State Question 793
- Thread starter PDT816
- Start date
Yes. More access for the poor and better health and safety regulations. No surgeries inside the retail stores. 47 other states already do this.
I'm voting yes. The "No" campaign has been one of the most misleading campaigns I've ever seen. They claim "Walmart" is putting profit ahead of patients. My wife and youngest daughter are prescription lens dependent and I can confidently say that those behind the "No" campaign are the only ones putting profit ahead of patients.
Walmart may profit from renting office space and additional sales, but it's creating a value to the customer by putting the service in an area most go to frequently. That not fancy rented office will also keep overhead low for the optometrist, likely creating a savings that is passed on to the consumer.
I’m voting no.
An optometrist or optician can open a shop in a Walmart right now just like they open next to a Pearls or Lenscrafter.
This State Question isn’t about access to the consumer IMO, it’s about a constitutional amendment that says Walmart and other merchantile organizations can limit the level of care and standard of care an optometrist or optician has to give without restriction or limit from the licensing boards of the profession.
It shouldn’t be a constitutional matter/enactment, and professional licensing boards are the proper authority to establish required standards and levels of care for the profession.
Though it’s not an issue that causes me great concern personally one way or the other.
An optometrist or optician can open a shop in a Walmart right now just like they open next to a Pearls or Lenscrafter.
This State Question isn’t about access to the consumer IMO, it’s about a constitutional amendment that says Walmart and other merchantile organizations can limit the level of care and standard of care an optometrist or optician has to give without restriction or limit from the licensing boards of the profession.
It shouldn’t be a constitutional matter/enactment, and professional licensing boards are the proper authority to establish required standards and levels of care for the profession.
Though it’s not an issue that causes me great concern personally one way or the other.
This is what I thought the whole thing was about. I still don’t understand it completely though.
- Eye professionals can not operate anywhere that their offices don't have access to a public thoroughfare. You can not set up shop in Walmart today as has been claimed.
- You can not sell glasses, contacts, etc out of any establishment where 50% of sales are from non-optical products/services.
A no vote is a vote to keep price gouging legal for glasses and other optical products.
1. You can set up shop in a Walmart if you have a door outside open to a public thoroughfare directly into your shop. So you absolutely can set up shop in a Walmart.
2. You are correct in this assertion that an general merchantile establishment cannot be licensed to sell glasses, etc. if 50% of their sales are from non-optical products/services. I would agree that it is a bad regulation when it comes to opticians, but would disagree that is a bad thing when it comes to eye exams from optometrists.
I would gladly vote for a statutory initiative that rescinded or amended those laws.
I’m not for a constitutional initiative that allows Walmart to dictate and limit appropriate standards of care for optometrists.
They aren't limiting standards of care, they are limiting the menu of services offered. You as a consumer/eye patient have full choice as to who you go to for medical treatment.
They absolutely are limiting the standard of care if they can tell and dictate optometrists not to do particular health tests regardless of of board regulations.
They aren't. It's no different than going to a doc in the box versus going to the ER. The amount of care the two establishments can and are willing to provide is greatly different. You as the patient make the choice where you want to go.
Is there anything from a medical or vision perspective that supports the current law? Entering directly from the outside vs entering through a door inside Walmart isn't something that affects outcomes from any perspective that I've evaluated.
They are when the licensing board determines that the standard of care for an eye exam includes certain diagnostic tests, but Walmart can just say “not for our folks”.
I’ve already said I’d vote for a STATUTORY initiative repealing or amending these laws.
It’s the last sentence in this constitutional initiative that gives me pause.
Total campaign contributions:
Support: $130,967.00
Opposition: $1,460,683.21
Someone will pay ridiculously big dollars to keep their ridiculously big dollars unless they are limited by the vote of the people. That's the sole reason why I'm supporting a constitutional amendment instead of a statutory initiative repealing or amending the laws.
https://ballotpedia.org/Oklahoma_St...ce_in_Retail_Establishments_Initiative_(2018)
“
Ballotpedia identified one committee registered in support of the measure: Yes on 793, Inc. The committee reported a total of $130,967.00 in contributions, $105,100 in cash contributions and $25,867 in-kind donations. The top contributor to the committee was Walmart, which provided a total of $65,867 in cash and in-kind donations. Other donors include Oklahomans for Consumer Freedom and Costco Wholesale Corporation.
Ballotpedia identified one committee registered to oppose the measure: Oklahomans Against 793. The committee had raised $1.46 million and had spent $501,393. The largest donor was the Oklahoma Association of Optometric Physicians which had given $655,723 in cash and in-kind contributions. The majority of the other contributions came from Doctors of Optometry
Do you think the Oklahoma legislature should be handling optometrist licensing? Don’t be a fvcking idiot lol
They won't be, Colonel DipShit. Ask your mom and dad to explain 793 to you. Obviously you can't figure it out yourself.
The amendment would allow the state Legislature to enact legislation to:[1]
- Maintain license requirements for optometrists;
- Impose minimum health and safety standards for optical services and goods.
Stupid oozes out of you like cheddar bay biscuits and endless shrimp. You do realize that the state legislature has the authority to establish and maintain licensure requirements for every licensed healthcare professional in the state in addition to all kinds of other occupational licenses, right?
No even a factor in the debate.
Nothing about licensing changes. At question is the irrational handwriting that Walmart "might" elect not to provide all the medical exam testing and be a prescription only shop. (which is perfectly fine with me)
