Signature drive coming soon

Volunteer
Claims & rebuttals

Claims and Rebuttals

Common questions and concerns about ending straight-party voting — and clear answers.

Claim 01

“This will decrease voter turnout.”

Rebuttal

Voters already mark judicial retention questions, nonpartisan races, and state questions individually. Requiring the same for partisan races does not add a new burden that has been shown to suppress turnout. Most voters who use straight-party voting already review the rest of the ballot. The change simply removes a single shortcut that fills multiple races at once.

Claim 02

“It makes voting take longer and is more confusing.”

Rebuttal

Voters already spend time marking multiple races and questions on the ballot. Removing the straight-party option makes the process more consistent, not more complicated. Clear voter instructions and ballot design can keep the experience straightforward. Many states have already eliminated straight-party voting without creating widespread confusion.

Claim 03

“This hurts my political party.”

Rebuttal

The change applies equally to every recognized political party and every voter. No party receives special treatment. Voters who want to support an entire party's candidates can still do so — they simply mark each candidate instead of using one box for all of them.

Claim 04

“People like the convenience of straight-party voting.”

Rebuttal

Convenience should not replace intentional choices in every race. Voters who prefer one party can still vote for all of that party's candidates. The initiative only removes the single-mark shortcut that automatically fills every partisan contest, including races the voter may not have reviewed.

Claim 05

“Straight-party voting helps low-information or busy voters.”

Rebuttal

Voters already must make individual choices on state questions and nonpartisan races. Extending that same standard to partisan contests encourages engagement with the full ballot rather than leaving down-ballot races to an automatic mark. Clear ballot design and voter education can support all voters without relying on a single-party shortcut.

Claim 06

“This is just an attack on one party.”

Rebuttal

Every Vote Counts is party-neutral. It ends the straight-party option for all parties and requires individual marking in every partisan race. The measure does not favor or disadvantage any political party.

Claim 07

“Voters will leave more races blank.”

Rebuttal

Voters who want to support candidates of one party can still do so by marking them. The difference is that each race requires a deliberate mark rather than an automatic fill. In practice, many voters already override straight-party selections in individual races. This change simply makes every partisan contest consistent with how the rest of the ballot already works.

Claim 08

“Oklahoma has always had straight-party voting.”

Rebuttal

Many long-standing election practices have been updated as voting systems and voter expectations changed. Other states have eliminated straight-party voting. The goal is a ballot process in which every partisan race receives an intentional choice from the voter.

Have another question?

Send it to the campaign and we'll answer it directly.

Contact Us
Email updates

End straight-party voting. Be ready to sign.

Signatures for this initiative are collected in person, on paper, at events across Oklahoma. Join the email list and we'll send the dates, locations, and what to bring.

Read the FAQ

Campaign updates only. Unsubscribe anytime.