvonne Kauger said
legislators should consider imposing the measure calls for a statewide vote
deadlines for challenges of legislative on whether the right to farm and ranch

By Tim Talley

Associated Press

in Oklahoma shall be forever guaranteed. Supporters say the proposed constitutional amendment was prompted in
part by a California proposal that placed
restrictions on the size of cages housing egg-laying hens and that the measure would prevent animal rights groups
from changing agriculture practices in
Oklahoma.
In addition to the nonprofit Save the
Illinois River, Inc., the proposal was challenged by state Rep. Jason Dunnington,
D-Oklahoma City, and two private citizens.

Property of OPS News Tracker and members of the Oklahoma Press Association.

Dunnington did not immediately return

a telephone call seeking comment.
Opponents allege the measure could
allow large farming corporations to set
state agricultural policy instead of voters
and lawmakers. Among other things, the
proposal would prohibit the Legislature
from passing laws that would take away
the right to employ agricultural technology and livestock production and ranching practices without a compelling state
interest.
Q
State question 777: bit.ly/2b3GCRo

The Lawton Constitution

Aug
09
2016
Page
B005
Clip
resized
65%

State high court lets Right to Farm stand

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP)
The Oklahoma Supreme
Court ruled Monday that voters can consider the socalled Right to Farm ballot
initiative during the general
election this fall, but some
members of the states highest court said state lawmakers should require that challenges to ballot measures be
filed earlier.
A coalition known as Save
the Illinois River, Inc., filed a
lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the proposal
in March, more than eight
months after Gov. Mary
Fallin issued an order placing the matter on the Nov. 8
ballot. In a unanimous ruling,
the nine-member court let
stand a decision by Oklahoma County District Judge
Patricia Parrish in May to
dismiss the lawsuit.
But in a concurring opinion, Justices Douglas Combs
and Yvonne Kauger said legislators should consider imposing deadlines for challenges of legislative ballot
initiatives.
The Legislature has not
provided any statutory timeframe for a pre-election constitutional challenge to legislative referendums, the
opinion states. This court
has previously stressed the
important of timeliness in

election and ballot-related

measures.
The decision says that the
lengthy
time
between
Fallins June 2015 proclamation that placed the measure
on the ballot and the time the
lawsuit was filed prejudices
the courts.
This court cannot permit
potential challengers to bide
their time until the ballot
printing and election deadlines loom, in an attempt to
force an adjudication quickly, the concurring opinion
says. We cannot permit a
flood of late-filed suits that
must be resolved before ballot printing lest the state be
forced to reprint the ballots
at significant expense.
Passed by the Legislature
last year, the measure calls
for a statewide vote on
whether the right to farm
and ranch in Oklahoma shall
be forever guaranteed.
Supporters say the proposed
constitutional amendment
was prompted in part by a
California proposal that
placed restrictions on the
size of cages housing egglaying hens and that the
measure would prevent animal rights groups from
changing agriculture practices in Oklahoma.
In addition to the nonprofit
Save the Illinois River, Inc.,

the proposal was challenged

by state Rep. Jason Dunnington, D-Oklahoma City, and
two private citizens. Dunnington did not return a call
seeking comment.
Opponents allege the
measure could allow large
farming corporations to set
state agricultural policy instead of voters and lawmakers. Among other things, the
proposal would prohibit the
Legislature from passing
laws that would take away
the right to employ agricultural technology and livestock production and ranching practices without a compelling state interest

Roose & Roose

LAW FIRM, PLLC

Social Security
We help you fill out
applications.
We represent you at hearings.
We have experience
in Federal Court.
Former U.S. Army
JAG Officers

Payment
Plans
Available
Amy & John Roose

Call 580-581-0700
812 West Gore Blvd., Suite A
Visit website at
rooseandrooselaw.com

Property of OPS News Tracker and members of the Oklahoma Press Association.

Aug 2016 Page

09
A001

Clip
resized
103%

Muskogee Phoenix

High court keeps SQ 777 on ballot

Some justices
say foes of farm
proposal should
have sued earlier
OKLAHOMA CITY
(AP) The Oklahoma
Supreme Court ruled
Monday that voters can
consider the so-called
Right to Farm ballot
initiative during the
general election this fall,

but some members of the

states highest court said
state lawmakers should
require that challenges
to ballot measures be
led earlier.
A coalition known as
Save the Illinois River,
Inc., led a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the proposal
in March, more than
eight months after Gov.
Mary Fallin issued an
order placing the mat-

ter on the Nov. 8 ballot.

