The LATEST

As a lifelong conservative, a Republican pollster, and someone who has spent decades helping Republican candidates win in Oklahoma and across the country, I understand the instinct to be cautious when it comes to changes in how we conduct our elections. But I also believe that when a system no longer serves the principles we claim to uphold, we must be willing to reform it.

That’s why I support State Question 836 — the ballot initiative proposing open primaries — and why I believe my fellow conservatives should, too.

Let me be clear: SQ 836 is not about allowing Democrats to vote in Republican primaries. It proposes instead to eliminate partisan primaries altogether and restore fairness and accountability to a system that’s increasingly broken. Under SQ 836, all candidates — Republican, Democrat, independent or otherwise —appear on the same ballot, and all voters, regardless of party, get to choose the candidate they believe is best. The top two vote-getters then advance to the general election.

This reform is rooted in the foundational principles of conservatism — especially fairness, accountability and respect for individual rights. It puts an end to a system where taxpayers are forced to fund elections they are not allowed to participate in. That practice runs counter to both fiscal responsibility and the conservative rejection of taxation without representation. Political parties are essentially private organizations, yet primaries are publicly funded — even though many voters are locked out from participating. No conservative should accept a structure where citizens are compelled to financially support elections that systematically exclude them.

The result of that exclusion is widespread voter disenfranchisement. In 2024, 86% of Oklahoma’s federal, state and county offices either had no general election or a general election that was rendered virtually meaningless because there were not two major party candidates on the ballot. That left hundreds of thousands of voters — Republicans in heavily Democratic districts (like my district in Norman), Democrats in Republican strongholds, and independents across the board — without a meaningful vote. This isn’t just a technical flaw; it’s a structural failure that denies representation to large swaths of the electorate. If we believe in responsive government and equal representation, we can’t ignore how many Oklahomans are shut out under the current system.

SQ 836 also protects the constitutional right of freedom of association. I fought for Oklahoma’s Right-to-Work law because I believed no one should be compelled to join a union just to earn a living. I feel the same about our current primary system. It is wrong to force someone to join a political party just to cast a meaningful ballot. Whether the dominant party is Democrat or Republican, the principle remains: No one should be required to affiliate with a private organization in order to participate in a publicly funded election.

Some worry that open primaries will weaken party organizations, but I see it as an opportunity to reinvigorate them. Since the Citizens United court decision that greenlit unlimited corporate spending in elections, grassroots activists have often been overshadowed by corporate dark money groups. SQ 836 offers a chance for the grassroots to reclaim influence. With all candidates on one ballot, party organizations will have more incentive — and more power — to engage early and endorse candidates who represent their values. That engagement can make a real difference in determining who advances to the general election.

Finally, SQ 836 creates a system that rewards candidates who can appeal to more than just a narrow partisan base. It fosters competition. It demands better ideas. And it leads to outcomes that more closely reflect the will of the people. Isn’t that what we want in a representative republic?

As conservatives, we talk often about fairness, freedom, and accountability. SQ 836 delivers on all three. It’s time to stop defending a status quo that no longer works and embrace a reform that strengthens our democracy, respects our principles and empowers our voters.

This isn’t a threat to conservatism — it’s a return to it.

Pat McFerron is a principal in a consulting firm, CMA Strategies, that does regular polling for businesses and political candidates. 

Read at The Oklahoman 

Key Points:

• An Oklahoma Senate bill proposes significant changes to the state's initiative and referendum process, sparking debate about public input and legislative authority.
• Supporters argue the bill enhances transparency by requiring disclosure of paid signature gatherers and limiting out-of-state influence, while opponents view it as an attempt to restrict citizen participation in policymaking.
• The bill's passage through committee highlights the ongoing tension between those who believe in empowering citizens to directly shape policy and those who favor a more centralized legislative process.

A bill that would make dramatic changes to the state's initiative and referendum process cleared a Senate committee last week and is expected to be heard by the full Senate soon.

Supporters of the measure said the bill would "bring greater transparency to the initiative petition process by requiring paid signature gatherers to disclose who is paying them and stipulating that only Oklahoma residents or entities can pay people to collect signatures for an initiative petition."

Opponents of the measure said the bill is an attempt to restrict public input and give the Legislature more authority than the general public.

The measure's co-author, Senate President Pro Tempore Lonnie Paxton, R-Tuttle, acknowledged the bill does add new restrictions - namely on how signatures for a petition are gathered.

"Someone who wants an initiative petition would need to get a little more cross section of the state of Oklahoma," Paxton said Thursday afternoon. "They can't just focus on one area of the state."

