With the Oklahoma Republican primary election less than five weeks away, the individuals running for the party’s gubernatorial nomination are working hard to differentiate themselves from each other.

But on one major issue, there’s no daylight between any of the major candidates seeking the office: They all agree that State Question 832, which would cause Oklahoma’s mandatory minimum wage to skyrocket based on changes in the cost of living in places like New York City, is bad policy.

The five Republican candidates with the highest name ID are all urging voters to reject SQ 832.

State Question 832 would impose a $15-an-hour minimum wage and require rapid escalation every year thereafter, putting the wage mandate on a fast track to $35 an hour and higher in future years, according to independent analysis.

The proposal would mandate continual annual increases in Oklahoma’s minimum wage based on changes in the cost of living in the nation’s largest urban centers, as measured by the U.S. Department of Labor’s Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers. That would effectively mandate wage levels far above market rates in Oklahoma, which currently has a low cost of living, based on the high cost of living in places like New York City or San Francisco.

On May 9, candidate Chip Keating, whose father Frank Keating served as governor in the 1990s, posted his opposition to SQ 832 on X, writing, “I was asked my thoughts on SQ 832. No doubt we need more good, high-paying jobs in Oklahoma. But a burdensome minimum wage mandate on businesses will be a killer.”

He also posted a video from his appearance before members of the Oklahoma Grain and Feed Association, where he was asked about SQ 832.

“We’re going to be paying California wages,” Keating told attendees. “I mean, our cost of living is not California. It’s crushed California. They’ve lost hotels, restaurant industry. It’s decimated their economy.”

California dramatically increased the minimum wage for fast-food employees in that state to $20 an hour in April 2024. A paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research found that, after the wage increase, employment in California’s fast-food sector declined relative to employment in the fast-food sector elsewhere in the United States, with an estimated 18,000 jobs lost.

In November 2024, the Employment Policies Institute found that the California wage law also hit customers’ pocketbooks. Menu prices surged as much as 10.1 percent from the law’s 2023 passage to April 2024.

A February 2025 paper from the Berkeley Research Group found that menu prices at California’s fast-food restaurants increased by 14.5 percent between September 2023 (the month the wage legislation was signed into law) and October 2024, nearly double the national average during that time.

At an October 2025 study conducted by members of the Oklahoma House of Representatives, James Leewright, president and CEO of the Oklahoma Restaurant Association, noted that, adjusted for cost-of-living differences, a $20-an-hour wage in California is comparable to a $14-per-hour wage in Oklahoma.

Other Republican gubernatorial candidates have also spoken out against SQ 832.

On May 12, former Oklahoma House Speaker Charles McCall issued a statement of opposition, warning that SQ 832 would threaten jobs and increase costs for working families across the state. McCall also said SQ 832 would disproportionately hurt family-owned operations, rural employers, and local job creators.

“State Question 832 would move our state in the wrong direction by placing more government control on employers, making it harder for small businesses to survive, and passing costs on to working families,” McCall said. “As wages rise under this mandate, businesses would be forced to charge consumers higher prices for everyday goods and services, with costs rising just as much or even more than the wage increase itself. We should be focused on growing opportunity, not copying failed liberal policies.”

Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond previously argued in court that SQ 832 unconstitutionally delegated state power over Oklahoma’s wage law to federal officials in the U.S. Department of Labor.

He remains opposed to SQ 832.

“Raising the minimum wage may sound compassionate, but in practice it often hurts the very people it’s supposed to help,” Drummond said. “Government can’t simply mandate prosperity by picking an arbitrary wage number that ignores the realities of different jobs, industries, and local economies. Higher minimum wages drive up costs for families, put pressure on small businesses, and make it harder for young people, part-time workers, and those entering the workforce to get their foot in the door. As someone who employs more than 500 people, I’ve seen firsthand that the free market—not government mandates—is far better at creating opportunity, rewarding hard work, and setting fair wages.”

Former state Sen. Mike Mazzei is also an opponent.

“I am a hard no on SQ 832, and I hope voters are aware of the disaster it would create,” Mazzei said. “California proved that an inflated minimum wage results in elimination of entry-level jobs, fewer hours for workers, and higher prices, which hit low-income families the hardest. The free market should determine what labor is worth, not the government.”

Former state Sen. Jake Merrick is also among those urging Oklahoma voters to reject SQ 832.

“I am opposed to SQ 832,” Merrick said. “In fact, I am opposed to minimum wage entirely. Let the employer pay what he can afford. If the employee or prospective employee cannot work for those wages, they are free to work elsewhere. Let the free market work.”

For this story, the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs also sought comment from the two major Democratic gubernatorial candidates—current state Rep. Cyndi Munson and former state Sen. Connie Johnson. Neither responded. But on May 2, Johnson posted a video on her campaign Facebook page in which she expressed support for SQ 832, saying, “You can vote on minimum wage, raising the minimum wage. We’re still in the dark ages on that.”

During House lawmakers’ October 2025 study, Peter Hansen, director of research and policy analysis at the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), warned that the impact of an artificially high wage law would reduce Oklahoma’s gross domestic product by roughly $700 million by 2035 compared to what would happen if no change were made to the state’s minimum-wage law.

He also warned that net job losses were likely in Oklahoma by 2031 and 16,000 jobs could be lost by 2035 if the state’s minimum-wage law is increased dramatically.

Amanda Hall, policy and research director for the State Chamber Research Foundation, told lawmakers at that same meeting that a $15-an-hour minimum wage would be especially devastating for rural communities, since it would hike payroll costs by 10 to 20 percent.