Wednesday 23 Apr
 
 
 photo 85cca911-3826-446b-828b-785107dd2ef3_zpse09f07ac.jpg

 

OKG Newsletter


Letters to the Editor
 

LETTERS


Wanda Jo Stapleton January 29th, 2014

In May, 2013 the Oklahoma Legislature passed House Bill 2226. This new law told females under age 17 that they must have a doctor’s prescription for getting over-the-counter emergency contraception (called Plan B or the morning after pill).

This contraception, if taken within 72 hours after unprotected sex, will most likely prevent pregnancy but will not terminate an existing pregnancy. However, getting an appointment with a doctor for a prescription could cause unacceptable delays. Equally bad, a female age 17 and older must prove her age with identification that she may or may not have. Thankfully, the New Yorkbased Center for Reproductive Rights joined the Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice in filing a court challenge to this new law.

In response, on Jan. 23, Oklahoma County District Judge Lisa Davis struck down this new law. She called it unconstitutional because it violates the single-subject provision of the Oklahoma Constitution. Specifically, the Oklahoma Constitution declares that “Every act of the Legislature shall embrace but one subject.” However, section one of the new law in question deals with insurance regulation, and section two deals with prescription drug benefits. Judge Davis was simply following the law, the Constitution’s ban on multiple subjects in one bill.

— Wanda Jo Stapleton, Former State Representative
Oklahoma City

Why so angry?
We should all ask the question why one person, Ed Shadid, is so consumed with the prevention of a new convention center for our city. It seems to be an obsession of his to prevent this from happening. The answer is pretty simple: The public voted for it.

To say it was the least popular of all the MAPS 3 initiatives is not enough. People who didn’t want it could have stopped the entire initiative then. They did not. Now let’s go through the process, do our diligence and do the very best to support that which the public has requested. If there are elements not feasible, they will be dealt with by the powers that be.

To call a vote to shut it down without giving it a chance is not acceptable, especially knowing that the people in office, past and present, have made a series of long-running, successful decisions regarding our community. The promise of the first MAPS initiative of double the investment has been surpassed by several billion dollars. I like that track record. Then the question becomes, “Who is Ed Shadid, and what credibility does he have?” Do we want to support the rantings of a person revealed to us in his recently unsealed divorce documents?

Dr. Shadid and his ex-wife have stated publicly that he is a changed man. I certainly hope that is true. Is this obsession with the convention center a continuation of what we heard about in these unsealed divorce documents? A “rageaholic” was one of the kinder terms used. On top of all of this, we now find out that his voting record is abysmal. I don’t think we as a city want to take a chance on having the kind of exposure that San Diego experienced with Mayor Bob Filner. Let’s let the decisions on the convention center be determined by its own merits, not by the rantings of questionable character.

— Harold Patterson
Oklahoma City

Oklahoma Gazette provides an open forum for the discussion of all points of view in its Letters to the Editor section. The Gazette reserves the right to edit letters for length and clarity. Letters can be mailed, faxed, emailed to jchancellor@okgazette.com or sent online at okgazette.com. Include a city of residence and contact number for verification.

 
  • Currently 3.5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
 
 

 

 
 
 
Close
Close
Close