SQ 836: A Republican strategist explains why Oklahoma needs change

19 June 2025

Interview of Pat McFerron, Oklahoma Pollster and Vote Yes 836 Strategist,

By Dylan Goforth of The Frontier

Where are we now?

Oklahoma’s State Question 836 is a proposed constitutional amendment that would replace the state’s current closed primary system with a top-two open primary model. Instead of holding separate primaries for each political party, all candidates for state, county, legislative, district attorney, and congressional offices would appear on a single, nonpartisan primary ballot. Voters, regardless of party affiliation, could vote for any candidate, and the top two vote-getters — regardless of party — would advance to the general election.

Supporters argue the measure would increase voter participation, particularly among independents, and encourage candidates to appeal to a broader electorate. Oklahoma consistently ranks low in voter turnout, and many races go uncontested in general elections. Opponents, including the Oklahoma Republican Party, have filed a legal challenge, arguing the proposal violates political parties’ constitutional rights to free association by forcing them to allow non-members to influence their nominations. They also claim the ballot language is misleading.

A recently passed law, SB 1027, imposes new restrictions on initiative petitions and applies retroactively to SQ 836, adding further legal complexity. Supporters of the state question have asked the Oklahoma Supreme Court to block the retroactive enforcement, arguing it unfairly changes the rules mid-process and adds significant legal and logistical hurdles.

Q&A with Pat McFerron

Dylan: Pat thanks for catching up with me. A lot has happened since the last time I interviewed someone about State Question 836. Tell me where you guys are in the process right now.

Pat: I think it's important to note that our campaign is continuing to grow across the state. We're finding a lot of enthusiasm for what we're doing. Next Tuesday, June 24 is a key date. It is going to be oral arguments in front of the Oklahoma Supreme Court, and it is one of the last hurdles prior to signature collection.

Dylan: So how did this case end up in front of the Oklahoma Supreme Court?

Pat: The Oklahoma Republican Party challenged our petition as being unconstitutional, and we believe it is constitutional. We're going to have these oral arguments and after that's resolved, and there's a period for a rehearing request, and then we'll be well on our way to collecting signatures. The goal is still to be on the November 2026 general election ballot.

Dylan: A lot of the opposition to this state question has framed it as a fight between rural voters and urban voters. As you’ve been going across the state, have you seen a difference in the reaction based on geography?

Pat: I think the urban, rural fight that you saw play out in the legislature, or those accusations in Senate Bill 1027, that's just a battle among the political elite. When we're talking to the voters and the regular folks, they just know that they need a solution that works, because they want the government to work for them.

Dylan: States with some form of open primary often have more voter participation, correct?

Pat: There have been some national studies that show that in 2020 and 2024, Oklahoma was 50th in the nation in November voter turnout among voting age populations. And again, it's because our elections here are already decided, either only one candidate files or it’s decided in the primary, or the demographics are such that only one party can win.

Dylan: What do you feel is at stake if SB 1027 is allowed to stand?

Pat: A lawsuit has been filed against the retroactivity aspect. It was written in a way that it would apply to us, since we have not reached the point of collecting signatures. And we just think it’s not the right way for the state to do business at all, considering our process has already started. We don’t think it’s fair to the voters, and we don’t think it’s appropriate so that aspect is being litigated in court.

Dylan: Are voters understanding the concept of open primaries?

Pat: The concept of the top two people regardless of party moving on is pretty simple. The terminology can get confusing and I think some of that has been intentional by our opponents. What we are getting rid of is partisan primaries, and going to a people’s primary, similar to the way mayors are elected throughout the state.

Dylan: Do you get different responses from Republicans versus Democrats?

Pat: I don’t think there’s necessarily a partisan difference. It’s more about insiders versus regular people. The people with power now are insiders who don't want to risk changing the system. But I think we’re going to see our state’s populist aspect come to bear and be successful.

Dylan: Why do you, as a Republican, support this change?

Pat: I think you get a better government when your electeds are responsible to every voter. The current system incentivizes market share politics—finding intense supporters and winning elections that way—while discouraging consensus building and solving real problems.

Dylan: What should our readers know right now?

Pat: If voters want to learn more, we’ll be in Norman on June 24. It will be myself on the Republican side and Emily Virgin on the Democratic side. We’re partnering with Women in Action for All Norman and the League of Women Voters of Norman. It’s a forum where folks can come learn more about the state question and why we think it’s important.

Upcoming Event Info

WHAT:Community Conversation on State Question 836A nonpartisan discussion on open primaries and Oklahoma’s election future. Featuring Pat McFerron and Emily Virgin. Free and open to the public. RSVP here.

WHEN:Tuesday, June 24, 20256:00 PM – Refreshments & Conversation6:30 PM – Program BeginsEnds at 7:30 PM

WHERE:St. Stephen’s United Methodist Church1801 W. Brooks St.Norman, OK 73069