In a unanimous ruling,
the nine-member court
let stand a decision by
Oklahoma County District Judge Patricia Parrish in May to dismiss
the lawsuit.
But in a concurring
opinion, Justices Douglas Combs and Yvonne
Kauger said legislators
should consider impos-

Property of OPS News Tracker and members of the Oklahoma Press Association.

(See SQ 777, 2A)

Aug 2016 Page

09
A002

Clip
resized From
91% A001

Muskogee Phoenix

SQ 777
Continued from Page 1A

ing deadlines for challenges of legislative ballot

initiatives.
The Legislature has
not provided any statutory timeframe for a
pre-election constitutional challenge to legislative
referendums, the opinion
states. This court has
previously stressed the
important of timeliness
in election and ballot-related measures.
The decision says that
the lengthy time between
Fallins June 2015 proclamation that placed the
measure on the ballot
and the time the lawsuit
was led prejudices the

courts.
This court cannot permit potential challengers
to bide their time until
the ballot printing and
election deadlines loom,
in an attempt to force an
adjudication quickly, the
concurring opinion says.
We cannot permit a ood
of late-filed suits that
must be resolved before
ballot printing lest the
state be forced to reprint
the ballots at signicant
expense.
Passed by the Legislature last year, the measure calls for a statewide
vote on whether the
right to farm and ranch
in Oklahoma shall be
forever guaranteed.
Supporters say the proposed constitutional
amendment was prompt-

ed in part by a California
proposal that placed restrictions on the size of
cages housing egg-laying
hens and that the measure would prevent animal rights groups from
changing agriculture
practices in Oklahoma.
In addition to the nonprot Save the Illinois
River, Inc., the proposal
was challenged by state
Rep. Jason Dunnington,
D-Oklahoma City, and
two private citizens.
Dunnington did not immediately return a telephone call seeking comment.
Opponents allege the
measure could allow large
farming corporations to
set state agricultural policy instead of voters and
lawmakers.

ti
Property of OPS News Tracker and members of the Oklahoma Press Association.

Aug 2016 Page

09
C001

Clip
resized
48%

The Oklahoman

SQ 777 about farming methods to stay on ballot, Oklahoma court rules

BY BRIANNA BAILEY
Business Writer
bbailey@oklahoman.com

The Oklahoma Supreme

Court has upheld a lower
court decision allowing
the proposal on regulat-

ing farming methods to

remain on the November
ballot.
The nonprofit Save
The Illinois River Inc.,
Rep. Jason Dunnington,
D-Oklahoma City, and two
private citizens filed a law-

suit in Oklahoma County

District Court in March to
challenge State Question
777.
Oklahoma County District Court Judge Patricia
Parrish threw out the lawsuit in May. The plaintiffs

later appealed the decision

to the Oklahoma Supreme
Court.
In its seven-page ruling,
the state Supreme Court
ruled that the lower court
should not be able to rule
on a legislative referendum

before the people have

voted on the matter.
The ruling could affect
other legal challenges to
legislative referendums,
including a challenge to
State Question 792, on
allowing wine sales in gro-

Property of OPS News Tracker and members of the Oklahoma Press Association.

cery stores, that the Retail

Liquor Association has
filed.
In a separate opinion,
which agreed with the
majority ruling, ViceSEE COURT, PAGE 6C

Aug 2016 Page

09
C006

Clip
resized From
70% C001

The Oklahoman

e
e
s
o
d
r
s
e
p
e
e
t

Court: Challenge must be timely

FROM PAGE 1C

Chief Justice Douglas Combs

wrote that the such challenges to
ballot measures must be made in
a timely fashion.
This court cannot permit
potential challengers to bide
their time until the ballot printing and election deadlines loom,
in an attempt to force an adjudication quickly, Combs wrote.

The plaintiffs challenged the

constitutionality of State Question 777 on several grounds
and argue that the measure is
so blatantly unconstitutional
that it would be a waste of state
resources and misleading to voters.

Vote set for November

SQ 777 is a constitutional
amendment that would pre-

vent Oklahoma lawmakers from

passing legislation to regulate
agriculture unless it has a compelling state interest. The state
is set to vote on the ballot measure in November.
The state question would
not reverse any state statutes or
ordinances enacted before Dec.
31, 2014, but any law regulating
agriculture passed after that date
would be subject to repeal.

Property of OPS News Tracker and members of the Oklahoma Press Association.

