Capitol Notebook: Lawmakers aim to block state deals with anti-gun and anti-fossil fuel firms

The Oklahoma Legislature is moving to prevent the state from contracting with businesses that "discriminate" against gun makers and entities that boycott fossil fuel companies. 

Two bills that cleared the Senate last week could limit the companies with which the state does business. 

House Bill 3144, authored by Rep. Kevin West, R-Moore, and Sen. Casey Murdock, R-Felt, would prohibit the state from entering into six-figure contracts with banks if those lenders' policies have qualifying conditions when loaning money to gun manufacturers. 

Murdock said some banks will not lend money to gun manufacturers that produce certain types of weapons or those that sell long rifles to people under the age of 21.

"Today, the firearm industry is being attacked and discriminated against simply because of manufacturing firearms," Murdock said. 

During the floor presentation of the bill, Murdock cited several corporations that would be impacted by the bill, including Bank of America, Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs, PNC, PayPal and General Electric Credit Union.

"I'm saying these banks in New York City should not be pushing gun policy," he said. 

More:Turnpike Authority approves $200 million line of credit to start ACCESS Oklahoma

Senate Democrats voiced concerns that the bill undermines the free market and could force the state to work with smaller banks that cannot offer pricing that's as competitive as larger institutions. They also expressed concerns the bill could violate free speech protections in the First Amendment. 

Murdock acknowledged that using smaller banks could potentially cost the state an additional $64,000 on a contract. 

“I’m not willing to submit my district to that kind of loss,” said Senate Minority Leader Kay Floyd, D-Oklahoma City. 

The bill passed on a 37-8 vote. If approved, the measure would require state contracts to contain a section with written verification that the contractor does not have in place policies targeting gun manufacturers and that no new policy be created while working with the state. 

More:Senate resolution would ask voters to approve sweeping changes to Oklahoma's judicial system

Meanwhile, House Bill 2034 creates a similar system to keep the state out of deals with corporations boycotting oil and gas production. 

The "Energy Discrimination Elimination Act" would require the state treasurer to compile a list of financial companies that boycott fossil fuel energy companies. 

Under the proposal, companies working with the state would need to verify they do not have such policies in place to continue their contracts.

If no notice is received, or if the company has a policy in place to prevent work with energy companies, those corporations would have a window to make changes before the state divests its assets. 

“This legislation would ensure the state of Oklahoma is free from discrimination against the fossil-fuel industry and does not support corporations that put political ideology ahead of the interests of taxpayers, shareholders and residents,” said Sen. Mark Allen, R-Spiro, the bill's Senate author. 

More:Abortion providers file suit after Oklahoma lawmakers send Stitt Texas-style abortion ban

While the bill has seven Republicans signed on between the House and Senate, Democrats in the Senate also largely supported the bill as it passed by a 38-3 vote.

Both bills return to the House.  

House Democrats criticize budget process as opaque

House Democrats complained last week about state budget negotiations, saying the discussions that happen behind closed doors in the latter weeks of the legislative session are shrouded in mystery. 

Members of the legislative minority called for budget negotiations to be more transparent and asked that all lawmakers be given more time to review the details of the final plan before having to vote. 

Typically, once Republican legislative leaders and the governor’s office reach a budget agreement, the proposal is quickly advanced through the Legislature in a matter of days. 

More:Oklahoma Tourism leader resigns, state files lawsuit against Swadley's after parks deal

Democrats are not involved in the negotiations, and they often don’t find out the details of the budget agreement until the deal is announced publicly. 

“There's a transparent way to create, present and pass a budget,” said Rep. Forrest Bennett, D-Oklahoma City. “It's just not the way we're doing it right now.” 

State lawmakers are constitutionally required to pass a balanced budget by the last Friday in May. Budget negotiations are ongoing. 

Rep. Ryan Martinez, R-Edmond, the vice chairman of the powerful House Appropriations and Budget Committee, said the suggestion that building the budget happens through a closed-door process is unfair. 

More:Oklahoma House passes bathroom bill while state school board members decry Hofmeister

He said the budget committee has numerous subcommittees that hold public meetings before and during the legislative session to discuss state agency budgets and funding-related bills. 

“The state budget right now is more transparent than I've ever seen it, and there's so much work done through subcommittees,” he said. “Those are all open meetings.”

Lawmaker criticizes governor's veto on carry over of state employee leave

The author of a bill that would have allowed state employees to continue carrying over unused leave that they built up during the pandemic said he was upset and confused by Gov. Kevin Stitt's veto. 

The governor vetoed last week Senate Bill 176 from Sen. Frank Simpson, R-Springer, that would have temporarily increased annual leave accumulation limits and allowed state employees to carry over their extra leave through the end of fiscal year 2023. 

Without the extension, employees will have to either use or lose by the end of June the extra leave they accumulated during the COVID-19 state of emergency.  

State employees accrue a set amount of annual leave based on their years of service. Once they surpass a set cap, an employee has until the end of a calendar year to use the extra hours or lose them.

Last year, lawmakers passed legislation to temporarily increase accumulation limits for annual leave and extended the timeframe in which the extra hours could be used. SB 176 would have extended the deadline again. 

More:Oklahoma House passes charter school reform bill. What's next?

“While most of the state was shut down in 2020 and parts of 2021, our state employees worked even longer hours to provide critical state services to the citizens of Oklahoma," Simpson said in a statement. "This bill simply recognized the unique circumstances of the pandemic and would have given these public servants one more year to use their vacation time."

SB 176 passed the Legislature with bipartisan support and veto-proof margins. It's unclear if Simpson will seek a veto override vote.

In his veto message, Stitt said the bill would put a financial burden on state agencies and negatively impact taxpayers. He also said if state employees were allowed to carry over their extra leave until next summer, that would be two years after the COVID-19 state of emergency had been lifted. 

Noting the bill's fiscal impact statement said the measure was expected to have minimal or no impact on agency budgets, Simpson dismissed Stitt's financial concerns.

More:Keith Reed nominated for state health commissioner after holding the role on interim basis

According to Simpson, time off accrued from working longer shifts, weekends and stepping in during staff shortages throughout the pandemic could be lost for employees across the board. 

“Sadly, the work of our state employees has often been overlooked through this ordeal, and Governor Stitt’s veto is the ultimate insult to them. This bill will not negatively impact taxpayers or state agencies unless our state employees quit from the governor’s inconsiderate veto and unfair treatment.” Simpson said.