Agricultural News
Two Months Out- Oklahoma Lawmakers Scott Biggs and Casey Murdock Say 777 Needed for Future Attacks on Agriculture
Thu, 08 Sep 2016 06:44:14 CDT
With the November General Election now two months away, there is one thing that is certain about the 2016 ballot that Oklahoma voters will consider. It will be loaded with State Questions- and they are likely to provide much of the drama leading up to election day at the state level. Leading the pack, based on the likely resources that both the proponents and the opponents may end up spending is State Question 777, the Right to Farm Constitutional Amendment.
One of the authors of HR 1012, the underlying measure that was overwhelmingly passed by the State Legislature in 2015, is Scott Biggs. Radio Oklahoma Ag Network Farm Director Ron Hays sat down with State Representative Biggs and State Representative Casey Murdock at the State Capitol on Wednesday to talk about their take on the rhetoric on State Question 777 that has been flying to this point- and is likely to become even louder between now and November 8th. You can hear their conversation by clicking on the LISTEN BAR below.
Biggs addressed several of the arguments being made by opponents of the State Question, starting with the claim that an out of state group known as ALEC wrote the language of the proposal- and that the group, the American Legislative Exchange Council, is the mouthpiece of Big Corporations. Drew Edmondson with the Oklahoma Stewardship Council wrote in a local magazine, OKC Pets, about his concerns with ALEC, and contends that the language for 777 was "copied and pasted from a measure written by ALEC and its corporate members." Biggs says not true- "You know, it's funny but we passed several ALEC bills this last session, both Republicans and Democrats supporting, but this bill was not one of them. This bill did not come from ALEC. ALEC had some model farm legislation dealing with nuisance laws which we already have on the books and have had on the books for awhile, but they had nothing on a state amendment like this- this bill came from Oklahoma cattlemen, Oklahoma producers, Oklahoma Associations that protect the interests of farmers- it did not come from out of state."
Biggs also dismissed the claims by Edmondson in the OKC Pets article that 777 could be the first step in rolling back state regulations on puppy mill operations and cockfighting. Biggs says that both of these activities are now illegal in Oklahoma- and that the state legislature is not interested in making any changes in their status. Of the claims by the former AG, Biggs says "that's something that he knows is an absolute false argument- he knows that but he continues to put it out there because it tugs at emotions."
Hays and Biggs also talked about the compelling state interest language and water issues, which he says has already been addressed by a bill passed by both the House and Senate in 2016- and signed into law by the Governor- declaring that water is a compelling state interest in Oklahoma. He believes that if there was ever a challenge to a water bill impacting agriculture- any Judge would consider the intent of the Legislature from the 2016 legislation on water being a compelling state interest based on the language found in the constitutional amendment.
Felt, Oklahoma farmer and State Lawmaker Casey Murdock is especially upset with the "Vote No" claims that the State Question is only for corporate agriculture. Murdock contends it is needed to offer protection to smaller producers, of which he says he is one. "I run 150 mama cows- there are regulations that could be pushed that could put me out of business under which I could not operate." Murdock believes that a large farm or ranch could adapt their operation to comply with a more restrictive regulation that might be adopted- but a smaller farmer/rancher might find it economically impossible to do so. He adds that State Question 777 is a forward looking proposal. "Right now today, we have a strong rural caucus at the Capitol- but what will the face of the Capitol look like twenty years from now...777 will protect agriculture and rural Oklahoma 20 years from now- we have to look after the small farmer and 777 does that."
You can hear the full conversation that Hays and Biggs and Murdock had on Wednesday by clicking on the LISTEN BAR below.
If you want to learn more about State Question 777, we have several resources that you can go and investigate. To begin with, we would suggest you go and read the actual State Question from the official State of Oklahoma website- click here for the ballot language for 777. The State Legislature passed underlying legislation in spring of 2015 to send the Right to Farm amendment to a vote of the people by votes of 90 to 6 in the State House and 39 to 6 in the State Senate. After the vote, Radio Oklahoma Ag Network Farm Director Ron Hays sat down with one of the lead authors of the underlying bill, State Representative Scott Biggs, to discuss the measure- click here to review that story and their conversation.
There is one PAC that is registered with the State of Oklahoma that is raising money with the intent of supporting the State Question- Oklahoma Farmers Care. Click here for their website. There are two PACs registered with the State of Oklahoma opposed to the State Question, Click on their names to jump to their respective websites- the Oklahoma Stewardship Council and Oklahomans for Food, Farm and Families. After the Stewardship Council was formed, Hays talked with former Attorney General Drew Edmondson about the efforts to organize a "NO" vote on the measure- click here for that story from November of 2015.
A new resource that has just been released is from Oklahoma State University- Dr. Shannon Ferrell and Dr. Larry Sanders have written a Fact Sheet on State Question 777- click here to go and read their analysis.
WebReadyTM Powered by WireReady® NSI
Top Agricultural News
More Headlines...