The Shawnee News-Star

Okla. Supreme
Court lets stand
Right to Farm
initiative
Aug
09
2016
Page
A001
Clip
resized
51%

OKLAHOMA CITY (AP)

The Oklahoma Supreme
Court ruled Monday that
voters can consider the
so-called Right to Farm
ballot initiative during the
general election this fall,
but some members of the
states highest court said
state lawmakers should
require that challenges to
ballot measures be filed
earlier.
A coalition known as
Save the Illinois River, Inc.,
OHG D ODZVXLW FKDOOHQJLQJ
the constitutionality of the
proposal in March, more
than eight months after
Gov. Mary Fallin issued an
order placing the matter
on the Nov. 8 ballot. In
a unanimous ruling, the
nine-member court let
stand a decision by Oklahoma County District Judge
Patricia Parrish in May to
dismiss the lawsuit.
But in a concurring
opinion, Justices Douglas
Combs and Yvonne Kauger
said legislators should consider imposing deadlines
for challenges of legislative
ballot initiatives.
The Legislature has not
provided any statutory
timeframe for a pre-election constitutional challenge to legislative referendums, the opinion states.
This court has previously
stressed the important of
timeliness in election and
ballot-related measures.
The decision says that
the lengthy time between
Fallins June 2015 proclamation that placed the
measure on the ballot
and the time the lawsuit
ZDV OHG SUHMXGLFHV WKH
courts.
This court cannot permit potential challengers
to bide their time until
the ballot printing and
election deadlines loom,
in an attempt to force an
adjudication quickly, the
concurring opinion says.
:HFDQQRWSHUPLWDRRG
RIODWHOHGVXLWVWKDWPXVW
be resolved before ballot
printing lest the state be
forced to reprint the ballots
DWVLJQLFDQWH[SHQVH
FARM, Page 5A

Property of OPS News Tracker and members of the Oklahoma Press Association.

The Shawnee News-Star

Aug
09
2016
Page
A005
Clip
resized
103%
From
A001

FARM
Continued from Page 1A

Passed by the Legislature last year, the measure

calls for a statewide vote on
whether the right to farm
and ranch in Oklahoma
shall be forever guaranteed. Supporters say the
proposed constitutional
amendment was prompted in part by a California
proposal that placed restrictions on the size of
cages housing egg-laying
hens and that the measure
would prevent animal
rights groups from changing agriculture practices in
Oklahoma.
In addition to the nonprofit Save the Illinois
River, Inc., the proposal

was challenged by state

Rep. Jason Dunnington,
D-Oklahoma City, and two
private citizens. Dunnington did not immediately
return a telephone call
seeking comment.
Opponents allege the
measure could allow large
farming corporations to
set state agricultural policy instead of voters and
lawmakers. Among other
things, the proposal would
prohibit the Legislature
from passing laws that
would take away the right
to employ agricultural
technology and livestock
production and ranching
practices without a compelling state interest.
___
State question 777:
http://bit.ly/2b3GCRo

Property of OPS News Tracker and members of the Oklahoma Press Association.

Aug 2016 Page

09
A004

Clip
resized
67%

Stillwater NewsPress

OKLAHOMA VIEWPOINTS THE JOURNAL RECORD

Protecting right to change

Oklahoma is home to 78,000
farming operations that cover
34.2 million acres, more than
three-fourths of the total area.
Those farms produce more
than $7.1 billion of products
each year, more than $5.2
billion of that in livestock and
poultry, making Oklahoma
the 11th-largest livestock producing state and 23rd-largest
ag-producing state.
Most farmers will support
State Question 777 in November. The measure would add
a new section to Article II of
the Oklahoma Constitution. It
would be four sentences long.
The first sentence says the
intent is to protect farmers
and ranchers and ensure that
they can keep farming and
ranching forever. The third

and fourth sentences talk

about what the amendment
does not do: modify laws relating to trespass, eminent domain, the dominance of mineral rights, and so forth. There is
little in those three sentences
with which one might take
issue.
The devil is the second
sentence, which reads: The
Legislature shall pass no law
which abridges the right of
citizens and lawful residents
of Oklahoma to employ agricultural technology and livestock production and ranching
practices without a compelling
state interest.
According to Merriam-Websters Dictionary of Law, a
compelling state interest is,
a governmental interest (as

in educating children or protecting the public) which is so

important that it outweighs
individual rights.
A compelling state interest
is an extraordinarily high
standard to meet that requires
the strict scrutiny test. If the
state were to adopt a law regulating agriculture and it was
challenged, the state would
have to prove that the policy
was necessary and narrowly
tailored to accomplish the
specific task. Its the same
standard that was applied in
Roe v. Wade when the court
found a persons privacy rights
could not be quashed by laws
outlawing abortions.
The law was not written
by local farmers; ALEC, the
American Legislative Ex-

Property of OPS News Tracker and members of the Oklahoma Press Association.

change Council, approved the

model legislation in 1996 and
again in 2013.
The state has a model; the
Legislature can add, subtract
and update laws as the world
changes. In 1776, no one imagined a need for laws governing
self-driving cars, but the public
certainly can imagine the
value of those today. No one
knows how the agriculture
industry will grow and change
in Oklahoma, but the public
representatives at the Capitol
must be allowed to help the
law adapt to whatever might
surface.
We must not cede governance of an industry to the
industry. Voters must defeat
State Question 777 in November.

