OKLAHOMA
CITY – It’s called ballot fatigue, and it can be the death knell for
some issues if voters tired of reading a lengthy ballot choose to mark
“no” on everything because they’re impatient.
It’s a concern for
some who see that the November 2010 general election ballot, more than
a year away, is already laden with eight questions generated by
legislators and at least one ballot initiative. Lawmakers and issue
supporters can add to the list next year as well.
The 2010 ballot
may also feature a heavy flock of candidates for top-of-the ballot
races, particularly in the contest to succeed Democratic Gov. Brad
Henry, who will have served two consecutive terms.
Oklahoma City
attorney Lee Slater, secretary of the State Election Board from
1971-1988, has seen ballot fatigue in action. He said it is
particularly noticeable on state-question ballots.
“We had a classic example of that,” he said.
On Thursday, Slater recalled one 10-question ballot that went down in flames in its entirety.
The
1984 general election ballot presented voters with a hefty array of
measures, some of which would have raised taxes or eliminated
exemptions.
Slater noticed that total voter numbers dropped
appreciably on each succeeding question. Although all of the issues
failed, the first on the ballot drew 15,579 votes more than the
next-to-last proposal, which pulled in the fewest.
In 1980, all eight state questions on the ballot failed.
“One
of the things that I think is important in having a number of questions
on the ballot is where yours is,” Slater said. “If you have a question
that the more people who vote, the more likely it is to pass or fail,
then obviously it would be to your advantage, depending upon how you
wanted it to come out, to have it at either the top or bottom of the
ballot.”
Slater said there is also a presumption that an
unpopular question, one that generates a lot of “no” votes, will prompt
some voters to turn down all issues on a ballot.
“I think that is
not as true with ‘yes’ votes,” he said. “It’s harder to get people to
vote ‘yes’ on all of them than it is ‘no’ on all of them.”
Slater said he doesn’t know how that voter tendency might affect the 2010 ballot.
At
one recent general election, in 2004, a nine-question slate of ballot
issues, some of which drew heated legislative debate, was approved.
That was the year Oklahoma voters finally gave a thumbs-up to a state
lottery, defined marriage as a union between one man and one woman,
approved casino-type gaming and increased the tobacco tax, among other
high-publicity issues. The first question in line on that ballot did
receive the highest number of votes, 1,435,519, with the lowest number
of votes among the other proposals gaining 1,384,265.
When it
comes to ballot questions generated by lawmakers following Henry vetoes
– including Senate confirmation of Workers’ Compensation Court judges
and requiring voters to present a valid ID at the polls – Slater said
their fate could be affected by whether the governor actively campaigns
against them or legislative leaders work for their passage.
Things
can work out differently at special elections, which are called for
specific, focused purposes, and not cluttered up with candidates,
Slater said.
Senate President Pro Tem Glenn Coffee, R-Oklahoma
City, said he has concern about the fate of some of the 2010 measures,
given the crowded ballot.
“But, many of these are important issues,” Coffee said.
The
Senate leader said he believes some issues, such as workers’
compensation reform, could be kept off the ballot if they could be
resolved legislatively. He said he expects that issue to be on the
legislative agenda next session.
Senate Democratic Leader Charlie Laster, D-Shawnee, who sees a problem with crowded ballots, said the 2004 ballot was unique.
“It’s
possible that there was more controversy in the Legislature than there
was among the public,” he said of the issues on that ballot.
Laster also said those gaming-related proposals presented voters with a cohesive theme.
Laster said the same thing occurred with the state’s right-to-work law, which sparked a lengthy controversy among lawmakers.
“The people were ready for it when it came out,” he said.
Laster sees the measures currently destined for the 2010 ballot as more of a mixed bag.
“There
are some things that the people probably are not going to identify
with, one way or the other, as easily as gaming,” he said.
The 2010 ballot could be further extended, Laster said.
“We still have another legislative session,” he said.
Laster
said one has to wonder how much roll-off or under-voting may occur when
people do not cast votes on everything due to the length of the ballot.
“You
certainly have to wonder if there will be a lot of ‘no’ votes just
because people think the Legislature is not doing its job in making
good policy, instead shucking it off for the voters,” he added.
Laster said he has heard rumors of a building “no them all” coalition.
“It’s preliminary at this point,” he said.
As
to voters having to resolve issues some see as legislative matters,
Coffee said, “We’ve got a divided government. We have a Democrat
governor and a Republican Legislature. There are simply some issues
that we couldn’t agree on, and the Legislature felt some of those
issues were important enough to go ahead and put them on the ballot and
let the people decide. But I think all of us would much prefer that the
Legislature dealt with it.”
Issues headed for the November 2010
ballot would also prohibit mandating that state funds be appropriated
based upon a pre-set formula, ban former governors who have served two
consecutive terms from sitting out at least once and running again, and
make English the state’s official language for government purposes,
among other proposals. The no-formula measure would block a funding
initiative backed by the Oklahoma Education Association.
Current
Oklahoma law does not say specifically whether a two-term governor
could run again after waiting out a term. The term-limiting measure
would also bar certain other state officials from serving longer than
eight years in office, with members of the Oklahoma Corporation
Commission limited to 12 years.