tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5299573370711766778.post4700109239836658282..comments2023-04-30T09:05:46.353-07:00Comments on Et tu, Oklahoma!: Yes on 744, No on 754. Touchdown!Public Sentryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01235023404887990646noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5299573370711766778.post-50693003063630527202010-10-27T08:17:49.351-07:002010-10-27T08:17:49.351-07:00After a teacher submitted a letter to the editor i...After a teacher submitted a letter to the editor in the Daily Oklahoman supporting SQ744, the paper's editors gratuitously added the following comment: "SQ 744 does not include school reforms provisions and creates no mechanism with which to pay for increased school funding."<br /><br />That's right - it does not. It leaves the details to the Oklahoma Legislature.<br /><br />If SQ744 attempted to solve all the problems created by Oklahoma state government, it would be voluminous and unwieldy. Constitutional provisions are supposed to provide broad guidelines - they are the "skeleton" of government, around which the muscles and sinew are constructed through statutes and regulations. SQ744 is a mandate to a legislature unable to see beyond their noses (in large part due to term limits, but that's another subject). <br /><br />How the legislature responds to the passage of SQ744 is up to the elected representatives of the people, as it should be. What's wrong with that?Waltnoreply@blogger.com