Stillwater NewsPress

Aug
09
2016
Page
A006
Clip
resized
46%

State Supreme
Court lets stand
Right to Farm
initiative
By Tim Talley
Associated Press

OKLAHOMA
CITY The Oklahoma
Supreme Court ruled
Monday that voters can
consider the so-called
Right to Farm ballot
initiative during the
general election this fall,
but some members of the
states highest court said
state lawmakers should
require that challenges
to ballot measures be
filed earlier.
A coalition known as
Save the Illinois River,
Inc., filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the proposal in
March, more than eight
months after Gov. Mary
Fallin issued an order
placing the matter on
the Nov. 8 ballot. In a
unanimous ruling, the
nine-member court let
stand a decision by Oklahoma County District
Judge Patricia Parrish
in May to dismiss the
lawsuit.
But in a concurring
opinion, Justices Douglas Combs and Yvonne
Kauger said legislators
should consider imposing
deadlines for challenges
of legislative ballot initiatives.
The Legislature has
not provided any statutory timeframe for a
pre-election constitutional challenge to legislative
referendums, the opinion states. This court
has previously stressed
the important of timeliness in election and ballot-related measures.
The decision says that
the lengthy time between Fallins June 2015
proclamation that placed
the measure on the ballot and the time the lawsuit was filed prejudices
the courts.

This court cannot permit potential challengers

to bide their time until
the ballot printing and
election deadlines loom,
in an attempt to force
an adjudication quickly,
the concurring opinion
says. We cannot permit
a flood of late-filed suits
that must be resolved
before ballot printing
lest the state be forced
to reprint the ballots at
significant expense.
Passed by the Legislature last year, the
measure calls for a statewide vote on whether
the right to farm and
ranch in Oklahoma shall
be forever guaranteed.
Supporters say the
proposed constitutional
amendment was prompted in part by a California proposal that placed
restrictions on the size of
cages housing egg-laying
hens and that the measure would prevent animal rights groups from
changing agriculture
practices in Oklahoma.
In addition to the nonprofit Save the Illinois
River, Inc., the proposal
was challenged by state
Rep. Jason Dunnington,
D-Oklahoma City, and
two private citizens.
Dunnington did not
immediately return a
telephone call seeking
comment.
Opponents allege the
measure could allow
large farming corporations to set state agricultural policy instead of
voters and lawmakers.
Among other things, the
proposal would prohibit
the Legislature from
passing laws that would
take away the right to
employ agricultural
technology and livestock
production and ranching
practices without a compelling state interest.

Property of OPS News Tracker and members of the Oklahoma Press Association.

Aug 2016 Page

09
A009

Clip
resized
61%

Tulsa World

Right to Farm to stay on ballot

Oklahoma Supreme Court
ruling means State Question
777 will be put to voters.
BY BARBARA HOBEROCK
World Capitol Bureau

OKLAHOMA CITY A state question

seeking to enshrine the rights of farmers
and ranchers in the state constitution will
stay on the ballot, according to an opinion
released Monday by the Oklahoma Supreme Court.
Lawmakers put State Question 777
dubbed Right to Farm by supporters and

Right to Harm by critics on the Nov. 8

ballot.
SQ 777 would add a section to the Oklahoma Constitution that would create a
constitutional right to engage in farming
and ranching.
It would protect the use of agricultural technology, livestock procedures and
ranching practices. If approved by voters,
it would make it more difficult to pass laws
regulating the agriculture industry.
Critics led suit in Oklahoma County
District Court but lost in their bid to keep
the question off the ballot. They then led
this appeal with the Oklahoma Supreme
SEE FARM A11

Regulation of farming and ranching practices is the focus of

State Question 777. Bloomberg le

Property of OPS News Tracker and members of the Oklahoma Press Association.

