A prominent organization backing State Question 836, which would eliminate party primaries in Oklahoma, suggests the proposal will lead to the defeat of up to 114 Republican members of the Oklahoma Legislature.

State Question 836 would eliminate Oklahoma’s primary elections and instead place all candidates from all parties on a single ballot, with all voters participating regardless of party registration. The top two finishers would then proceed to the November general election ballot under SQ 836–even if both candidates are members of the same political party.

That would largely mirror California elections, where even statewide races have involved only two Democratic candidates.

An initiative-petition effort is underway to collect 172,993 valid signatures to place SQ 836 on the ballot in Oklahoma.

Led by House Speaker Kyle Hilbert and Senate President Pro Tempore Lonnie Paxton, 75 Republican members of the Oklahoma House of Representatives and 39 Republican members of the Oklahoma Senate jointly signed a letter warning Oklahomans that SQ 836 is “bad policy and bad for Oklahoma.”

When the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs posted that letter on its Facebook page, the Kirkpatrick Policy Group responded, “Thank you for providing a list of the first politicians who should be voted out once SQ 836 passes.”

Notably, many of the backers of SQ 836 have longstanding ties to Democratic candidates and left-wing causes, and one of the major organizations backing the effort is based in New York.

Among other things, the Kirkpatrick Policy Group advocates for “comprehensive sex education in Oklahoma’s public schools” and “access to reproductive healthcare services” (a euphemism for abortion), according to the group’s website. The organization has criticized Oklahoma law on sexual education in public schools for emphasizing abstinence, allowing parents to opt their children out of HIV or sexuality lessons, and for excluding instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity aside from noting that certain homosexual activity is a leading AIDS risk.

The Kirkpatrick Policy Group also opposed an effort to reform Oklahoma’s judicial nominating process in 2024. That year, Senate Joint Resolution 34 would have allowed Oklahoma voters to eliminate the Judicial Nominating Commission and replace it with the U.S. Constitution’s model for judicial selection. Under the replacement system, a governor could select any qualified individual to serve as a judge, but legislative confirmation would be required for that person to be seated.

The Judicial Nominating Commission controls judicial nominations today, and the group has a longstanding left-wing tilt. Of the 15 members of the Oklahoma Judicial Nominating Commission, six are appointed by the Oklahoma Bar Association via internal membership elections. Public records show that 22 of the 32 individuals appointed to the JNC by the Oklahoma Bar Association from 2000 to 2024 (nearly 69 percent) have directed most of their campaign donations to Democrats, including to presidential candidates like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Only one bar appointee to the JNC since 2000 overwhelmingly donated to Republican candidates.

The Kirkpatrick Policy Group is closely tied to the Kirkpatrick Foundation. Christian Keesee is both president of the Kirkpatrick Policy Group and chairman of the Kirkpatrick Foundation.

Although it is an Oklahoma-based organization, the Kirkpatrick Foundation has recently been criticized for promoting far-left causes. A video on the website “No Wokelahoma” states, “At first glance, the Kirkpatrick Foundation might seem like an ordinary community charity, but it’s funding a radical, far-left agenda aimed at turning Oklahoma into Wokelahoma.”

The website documents various examples of how the foundation or officials associated with the foundation have supported left-wing causes and opposed conservatives.

“The Kirkpatrick Foundation has donated to liberal activists who attack farmers, support abortion, oppose cracking down on illegal immigrants with criminal records, and support men competing in women’s sports,” the video states. “The Kirkpatrick Foundation’s radical liberal agenda is out of step with Oklahoma.”

The Kirkpatrick Policy Group’s statement marks one of the first times that a SQ 836 backer has expressly emphasized partisan motives as justification for supporting the proposal, but critics have long noted that SQ 836 is designed to tilt elections in favor of left-wing candidates even when a majority of voters cast their ballots for conservatives.

In their letter to voters, Oklahoma state lawmakers warned that SQ 836 “will produce absurd outcomes in defiance of voter preferences.”

“Had SQ 836 been in place in 2018, Oklahomans would have had to choose between two Democrats for governor that November, because the Republican vote was split among 10 candidates in the primary,” the lawmakers noted. “Thus, even though 452,606 Oklahomans cast a vote for a Republican gubernatorial candidate compared to just 395,494 for a Democrat, the 2018 general election would have involved only two Democratic candidates.”

Election records show that if SQ 836’s California-style election had been in place, nearly every open-seat gubernatorial race won by a Republican in Oklahoma history would have instead been a Democrat-versus-Democrat general election.

In their letter, Oklahoma lawmakers also noted that SQ 836 will “not produce ‘moderate’ candidates but instead helps candidates advance to the November ballot by appealing to fringe voters during the multi-candidate first round of voting, as can be seen by the results of California elections.”

Numerous Oklahoma conservatives, at both the state and federal levels, have come out in strong opposition to SQ 836.

Photo credit: Alizada Studios / stock.adobe.com