The Finch Formerly Known As Gold

6 March 2003

Scratched off

According to at least one poll, Oklahomans favor the establishment of a state lottery by a three-to-one margin. I find this surprising, since the issue has been up for a state vote before and did not come close to passage.

A few minutes before the poll results were announced, the State House had an announcement of its own: House Bill 1278, which would put the establishment of a lottery on the ballot, had failed, 52-49. Most Democrats voted Yes, most Republicans voted No, but there were defectors from both sides.

I expect Governor Henry will be back with a similar proposal next year, but for this session, it's dead.

Posted at 7:02 AM to Soonerland

Technically it's not dead. A bill that failed to pass can be brought back to be heard again. The author of the bill, at the time of the failure of the bill to pass, tells the speaker of the house that on some future legislative date they will move to reconsider the vote by which the measure failed. House rules determine the time frame within which the representative can make the "motion to reconsider". I believe that time frame is 3 legislative days.

Posted by: Goof Beyou at 8:31 AM on 6 March 2003

Continuing the above comment, the house would then have to vote whether or not TO RECONSIDER the original vote. If they vote to not reconsider, then the bill is dead for this session. If they vote to reconsider, everyone debates again and then they vote on the bill.

Posted by: Goof Beyou at 8:34 AM on 6 March 2003

The author, I believe, is Ron Kirby.

But will there be a vote to reconsider? With 52 No votes on the first hearing? I tend to doubt it, but we shall see.

Anyway, thanks for the clarification.

Posted by: CGHill at 10:05 AM on 6 March 2003

The measure is already being held on a motion to reconsider. Kirby has until Tuesday, March 11 to bring it back.

Remember, you only need 51 to pass a measure. So the pro-lottery side needs just two reps to switch their votes.

Posted by: Goof Beyou at 2:22 PM on 6 March 2003

And a strange bit of nonsense: this entry was #777 in the current edition of the blog.

I swear by SpongeBob's square pants, it wasn't rigged.

Posted by: CGHill at 3:45 PM on 6 March 2003