Oklahoma is one of several states with initiative petition process

Paxton said Oklahoma was one of only a few states in the U.S. that have an initiative petition process.

He added that he would argue that the process doesn't always work well. However, records show that more than half the country - 26 states - have some form of initiative-and-referendum process.

That number includes several states surrounding Oklahoma, such as Arkansas, Colorado and Missouri and the state which Oklahoma modeled its own initiative process after - Nebraska.

"Our process isn't that difficult," Paxton said. "What happens is that sometimes an issue gets put on the ballot then gets diluted by (those) who have the money to put the ads out there."

Paxton said Oklahomans elect legislators to make decisions, adding "and we're responsible to our voters." He said he didn't want to do away with the process, but added he didn't like it when signatures from a petition could be gathered in just one or two big cities to place it on the ballot.

In a statement about the bill, Sen. David Bullard, R-Durant, the bill's author, said Senate Bill 1027 establishes that no more than 10% of the total number of signatures to get an initiative petition on the ballot come from any one county with more than 400,000 residents.

Bullard said no more than 4% of signatures shall come from any one county with a population of less than 400,000. He said this change will require campaigns to collect signatures from a minimum of around 20 counties, which he believes will give rural Oklahomans a greater say in whether an initiative petition qualifies for the ballot.

"These are much-needed changes to protect Oklahoma's initiative petition process from out-of-state interest groups who want to change our state laws and Constitution," Bullard said. "We need clear transparency and commonsense guardrails on how initiative petition campaigns collect signatures, who's behind them and who's funding them."

Secretary of state would be able to reject initiative petitions under bill

However, an analysis of the bill shows the measure would shift authority away from the Oklahoma Supreme Court by giving the secretary of state — a political appointee with no legal training - the power to reject initiative petitions based on subjective criteria.

In addition, the bill would require petition signers to verify they have read an entire ballot title before signing and would eliminate paid petition circulators by prohibiting per-signature compensation. It also would require the circulators to be Oklahoma residents.

The bill also would require additional financial disclosures and reporting requirements for grassroots organizations, and impose new limits on signature collection by capping the number of valid signatures from larger counties.

At least one nationally recognized expert on the U.S. Constitution said the bill's restrictions on the initiative process are unconstitutional. Robert McCampbell, an Oklahoma City attorney who specializes in constitutional law, wrote that the bill was unconstitutional.

"The bill includes provisions that restrict petition circulators, prohibit out-of-state contributions, grant broad discretionary power to the secretary of state over citizen-initiated petitions, and retroactively change the procedure for initiative petitions. Each of these provisions conflicts with well-established legal precedent," McCampbell wrote in a four-page memo analyzing the measure.

The government, McCampbell said, is not free to "impose burdensome roadblocks to the citizen initiative process."

"The courts are unanimous that circulating a petition is 'core political speech' where First Amendment protection is at its 'zenith," he wrote. "The restrictions on core political speech embodied in SB 1027 cannot survive scrutiny under the First Amendment."

Other opponents of the bill, echoing McCampbell, said SB 1027 would "make it dramatically harder for Oklahomans to bring issues directly to a vote, undermining one of the most fundamental avenues for public participation in policymaking."

"(The) vote to advance SB 1027 is a disappointing step backward for democracy in Oklahoma. By making it harder for citizens to bring issues to the ballot, lawmakers are silencing the voices of everyday Oklahomans and limiting public participation in policymaking," said Margaret Kobos, founder of Oklahoma United. "The right to petition is fundamental to our state's history and this bill adds unnecessary barriers that will make it nearly impossible for grassroots efforts to succeed."

Bob Burke, a local attorney and expert in Oklahoma history, said the bill would diminish and lessen the rights of people to petition their government. "It's 180 degrees from what the Founding Fathers of this state intended for the future," he said.

Burke said delegates to the 1906 Oklahoma Constitutional Convention were concerned about a governor or the Legislature being too powerful. "They were so concerned about that, that in Article Five, Section Two, the following words appeared: The first power reserved by the people is the initiative," he said. "Then it goes on to say the second power is the referendum."

"I don't understand why anyone is against the citizens of the state petitioning their government," Burke said. "If there is a concern that the executive and legislative branches are not taking care of, then the members of the Constitutional Convention wanted to have an easy road - a convenient way (for the public) to petition their government."

Senate Bill 1027 passed the committee in a 7-2 vote. The bill is now eligible to be heard by the full Senate.

A study by the Election Lab at the University of Florida found that Oklahoma had the lowest voter turnout during the Presidential election.

On Saturday's Hot Seat, News on 6's political analyst Scott Mitchell shares the work a group is doing to turn those voter numbers around in the future.

