Playing politics with term limits?

From Oklahomans for Responsible Government:

The resolution that passed the House and Senate that will put term limits for statewide elected officials on the ballot in 2010 has been changed. By a statewide elected official.

Here’s how it would have appeared on the ballot as proposed by the legislature:

THE GIST OF THE PROPOSITION IS AS FOLLOWS:

This measure amends Sections 4 and 23 of Article 6 of the State Constitution. It also amends Section 15 of Article 9 of the State Constitution. This measure would limit the Governor to eight years of service. Years served for less than a full term would not be counted. The person serving as Governor when this measure is passed could complete his or her term. Other statewide elected officials would be limited to eight years of service, although Corporation Commissioners would be limited to twelve years of service. Years served for less than a full term would not be counted. Persons serving when this measure is passed could complete their terms and serve an additional eight or twelve years. The Legislature could pass laws to implement these changes. Under current law, the Governor is limited to two successive terms.

SHALL THE PROPOSAL BE APPROVED?

FOR THE PROPOSAL — YES _____________

AGAINST THE PROPOSAL — NO _____________

Before the Secretary of State can put anything on the ballot, it has to be sent to the Attorney General’s office. Last week, Attorney General Drew Edmondson sent a letter to the Secretary of State, Speaker Benge and Senate President pro tem Glenn Coffee saying that what you read above ”did not comply with applicable laws.” So Attorney General Drew Edmondson is proposing changing it to the following:

The measure amends Sections 4 and 23 of Article 6 and Section 14 of Article 9 of the State Constitution. It limits the ability of voters to re-elect statewide elected officers. It limits the number of years a person may serve in each statewide elected office. Service as Governor is limited to eight years. Service as Lieutenant Governor is limited to eight years. Service as Attorney General is limited to eight years. Service as Treasurer is limited to eight years. Service as Commissioner of Labor is limited to eight years. Service as Auditor and Inspector is limited to eight years. Service as Superintendent of Public Instruction is limited to eight years. Service as Insurance Commissioner is limited to eight years. Service as Corporation Commissioner is limited to twelve years. Service for less than a full term would not count against the limit on service. Years of service need not be consecutive for the limits to apply. Officers serving when this measure is passed can complete their terms. All such serving officers, except the Governor, can also serve an additional eight or twelve years. The Legislature could pass laws to carry out these changes.

Look at that sentence I highlighted and tell me if it’s necessary at all. If anything, it may confuse voters into thinking they will not be able to re-elect anyone which is false. If that sentence were taken out, would it change the paragraph at all? Of course not. So why is a misleading statement being put into a ballot measure? Aren’t they supposed to be clear and concise? It makes you wonder why Drew Edmondson, who could be on the ballot in 2010 himself, would want to mislead voters.

But consider that this is the same Drew Edmondson who personally lobbied lawmakers last year to not pass term limits. And now that he’s failed in that regard, he’s trying to submarine the ballot measure with confusing language. We ask that Attorney General Edmondson remove that misleading statement from the ballot measure and let the people vote.

Federal “Freedom of Choice” Act Supported by Obama would Nullify State Abortion Laws, says Oklahoma’s Sally Kern

Oklahoma State Rep. Sally Kern (R-Oklahoma City) has filed House Joint Resolution 1009 in Oklahoma stating opposition to a Federal abortion rights law that President-Elect Barack Obama said he would sign into law once in office.

The federal “Freedom of Choice Act” that Obama supports would classify abortion as a fundamental right in the same category as the right of free speech and the right to vote. The new classification would in turn invalidate all state laws that interfere with abortion.

Kern said, of the proposed Federal Act:

“This act is an infringement on states’ rights. Abortion is not a right guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution but states’ rights are guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment. The Freedom of Choice Act would nullify our laws regarding abortion.

“This act would strip away our right to debate abortion policy in the state Legislature and support a radical ideology of unregulated abortion-on-demand. Oklahoma’s lawmakers need to let Congress know how they feel about this measure.”

Kern’s House Joint Resolution 1009, if approved, urges the U.S. Congress to oppose the law, citing the states’ right to regulate abortion in an effort to protect women’s health.

 

Activist OK Judge’s Ruling Contradicted by President Bush

Last week, activist U.S. District Judge Robin J. Cauthron just ruled HB 1804, Oklahoma’s new immigration law, set to go into effect July 1st, “unconstitutional.”

State Rep. Randy Terrill (R-Moore), the author of HB 1804 (pictured, right), responded yesterday, saying a judicial ruling to halt implementation of the private employer provisions of House Bill 1804, the state’s omnibus anti-illegal immigration law, was undermined this week by a presidential executive order.

It was clear from the very beginning that Judge Cauthron’s ruling was inconsistent with recent decisions in other similar cases, most notably in Missouri and Arizona,” said Terrill, a Moore Republican who authored House Bill 1804. “Now Present Bush’s executive order makes it obvious the judge’s ruling was wrong and should be overturned.

Last week, Judge Robin Cauthron issued a ruling that prevents implementation of the private employer provisions of House Bill 1804. Those provisions would have required employers contracting with the state government to verify that their employees are not illegal aliens by using a simple federal database (E-Verify), allowed Oklahoma citizens to sue an employer who fired them while retaining an illegal alien to perform the same job, and required businesses to check the citizenship status of independent contractors.

In that ruling, Cauthron claimed “federal law prohibits use of the Status Verification Systems to verify employment eligibility.”

That claim was contradicted on Monday by President George W. Bush when he issued Executive Order 12829, which requires anyone contracting with the federal government to use the E-verify system. Read more