Court Opinion

ID: 9785373
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-30 21:37:39.606275+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:36:21.465401
License: Public Domain

KAUGER, J.
dissenting:
T1 The issue presented is not whether any qualified individual should have the right to file for office or whether that right *1095will be protected by this Court. There is no question that candidates are entitled to all constitutional and statutory protections. Nevertheless, public policy concerning election regulation is expressed in the statutes and is mandatory, controlling and applicable to all political parties and nonpartisan candidates alike.1 It exists to protect the electorate and to ensure disclosure of the political positions and qualifications of candidates. Undoubtedly, the petitioner could have filed for election as a member of the party with which she is registered and aligned. Nevertheless, to allow her to file as an independent when she is a member of a political party with an espoused party platform with which she presumably agrees, if not fraudulent, would at the least be misleading and confusing. Voters are entitled to know for whom and for what they are casting their ballots.
1 2 The real question involves whether voters should be subjected to a member of a political party-disguised as an independent-in order to get on the ballot when our Constitution requires a mandatory primary system or whether a candidate may deign to dodge the bullet of the primary and participate in the general election under questionable pretenses? If we allow such a result, we undermine the Legislature's authority to detect and prevent election fraud by minimizing differences, leaving the public without an opportunity to make choices on the issues. Instead, we would force them to make distine-tions on personality or other matters even less important to public policy. In requiring an independent candidate not to have been affiliated with a political party for six months before the primary, the Oklahoma Legislature has expressed a general state public policy aimed at maintaining the integrity of the ballot2 and preventing chaos in the electoral process. This Court should do the same.
T3 The Oklahoma Constitution art. 3, § 33 provides that the Legislature may enact laws for a mandatory primary system in all elections for federal, state, county and municipal offices. It also mandates that the Legislature enact laws whereby citizens, by petition, may place names of independent, nonpartisan candidates for office, including the office of presidential electors, on the ballot.
4 The Oklahoma statutes were enacted in accordance with the provisions of art. 8, § 8. Title 26 00.98.2001 § 6-101, et seq. delineates how candidates may be placed on the ballot. Pursuant to 26 0.98.2001 § 5-102,4 state and federal candidates must file declarations of candidacy with the Secretary of the State Election Board.
15 Title 25 0.9.2001 § 5-105 5 requires a *1096candidate filing as an independent for any state or county office to have been registered to vote as an independent for the six-month period preceding the first day of the filing period. There is an apparent lacuna-a gap in the law 6-in 25 0.$.2001 § 5-105 insofar as federal offices are concerned. However, when read with § 5-102 and art. 8, § 3 which set forth the way candidates must file to be placed on the ballot, it is clear that the language of 25 0.8.2001 § 5-105 was not intended to be confined to state and county offices, but encompasses federal candidates as well.
T6 The United States Supreme Court explained in McPherson v. Blacker, 146 U.S. 1, 13 S.Ct. 3, 7, 86 L.Ed. 869 (1892), that although the federal constitution is implicitly imposed on the Oklahoma scheme, state legislatures have not been deprived of the right to determine methods of effectuating constitutional election processes. The McPherson Court stated:
"[The constitution] recognizes that the people act through their representatives in the legislature, and leaves it to the legislature exclusively to define the method of effecting the object."
T7 Art. 3, § 4 of the Oklahoma Constitution 7 does precisely what the United States Supreme Court recognized as a state right in McPherson-it affords the Oklahoma Legislature the authority to prescribe the manner and conduct of all elections. Furthermore, the same provision places the duty on the legislative body to enact such laws as are necessary to detect election fraud.
8 In enacting election laws, state legislatures act under the power and the grant of the United States Constitution art. 2, § 1, cl. 2 which provides:
"Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives which the State may be entitled in the Congress ..."
Oklahoma's Constitution affords the Legislature the right to enact mandatory rules for the conduct of primary elections relating to the nomination of all candidates in all elections for federal, state, county and municipal offices.8 The Oklahoma Legislature exercised its federal and state constitutional authority when it passed 26 0.98.2001 § 5-105(B) requiring that independent candidates must have been registered to vote as an independent for six months before the first day of the filing period.
T9 Since 1987, it has been necessary for independent candidates to meet the six-month registration requirement imposed by the Oklszshoma Legislature in 25 0.S.2001 § 5-105(B)9 The State Election Board followed the precise procedure applied here in 200210 and in 1996 11 when it denied federal candidates the right to register as independents because of their failure to meet the six-month registration requirement of 26 0.9.2001 § 5-105(B).12 Great weight is accorded the expertise of an administrative agency, and this Court presumes that validity attaches to the agency's actions.13 Fur*1097thermore, the statute's incorporation in the decennial compilations in 2001 cured any potential procedural defect that might otherwise have invalidated it14 Finally, the reco-dification purged the statute of potential constitutional infirmities.15
110 Statutes regulating primary elections are part of Oklahoma's public policy. Their provisions are mandatory and controlling upon all political parties and nonpartisan candidates alike.16 I dissent: 1) because the Oklahoma Legislature clearly intended that candidates running as independents should be registered as such for a minimum of six-months before filing for office; 2) in so providing, the Legislature exercised authority under both the Oklahoma and the Federal Constitutions; and 8) the State Election Board, in utilizing its expertise, has applied the requirement consistently, incorporating the statutory requirement of 26 0.9$.2001 § 5-105(B) into the election process thus denying any candidate for federal office the right to file as an independent when not so registered; and 4) even if the statute, as originally enacted, contained either procedural or constitutional faults when drafted, its recodification eliminated any such defects. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, requiring a candidate to present the true colors of party affiliation protects the public's right to know and to understand how such a elected representative may proceed on the political issues presented by an elected official.

