Skip to main content

Oklahoma Elections: For Insiders Only?


When is election day? Most people probably assume it’s the first Tuesday in November. That makes sense, since that’s the date for statewide elections, and, in even numbered years, federal elections as well. Would it surprise you to learn that there is an election scheduled in Oklahoma every single month in 2019? That is not to say that every district has an election every month. That would be a hassle - the well-engaged citizen would have to make it to his local precinct every 4 weeks to make sure his views are adequately expressed. The slipshod way local elections are scheduled is far more shocking and less predictable than that.

One would be forgiven for thinking, on first glance, that Oklahoma allows government bodies to change lawmakers and raise taxes through oddly scheduled, poorly noticed elections on (almost) whichever Tuesday they want. However, in reality there are “only” 15 days per year when local elections can be scheduled. Still, this means that the party in power gets to set the date of their election. School boards and local governments can set elections in any month they choose. This could be a Tuesday in July when people are on vacation, or in December when the rush of the holidays is upon us. In either case, voter turnout is likely to be low. A few stalwart supporters could easily carry any vote to approval. The rest of the citizens impacted by the vote may be completely unaware of its timing or even of its existence. It is left to the county election board to determine how to let voters in their district know about the times and dates of elections. 

This is no way to run a democracy. Majority rule and the consent of the governed are the touchstones of the American way of life. Only through the due process of scheduling reasonable elections at well-noticed times can the citizens of Oklahoma be truly be heard and represented. Scheduling elections for a date when no one expects it – so that only those voters who work in, or are somehow connected to, the local government remember to vote – is, at best, undemocratic and, at worst, a sham. 

The right to vote carries responsibilities to be sure - being informed on the basic issues and candidates should be a prerequisite for anyone casting a vote. But it should not be difficult for a reasonably informed citizen to know when it’s time to vote. Oklahoma should put procedures in place to ensure that people know when votes will happen, and that there are not a burdensome number of voting days in a year. Any ballot measure should have to happen concurrently with the statewide primary. Or, if the need is sufficiently urgent, on the date of the statewide primary. 

In a perfect world, there would be only two election dates each year: the primary and the general. However, There may be some real logistical reasons that school board and other local elections can’t happen on the date of the statewide elections - congressional districts do not always follow the same lines as school districts or county offices. Therefore, voters might be required to go to multiple polling places on the same day. As this would also be burdensome, the smart solution is for the state to intervene and ensure that, at a minimum, all school board elections occur on the same day across the state. Likewise, all county elections should occur on the same day statewide, as well as all municipal elections. Any ballot measure impacting such a district should also occur on the same day as elections for those officials. Furthermore, all Oklahoma elections should require actual notice, such as mailers to every household for each and every election scheduled. This would ensure that election dates are not burdensome to the average voter, that all citizens are aware of the elections which could affect their household, and that the citizens’ will is made law, not the government’s. It would also be somewhat expensive - this is a feature, not a bug. The cost would encourage localities and school boards to work together to hold elections on the same day, or better yet, find a way to hold them on the days of the statewide primary and general elections.

Voter turnout is not something the state can or should control. Decisions are made by those who show up. But there should be a real effort to ensure that elections are publicized enough that those who care to show up, can.  

By Mike R. Davis, 1889 Institute Research Fellow
Send comments to mdavis@1889institute.org 


Popular posts from this blog

Lies We Tell in Government, and Our Debts to Truth

HBO’s mini-series,  Chernobyl ,  is a drama depicting  the disastrous  1986  explosion ,  and  hero ic efforts to control the  resulting  meltdown ,  of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in Ukraine  (then part of the Soviet Union ).  A flawed man, but true hero,  Valery  Alexeyvich   Legasov , worked tirelessly to ameliorate the disaster’s consequences and  chiefly  investigated its cause. He was  Deputy Director of the  Kurchatov  Institute of Atomic Energ y , a Soviet elite, who  is portrayed at the end of  the  series making a dramatic speech at a trial about how the nuclear reactor exploded, when  such an explosion in that type of reactor  should not have been possible. In the course of the series, the audience  learns  that the reactor had a design flaw that had been covered up by the Soviet State (true).  The audience also learns  that...

Present Reforms to Keep the Ghost of State Questions Past from Creating Future Headaches

Oklahoma, like many western states, allows its citizens to directly participate in the democratic process through citizen initiatives and referendums. In a referendum, the legislature directs a question to the people — usually to modify the state constitution, since the legislature can change statutes itself. An initiative requires no legislative involvement, but is initiated by the people via signature gathering, and can be used to modify statute or amend the constitution. Collectively, the initiatives and referendums that make it onto the ballot are known as State Questions.   Recently, there have been calls to make it more difficult to amend the constitution. At least two proposals are being discussed. One would diversify the signature requirement by demanding that a proportional amount of signatures come from each region of the state. The other would require a sixty percent majority to adopt a constitutional amendment rather than the fifty percent plus one currently in place. ...

Even If Pandemic Models Were Right, Were Covid Lockdowns Wrong?

1889 has been quite critical of pandemic modeling that government officials have relied on for their Covid-19 response. We have also criticized shutdown orders in light of flaws in the models. But let’s assume for a moment that the worst predictions really would have come true if nothing was done. Even in those worst case scenarios, it’s fair to ask if our governments did the right thing. Were involuntary shutdowns justified, or would people have found a way to both limit the contagion and maintain some level of productivity? Was putting healthy citizens under house arrest acceptable even if they were willing to risk infection?   While large groups of people are often compared to herd animals, we are not sheep. We don’t behave like animals. We can, have, and will step up when our communities are in danger. When government and journalists give incomplete or false information, people will act irrationally. Depending on the situation, some will blindly follow the first aut...

The Legislators in Black Robes Strike Again

Once again, the Oklahoma Supreme Court has usurped the Legislature’s constitutional authority. This time, it has legislated new election rules, behind closed doors, on a compressed timetable, and without public input. All with an election looming in which the new rules will apply. On Monday, the Court eliminated the requirement that citizens voting by absentee ballot have their identity verified by a notary. If left unaddressed by the Legislature, absentee voters will be permitted to vote with little more than a pinky-swear promise that they are who they say they are, while in-person voters will still be required to show ID at the polling place. The Court’s decision not only harms the integrity of our election process, but was arrived at through a highly unusual process. The legal challenge to the notarization requirement was launched by a coalition of progressive organizations calling themselves “Let the People Vote.” Their stated reasoning for allowing unverified voting is...