Shocking Move! Why a New York Group is Threatening to Reform Oklahoma’s Election System—You Won’t Believe What’s at Stake!

In Oklahoma, a significant push is underway to overhaul the state’s electoral system by adopting a California-style "top two" election method. Advocates of State Question 836 (SQ 836) often tout their efforts as a grassroots movement aimed at enhancing voter participation and choice. However, the roots of this initiative, particularly its prominent backers, extend far beyond the Sooner State, reaching into the heart of New York City.

Oklahoma currently employs a traditional electoral system where Republican and Democratic voters select their respective party nominees in separate primaries. The winners then face off in the November general election alongside any independent candidates who file. This system, while familiar to many, is perceived by proponents of SQ 836 as limiting and partisan.

Should SQ 836 pass, all candidates—regardless of party affiliation—would appear on a single ballot. Every voter would participate in selecting their top two candidates, who would advance to the general election, potentially setting the stage for a November ballot that might feature two candidates from the same party. This approach closely mirrors the electoral system in California, where elections often culminate in contests between two candidates from the same political party, significantly shaping the state’s political landscape.

The movement to place SQ 836 on the ballot is gaining traction through an initiative-petition effort that aims to collect 172,993 valid signatures. However, the alignment with an out-of-state organization, Open Primaries, raises questions about the initiative's grassroots claims. Open Primaries has been instrumental in supporting the Oklahoma campaign, with its Senior Vice President Jeremy Gruber present during the petition submission at the Oklahoma Capitol. The organization, headquartered at 244 Madison Avenue, #1106 in New York, has declared its commitment to championing the Vote Yes 836 campaign.

Critics of the initiative have pointed out that Open Primaries, under the leadership of President John Opdycke, has a history of supporting independent and left-leaning political candidates. Opdycke's past includes involvement in the independent presidential campaign of Lenora Fulani, who is known for her avowedly Marxist views as a member of the New Alliance Party. This connection raises concerns about how much of the push for SQ 836 is genuinely rooted in local interests versus serving a broader national agenda.

Several Oklahoma figures advocating for SQ 836 also have ties to Open Primaries. For instance, Margaret Kobos, who founded the organization Oklahoma United, is noted as a spokesperson for Open Primaries. Additionally, Oklahoma City Mayor David Holt has collaborated with the group, contributing an introduction to an Open Primaries report praising the California-style election system they advocate.

This connection between Oklahoma's electoral reform efforts and an out-of-state organization has sparked debate among citizens and officials alike. Supporters argue that a top two system would increase voter engagement and provide more choices on the ballot, potentially breaking the dominance of entrenched political parties. However, detractors suggest that reliance on external funding and support can undermine the legitimacy of the movement as a true grassroots effort.

As the signature collection process continues, the outcome of this initiative remains uncertain. The implications of adopting a top two system could fundamentally alter the political dynamics in Oklahoma, impacting elections in ways that may resonate well beyond state lines. The conversation surrounding SQ 836 highlights the ongoing struggle between traditional party structures and attempts to innovate within the electoral process to foster greater inclusivity and representation.

As Oklahoma voters consider this proposal, they face a critical decision: will they embrace a shift toward a more open electoral system shaped by external influences, or will they choose to maintain their traditional party primaries that have defined the state's political landscape for decades?