To address this issue, Mitchell's guest, Pat McFerron, discussed the efforts of the "Yes on 835" group to reform Oklahoma's primary system. McFerron explained, "We're going to get rid of the exclusionary Republican and Democrat primaries and create one ballot. It's basically, it's how every city, town, community in Oklahoma does it."

McFerron emphasized the importance of greater civic participation.

"I think if you end up having those debates in the general election where you can invite everybody in to participate, you have a better chance to change actual behavior." He added, "If we make it where we tell people your vote doesn't matter, your vote doesn't count, and they don't participate in that, they're less likely to participate in planning commissions or boards or food banks or any other civic engagement."

However, McFerron acknowledged that the "ruling class" within the Republican party may resist these changes.

"The thing they don't want is the people. And I'm a Republican, I mean, and you know that, but for those watching, I was a state commitment for the Republican Party back in 1986 I was very active in the right to work effort. I've been involved in more than 100 successful legislative campaigns for Republican candidates, gubernatorial, presidential I was the only pollster Trump used in 2016 in the primary nationwide. And so those that are in power don't want to lose it, and they can control what they're doing right now, and it's insular."

In the coming months, the "Yes on 835" group will be working to gather signatures to get the state question on the ballot.

Watch the interview here.

Despite a record number of Oklahomans voting in the presidential election, turnout dropped

OKLAHOMA CITY — Despite record voter registration and early voting participation, Oklahoma had the lowest turnout rate among eligible voters in the country, one analysis found.

Oklahoma’s turnout rate for the Nov. 5 election was 53%, the lowest in the nation, according to a report from the  University of Florida. The report included anyone eligible to vote in the state, including Oklahomans who are not registered.

The state’s 2024 turnout of registered voters was also lower than the past two presidential elections.

Of Oklahoma’s registered voters, about 1.56 million — or 64% — voted in the 2024 presidential election. While nearly 4,000 more votes were cast this year than in 2020, records show the state had about 183,000 more voters on its rolls heading into the Nov. 5 election.

Experts said the drop in turnout can be attributed to a lack of competitive races at the state level, disillusionment of young voters and a lack of motivation to vote. 

On social media, the election board reported that the current vote count does not include provisional ballots, which will be counted Friday. Election officials said the lower turnout was due to a higher number of Oklahomans being registered to vote than in previous years. 

The Oklahoma State Election Board reported that voter registration exceeded 2.4 million people prior to Election Day, the highest number since the board began tracking the statistic this century. Turnout for the four-day period of in-person early voting was over 293,000 which surpassed a record previously set in 2020 in a three-day voting period. 

James Davenport, associate dean for Social Sciences in the Liberal Arts and Sciences division of Rose State College, said low turnout can happen when Oklahomans have no local or state-level competitive races to show up for. 

He said Oklahoma’s strong Republican dominance means that both Republican and Democratic voters are less likely to feel a need to show up to vote. The state’s GOP holds a supermajority in both chambers of the Legislature, all statewide elected offices and congressional seats. 

“I think the lack of competitiveness, the dominance of one party, and the fact that Oklahoma has a lot of places that are decided in the primaries so you have fewer general election races to begin with is going to depress turnout in these general elections as well,” Davenport said. “I think all of those factors are the largest factors in why you don’t see the kind of turnout that you might see in some of the other states.”

He said when Oklahomans have more high-profile elections that are more competitive such as governor or attorney general on the ballot, more people show up to the polls. 

Davenport said the record-setting early voting turnout could be indicative of a demand for opportunities to vote earlier.

Emily Stacey, professor of political science at Rose State College, said the lower turnout was surprising in comparison to the momentum and enthusiasm from the presidential campaigns. She said momentum doesn’t always translate to action at the polls.

“Democrats, particularly the youth, don’t see their vote actually turning into something,” she said. “They don’t know where their vote is going, or it’s not turning into success or a candidate change. And so after a certain point, I think that may get a little disheartening particularly for Democrats of youth in this state.”

Stacey said there is no “magic bullet” to solve low voter turnout in Oklahoma. She said making Election Day a federal holiday or bringing open primaries to Oklahoma could help, but focusing on civic education for youth is crucial.

Oklahoma’s top election official, Paul Ziriax, thanked election board employees, poll workers and law enforcement Wednesday for making the election possible. 

“As Oklahoma’s chief election official, I am proud of the Oklahomans who exercised their right to vote in this election,” he said in a statement. “I am deeply grateful for the poll workers, county election officials, and State Election Board employees who worked so hard to make this election possible even with heavy turnout and despite the storms that ravaged parts of our state in the days before the election.”

Read it at Oklahoma Voice.