Conservative voters are turning their backs on a proposed right-to-farm amendment for Oklahoma’s state constitution, a possibly pivotal shift in a politically conservative state. The independent Sooner Poll says voter support for the right-to-farm proposal, one of seven constitutional questions on Tuesday’s ballot, has plummeted to 37 percent from its July level of 53 percent.
Farm and ranch groups say the amendment would protect food production, and grocery prices, from animal-rights activists and anti-GMO groups. But leaders in some of Oklahoma’s largest cities say access to clean drinking water could be jeopardized by Question 777’s prohibition of new laws affecting “agricultural technology and livestock production and ranching practices without a compelling state interest.” A coalition of farm groups supporting the amendment says, “SQ 777 will not deregulate agriculture” while giving it “constitutional protection from unnecessary regulations.”
Support for right-to-farm is “well below water with only 37 percent” in favor, said the Sooner Poll. “Conservatives had the greatest impact on the drop.” In early October, 57 percent of them supported Question 777, falling to 41 percent in the poll of 530 likely voters taken Oct 18-20. A plurality of conservatives, 44 percent, opposes the amendment.
The predominantly urban congressional districts that include Oklahoma City and Tulsa, the two largest cities in the state, now oppose right-to-farm, an about-face from early October. Two-thirds of Oklahomans live in urban areas.
Some 14 percent of voters were undecided on right-to-farm, one of the largest undecided groups for the seven constitutional questions on the ballot. Since early October, support for the amendment among Republicans shrank to 44 percent while opposition swelled among Democrats and independents. The margin of error for the Sooner Poll was plus or minus 4.3 percent.
Oklahoma is the third state to vote on constitutional protection for farmers and ranchers. North Dakota adopted its amendment by a landslide in 2014 and Missourians approved their amendment by a hair in 2014.
The effect of the North Dakota and Missouri amendments “remain unclear there, even years after passage,” says StateImpact, a public broadcasting collaboration. North Dakota farmers, like their Oklahoma counterparts, worried about outside activists. “It hasn’t been tried in the courts up here yet,” said North Dakota Farm Bureau chief executive Jeffrey Missling. In Missouri, the amendment has been invoked as a defense against charges of illegally growing marijuana but rejected every time by judges, said Harvest Public Media.