Oklahoma Senate Bill SJR1

Oklahoma 2022 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/1/21
• Refer: 2/2/21
• Report Pass: 2/16/22

Caption

Constitutional amendment; modifying activity prohibited for members and former members of the Legislature. Ballot title.

Impact

If approved, SJR1 would significantly alter how former members of the Legislature are able to engage with state commissions and contracts, potentially allowing them to serve in roles that were previously barred during and after their terms. Additionally, it would grant the Legislature the authority to enact implementing legislation that could further delineate permissible activities. This change may lead to increased opportunities for former legislators to retain influence and positions in government or public service after their service concludes.

Summary

SJR1 is a Senate Joint Resolution aimed at amending Section 23 of Article V of the Oklahoma Constitution. This proposed amendment seeks to redefine the prohibitions on legislative activity for both current lawmakers and former members after their term ends. The bill intends to modify restrictions on receiving appointments and holding contracts that were created during the elected term, aiming to provide a clearer pathway for members of the Legislature to engage in various professional and legislative roles post-tenure.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SJR1 appears to be mixed, with some supporting it as a positive step toward flexibility and modernization of legislative practices, while others express concerns over ethics and potential conflicts of interest. Proponents argue that the restrictions currently in place are overly burdensome and do not reflect the reality of contemporary governance. Conversely, critics worry that easing these constraints could lead to corruption, favoritism, or undue influence from former legislators who may leverage their relationships for personal gain.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the potential ethical implications of allowing legislators to engage in contracts or appointments related to their prior legislative actions. Opponents argue that this could undermine trust in the legislative process and lead to a perception of corruption, while supporters contend that it is essential for attracting experienced individuals back into public service roles. The debate highlights the ongoing struggle between fostering a robust democratic governance structure and ensuring accountability and ethical standards within the legislative framework.