Tulsa World

FARM
Aug
09
2016
Page
A011
Clip
resized
63%
From
A009

FROM A9

Court.
The states high court noted
that the state constitution creates three separate and distinct branches of government:
legislative, executive and judicial. The constitution prohibits one branch from exercising the powers that belong to
the other branches, the court
noted.
To decide the validity of
legislation before it is passed
on by the governor or the voters, is for a court to inject itself
into the legislative process,
the courts opinion says.
The court ruled that the
state constitution requires it
to abstain from addressing the
substantive issues raised by
the parties.
The challenges raised here
remain unadjudicated and
intact, as does any challenge
brought under the federal or
state constitutions by a proper
party if State Question 777 is
passed by voters, the court
opinion says.
The Oklahoma Farm Bureau backs the measure.
The legal challenge to
State Question 777 was nothing but a last-ditch effort by
radical in-state and out-ofstate groups to silence the
voice of Oklahomans, said
Tom Buchanan, president of
the Oklahoma Farm Bureau.
Thanks to the wisdom of the
Oklahoma Supreme Court,
the measure now will be decided by Oklahoma voters,
rather than the liberal minority.
The challenge was brought
by Rep. Jason Dunnington,
D-Oklahoma City; nonprot
organization Save the Illinois
River; Ed Brocksmith, the
organizations secretary-treasurer; and John Leonard.
Supporters of the measure
say it is needed to prevent
certain groups from dictating
farming and ranching practices, such as cage sizes. Critics

say the measure could result

in a host of problems, including more pollution and legalized cruelty to animals.
Denise Deason-Toyne, president of Save the Illinois River,
told the Tulsa World on Monday evening that through the
Oklahoma Supreme Courts
refusal to rule on the measures validity before it is enacted, it essentially was saying
that the people should have a
voice in the laws of this state.
But if SQ 777 passes, we
LOSE our voice we will not
be able to seek regulations
limiting or restricting or otherwise having an impact on
agricultural technology and
farming and ranching practices, she said. Decisions will
be left to the courts, not the
people, to decide what is or is
not a compelling state interest
sufficient to allow regulation.
Deason-Toyne dismised assertions by SQ 777 proponents
that radical in-state and outof-state groups are behind
the effort to stop the state
question.
Save The Illinois River
Inc. is a highly respected and
long established environmental group whose mission is
to protect and preserve the
Illinois River, its tributaries
and Tenkiller Lake, DeasonToyne said.
Mr. Buchanans name calling and attempts to promote
hysteria about radicals and
liberals and the out-of-state
bogeyman coming to get
Oklahoma farmers and ranchers is simply a ploy to take
away from the reality that this
legislation is being pushed by
out-of-state corporate agribusinesses and foreign-owned
companies that want to use
Oklahoma resources without
being responsible stewards of
those resources. It is not about
family farmers and ranchers.
SQ 777 is really a Right to
Harm which will have devastating impacts on Oklahomans.
Barbara Hoberock 405-528-2465
barbara.hoberock@tulsaworld.com

Property of OPS News Tracker and members of the Oklahoma Press Association.

Woodward News

Right to Farm
question topic
at luncheon

Around
The area

Aug
09
2016
Page
A001

By Rachael Van Horn

Clip
resized
42%

A constitutional amendment that would guarantee

the rights of farmers and ranchers to freely practice
their trade was the topic of discussion Monday at the
August Woodward Chamber of Commerce luncheon.
The event takes place monthly and is a well attended venue for the discussion of state and local issues.
This month's luncheon was sponsored by Tri-State Oil
and Gas Convention Committee and Northwest
Oklahoma Court Appointed Special Advocates
(CASA) and Farm Bureau Insurance.
Guest speaker Alan Jett is a fourth generation
farmer and rancher living and ranching near Slapout.
Jett has been a member of the Beaver County Farm
Bureau since 1980. Since 2011 he has served as the
District 1 director on the Oklahoma Farm Bureau
Board. Jett offered an informational talk about how
State Question 777, Oklahoma's Right to Farm is projected to help ranchers and farmers in the state.
"What we are trying to accomplish is simple," Jett
said. "We're trying to keep the ridiculous rules that are
coming around the United States in agriculture, we are
trying to keep them out of Oklahoma."
It is the first constitutional amendment of its kind in
the U.S. that includes the "compelling state interest"
clause, which grants an industry the constitutional

Staff Writer

Alan Jett of Slapout talks about State Question 777 (Right to Farm) that will
be on the ballot this November. Jett was the featured speaker for the
monthly Woodward Chamber of Commerce luncheon held in the Pioneer
Room on Monday. Related story on page 6A. (Photo by Johnny McMahan)

Index

See Question on page 3A

Kendra Pierce (left) and Junior Long (right) discuss upcoming

events at the Woodward Chamber of Commerce luncheon.
Pierce talked about the Grab, Root and Growl Barbecue competition on Friday and Saturday and Long discussed the TriState Oil and Gas Convention which runs Thursday and Friday.
(Photos by Johnny McMahan)

Property of OPS News Tracker and members of the Oklahoma Press Association.