Oklahoma House Bill HB2173

Oklahoma 2022 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/1/21
• Refer: 2/2/21
• Report Pass: 2/11/21
• Engrossed: 3/1/21
• Refer: 3/15/21
• Report Pass: 3/24/21

Caption

Vacancies in office; United States Senator; requiring certain appointment; providing for special elections; duties of Governor.

Impact

The modification of existing laws is significant, as it centralizes the process of filling vacancies under the authority of the Governor while providing a timeframe for execution. This could enforce a more streamlined process, which some legislators may argue promotes timely governmental stability. Furthermore, the lack of a special election in certain circumstances is likely aimed at reducing electoral costs and administrative burdens on the state, reflecting a shift towards efficiency in governance.

Summary

House Bill 2173 addresses the protocol for filling vacancies in the offices of United States Senators and Representatives from Oklahoma. The bill stipulates that the Governor is responsible for calling a special election to fill such vacancies and issuing a Writ of Election within 30 days following the vacancy. However, the bill outlines specific conditions under which a special election would not be necessary, particularly if the vacancy occurs in an even-numbered year when the term expires the following year. In these cases, the candidate elected in the regular General Election would also be considered as having been elected to fill the unexpired term.

Sentiment

The sentiment around HB 2173 appears to be mixed. Supporters advocate for the bill's practicality and assert that it fills a necessary gap in the legislative process regarding vacancies. They believe it enhances governance efficiency and aligns electoral processes more closely. Conversely, critics may see potential downsides in terms of diminished public input through special elections, raising concerns about the implications of appointing individuals without the direct choice of voters in certain scenarios.

Contention

A noted point of contention in the discussions surrounding HB 2173 is the decision-making power vested in the Governor regarding judicial and legislative appointments. Critics may argue that this could lead to a lack of representative democracy, as key positions would be filled by appointments rather than through the electorate's choice, especially in cases where elections are circumvented. The discussions reflect broader tensions regarding the balance of power between elected officials and the appointment processes.