HB 2177 may have same effect of proposal voters rejected
After voters rejected a state question that would have allowed a Ten Commandments monument on public property, lawmakers recently approved legislation that could have the same effect.
On Nov. 8, 2016, voters rejected State Question 790 that would have removed a portion of the Oklahoma Constitution cited in an Oklahoma Supreme Court decision in 2015 that led to the removal of the privately funded Ten Commandments monument at the state Capitol.
State Question 790 was rejected, with 57.12 percent voting against removing statutory language that prevents public money from supporting a religion. The state question passed in only three House districts — two in northwestern Oklahoma and another near Lawton — and in no Senate district.
Despite that, lawmakers passed and Gov. Mary Fallin in May signed House Bill 2177 by Rep. John Bennett, R-Sallisaw, and Sen. Joseph Silk, R-Broken Bow. Neither lawmaker could be reached for comment.
The measure would allow the Ten Commandments on public grounds to be displayed with historical documents, such as the Declaration of Independence. It also requires the Oklahoma Attorney General’s Office to defend the measure should a lawsuit be filed.
“I would say fundamentally it is the same issue (that voters already rejected),” said Sen. Kay Floyd, D-Oklahoma City, who voted against the measure. “Is the language the same? No. But fundamentally the issue is the same.”
Floyd, who became a judge after serving as an assistant attorney general, said voters did not want public funds being spent on the Ten Commandments. Passing a bill 15 months later that allows for it is “trying to circumvent the will of the people,” she said.
The Senate passed the measure by a vote of 39-3, with five excused. The House passed the measure by a vote of 60-14, with 26 excused.
Sen. Eddie Fields, R-Wynona, voted for the measure despite his Senate district voting against the state question. He said his district understood that the portion of the Constitution the state question would have removed was preventing public education dollars from going to private schools.
“I think that is the reason the state question failed,” Fields said. “So many found it out would allow public dollars to go to a private entity for school kids.”
Sen. Marty Quinn, R-Claremore, also voted for the legislation, noting that many of the state’s laws and national laws come from the Ten Commandments.Rep. Regina Goodwin, D-Tulsa, voted against House Bill 2177, citing the measure’s history.
“We have already lost one lawsuit and spent taxpayer dollars,” she said. “Why do we do it again?”
She also said she felt that arguments on the House floor that the Ten Commandments were a historical document rather than a religious document were not supported. She said some were trying to hide the fact that they were attempting to use taxpayer dollars to promote religion.
Sen. Julie Daniels, R-Bartlesville, voted for the measure, noting that it does not promote the establishment or benefit of any particular church or religious system.
“What it does is affirm the right of governments to put on public property our genealogy of individual freedom,” Daniels said. “That is what I would call these documents. It is a heritage all Oklahomans and Americans share. The bedrock of those founding documents are the Ten Commandments.”
The Supreme Court ruling, however, disagreed. In ordering the removal of the Ten Commandments monument from the Capitol, it listed in its opinion that “As concerns the ‘historic purpose’ justification, the Ten Commandments are obviously religious in nature and are an integral part of the Jewish and Christian faiths.”
Daniels said there is no requirement that the documents to be displayed include the Ten Commandments.