Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
State Questions
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="KOPBET" data-source="post: 2917425" data-attributes="member: 4153"><p>Best thing to do is to read pro and con opinions and come to your own conclusion.</p><p></p><p><a href="https://ballotpedia.org/Oklahoma_Right_to_Farm_Amendment,_State_Question_777_(2016)" target="_blank">https://ballotpedia.org/Oklahoma_Right_to_Farm_Amendment,_State_Question_777_(2016)</a></p><p></p><p></p><p>Last thing I want to do is agree with the Tulsa World, but it is what it is.</p><p></p><p>The <em><strong>Journal Record</strong></em> editorial board wrote the following in opposition to State Question 777:<a href="https://ballotpedia.org/Oklahoma_Right_to_Farm_Amendment,_State_Question_777_(2016)#cite_note-26" target="_blank"><u>[26]</u></a></p><p></p><p>“The law was not written by local farmers; ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council, approved the model legislation in 1996 and again in 2013. The state has a model; the Legislature can add, subtract and update laws as the world changes. In 1776, no one imagined a need for laws governing self-driving cars, but the public certainly can imagine the value of those today. No one knows how the agriculture industry will grow and change in Oklahoma, but the public representatives at the Capitol must be allowed to help the law adapt to whatever might surface. We must not cede governance of an industry to the industry. Voters must defeat State Question 777 in November.<a href="https://ballotpedia.org/Oklahoma_Right_to_Farm_Amendment,_State_Question_777_(2016)#cite_note-quotedisclaimer-4" target="_blank"><u>[4]</u></a> ” </p><p><em><strong></strong></em></p><p><em><strong>The Norman Transcript</strong></em> said:<a href="https://ballotpedia.org/Oklahoma_Right_to_Farm_Amendment,_State_Question_777_(2016)#cite_note-27" target="_blank"><u>[27]</u></a></p><p></p><p>“In effect, SQ 777 would freeze any new legislation directed at farming or ranching. The industry should certainly be allowed to develop and utilize new technologies, methods and practices, but the state and cities should be able to pass laws and ordinances when necessary. Restricting them from doing so takes power away from leaders elected by Oklahomans.<a href="https://ballotpedia.org/Oklahoma_Right_to_Farm_Amendment,_State_Question_777_(2016)#cite_note-quotedisclaimer-4" target="_blank"><u>[4]</u></a> ”</p><p><em><strong></strong></em></p><p><em><strong>The Tulsa World</strong></em> said:<a href="https://ballotpedia.org/Oklahoma_Right_to_Farm_Amendment,_State_Question_777_(2016)#cite_note-28" target="_blank"><u>[28]</u></a></p><p></p><p>“The first rule of constitutional amendments should be: First, do no harm, and in its potential for unintended consequences — especially in the state’s ability to protect its own environment — we fear harm in SQ 777. Farming is very important, but SQ 777 doesn’t solve any real Oklahoma problems, and its potential to create new problems in the future makes it bad policy.<a href="https://ballotpedia.org/Oklahoma_Right_to_Farm_Amendment,_State_Question_777_(2016)#cite_note-quotedisclaimer-4" target="_blank"><u>[4]</u></a> "</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="KOPBET, post: 2917425, member: 4153"] Best thing to do is to read pro and con opinions and come to your own conclusion. [URL]https://ballotpedia.org/Oklahoma_Right_to_Farm_Amendment,_State_Question_777_(2016)[/URL] Last thing I want to do is agree with the Tulsa World, but it is what it is. The [I][B]Journal Record[/B][/I] editorial board wrote the following in opposition to State Question 777:[URL='https://ballotpedia.org/Oklahoma_Right_to_Farm_Amendment,_State_Question_777_(2016)#cite_note-26'][U][26][/U][/URL] “The law was not written by local farmers; ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council, approved the model legislation in 1996 and again in 2013. The state has a model; the Legislature can add, subtract and update laws as the world changes. In 1776, no one imagined a need for laws governing self-driving cars, but the public certainly can imagine the value of those today. No one knows how the agriculture industry will grow and change in Oklahoma, but the public representatives at the Capitol must be allowed to help the law adapt to whatever might surface. We must not cede governance of an industry to the industry. Voters must defeat State Question 777 in November.[URL='https://ballotpedia.org/Oklahoma_Right_to_Farm_Amendment,_State_Question_777_(2016)#cite_note-quotedisclaimer-4'][U][4][/U][/URL] ” [I][B] The Norman Transcript[/B][/I] said:[URL='https://ballotpedia.org/Oklahoma_Right_to_Farm_Amendment,_State_Question_777_(2016)#cite_note-27'][U][27][/U][/URL] “In effect, SQ 777 would freeze any new legislation directed at farming or ranching. The industry should certainly be allowed to develop and utilize new technologies, methods and practices, but the state and cities should be able to pass laws and ordinances when necessary. Restricting them from doing so takes power away from leaders elected by Oklahomans.[URL='https://ballotpedia.org/Oklahoma_Right_to_Farm_Amendment,_State_Question_777_(2016)#cite_note-quotedisclaimer-4'][U][4][/U][/URL] ” [I][B] The Tulsa World[/B][/I] said:[URL='https://ballotpedia.org/Oklahoma_Right_to_Farm_Amendment,_State_Question_777_(2016)#cite_note-28'][U][28][/U][/URL] “The first rule of constitutional amendments should be: First, do no harm, and in its potential for unintended consequences — especially in the state’s ability to protect its own environment — we fear harm in SQ 777. Farming is very important, but SQ 777 doesn’t solve any real Oklahoma problems, and its potential to create new problems in the future makes it bad policy.[URL='https://ballotpedia.org/Oklahoma_Right_to_Farm_Amendment,_State_Question_777_(2016)#cite_note-quotedisclaimer-4'][U][4][/U][/URL] " [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
State Questions
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom