HB2451 is a legislative referendum measure that would place a question before Oklahoma voters at the next general election asking whether a constitutional convention should be called under the Oklahoma Constitution. The bill does not itself revise the constitution; instead, it initiates the process for asking the electorate to approve or reject convening a convention to consider revisions to the state constitution.
The measure also supplies the ballot title and the exact gist of the proposition to be used if the referendum is submitted. It directs the Chief Clerk of the House to file copies of the act, including the ballot title, with the Secretary of State and the Attorney General after passage. In practical terms, the bill is a procedural step to trigger a statewide vote on whether Oklahoma should hold a constitutional convention.
Impact
If enacted, HB2451 would affect the state’s constitutional amendment process by formally ordering a legislative referendum under Article V, Section 3 of the Oklahoma Constitution and invoking Article 24, Section 2’s convention procedure. It would not change substantive statutory law directly, but it would create the legal mechanism for submitting the convention question to voters and would require official filing and ballot-title preparation by legislative officers and state officials.
Sentiment
Based on the available record, the bill appears procedural and institutionally significant rather than controversial on its face, but there is no committee transcript or vote history provided to show active debate or broad support/opposition. The measure’s tone is neutral and administrative, reflecting an effort to let voters decide whether to open the constitution to revision through a convention.
Contention
The main point of contention inherent in the bill is whether Oklahoma should call a constitutional convention at all, since a convention could open the door to wide-ranging changes to the state constitution. Supporters would likely view the referendum as a democratic way to consider modernization or restructuring, while opponents may worry about the uncertainty, scope, and potential consequences of a convention. No specific stakeholder positions are documented in the provided materials, so any disagreement is only implied by the nature of the question being placed before voters.