. Craig v. Bond, 1932 OK 697, ¶ 31, 160 Okla. 34, 15 P.2d 1014.

. Storer v. Brown, 415 U.S. 724, 733-34, 94 S.Ct. 1274, 39 L.Ed.2d 714 (1974), rehearing denied, 417 U.S. 926, 94 S.Ct. 2635, 41 L.Ed.2d 230 (1974).

. The Okla. Const. art. 3, § 3 provides:
''The Legislature may enact laws providing for a mandatory primary system which shall provide for the nomination of all candidates in all elections for federal, state, county and municipal offices, for all political parties, except for the office of Presidential Elector, the candidates for which shall be nominated by the recognized political parties at their conventions. The Legislature also shall enact laws providing that citizens may, by petition, place on the ballot the names of independent, nonpartisan candidates for office, including the office of Presidential Elector."

. Title 5 0.$.2001 § 5-102 provides:
"Candidates for United States Senator, United States Representative, state officer, State Senator, State Representative, district judge, associate district judge and district attorney shall file Declarations of Candidacy with the Secretary of the State Election Board."

. Title 5 0.$.2001 § 5-105 provides:
"A. To file as a candidate for nomination by a political party to any state or county office, a person must have been a registered voter of that party for the six-month period immediately preceding the first day of the filing period prescribed by law and, under oath, so state. Provided, the requirement shall not apply to a candidate for the nomination of a political party which aitains recognition less than six (6) months preceding the first day of the filing period required by law. «However, the candidate shall be required to have registered with the newly recognized party within fifteen (15) days after such party recognition.
B. To file as an independent candidate for any state or county office, a person must have been registered to vote as an independent for the six-month period immediately preceding the first day of the filing period prescribed by law and, under oath, so state."

. Keating v. Edmondson, 2001 OK 110, ¶ 12, 37 P.3d 882; City of Oklahoma City v. Oklahoma Tax Comm'n, 1990 OK 27, ¶ 10, 789 P.2d 1287; State v. Goforth, 1989 OK 37, ¶ 9, 772 P.2d 911; R. Aldisert, "Hard Core Judicial Process Problems Facing Judges in the 89's", p. 34 (1982).

. The Okla. Const. art. 3, § 4 provides:
''The Legislature shall prescribe the time and manner of holding and conducting all elections, and enact such laws as may be necessary to detect and punish fraud in such elections. The Legislature may provide by law for the registration of electors throughout the state and, when it is so provided, no person shall vote at any election unless he shall have registered according to law."

. The Okla. Const. art. 3, § 3, see note 3, supra.

. Title 26 0.$.2001 § 5-105(B), see note 5, supra.

. Cause No.2002-14, In the Matter of Contest of the Candidacy of Joe Zalar, Jr., for the Office of United States Representative, Fourth District, State of Oklahoma.

. Cause No. 96-8, In the Matier of the Petition to Contest of Candidacy of Meg Corn for Congress, District 4, State of Oklahoma.

. Title 26 0.9.2001 § 5-105(B), see note 5, supra.

. Tulsa Area Hosp. Council, Inc. v. Oral Roberts Univ., 1981 OK 29, ¶ 10, 626 P.2d 316.

. Hendrick v. Walters, 1993 OK 162, ¶ 17, 865 P.2d 1232. See, Allen v. Retirement Sys., 1988 OK 99, ¶ 8, 769 P.2d 1302, 1305.

. Cox v. Dawson, 1996 OK 11, ¶ 19, 911 P.2d 272; Allen v. Retirement Sys., see note 14, supra.

. Craig v. Bond, see note 1, supra.