Skip to main content

Oklahoma Is OK, but Seriously, That’s Not OK


The Americans at the table, negotiating a business deal, ask one of their number, “You can speak Dutch?” He replies, “I’m OK.” With his fellow Americans looking doubtful, he proceeds to mistranslate what they want him to say to their Dutch counterparts. The “OK” translator tells the Dutch that the Americans really need a hug, when he was supposed to tell them they really need the deal. With that, the AT&T commercial ends as one of the Dutch negotiators gives an American a hug with the announcer saying, “When just OK is not OK.”

There are several of these commercials, each with a different scenario, in which, indeed, just OK is not OK. And every time I see one of these commercials I think of the license plates that were once so common – “Oklahoma is OK.”

As someone who works to develop policy suggestions intended to make Oklahoma better, and hopefully, the best that Oklahoma can be, it often seems that slogan – Oklahoma is OK – gets in the way.

The fact is, in most respects Oklahoma IS OK. We don’t have the best tax system in the land, but it’s not the worst, either. We don’t have the lowest taxes, but they’re not nearly the highest. Our roads seem pretty terrible compared to Texas, but eight states have worse ones. Eleven states are worse than Oklahoma when it comes to education systems, by one ranking. Sure, it was only recently that Oklahoma was included in a list of “judicial hell holes,” but we have a lower unemployment rate than 25 other states. It can’t be all that bad, right?

But do Oklahomans tolerate being “OK” from their sports teams? Would slogans like “OU football is OK,” “OSU football is OK,” and “Thunder basketball is OK” be stated with pride?

Suppose the coaches at OU and OSU were the best-paid in the country, and the Thunder’s payroll was above the luxury tax. If all these teams had mediocre winning records, would anybody brag that Oklahoma’s teams had the highest paid coaches and players in the land? No. Rather, it would be a mark of shame.

Yet, many of Oklahoma’s legislative leaders have made it a goal to raise average teacher pay to the highest in the region. How well our students perform in demonstrating how much they know doesn’t seem to matter.

Oklahoma isn’t at the bottom in education, it seems, so hey, it’s OK. We’re fixing bridges, so hey, the highways are OK. New companies set up shop in Oklahoma now and then, and movies get made here occasionally, so hey, economic incentives (bribes) are OK. Oklahoma City spends money on an artificial canal, artificial rapids, and a trolley to nowhere, and hey, it’s OK because maybe we’ll get our share of millennials.

But is just OK really OK? Do we really know what we ought to be OK about? Shouldn’t our leaders strive for being the best? Would “top 10” ever be good enough for OU football? Why shouldn’t it be that way for Oklahoma government, in ways that matter, which is not just how much money we spend?

Don’t get me wrong. I live here. I’m glad Oklahoma is OK. I just want it to be so much better.

Byron Schlomach is Director of the 1889 Institute and can be reached at bschlomach@1889institute.org.

The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the official position of 1889 Institute.


Popular posts from this blog

Licensing Boards Might Violate Federal Law: Regardless, They Are Terrible Policy

Competition is as American as baseball and apple pie. “May the best man win” is a sentiment so old it doesn’t care about your pronouns. The beneficial effects of competition on economic markets are well documented. So why do we let powerful business interests change the rules of the game when they tire of competing in the free market? Most of the time when an occupational license is enacted, it is the members of the regulated industry who push hardest in favor of the license. Honest competition may be fundamentally American, but thwarting that competition through licensing seems to be fundamentally Oklahoman. Oklahoma doesn’t have the most occupational licenses, but when they do license an occupation, the requirements tend to be more onerous than the same license in other states. But what if, instead of merely breaking the rules of fair play to keep out would-be competition, Oklahoma licensing boards are also breaking the law? Normally a concerted effort to lock out competition would v...
Read more

AG Hunter Lowers Boom on Barrier to Entry; Legislature Should Follow His Lead

Even as the Oklahoma Supreme Court  struck down  a recent alcohol distribution law, the Attorney General paved the way for the state’s Alcoholic Beverage Law Enforcement Commission (ABLE) to remove an obstacle from the expansion of liquor store competition - finding that Oklahoma’s five-year in-state residency requirement before one can own a liquor store likely runs afoul of the U.S. Constitution and recent U.S. Supreme Court precedent.  The AG’s  opinion , issued at the end of December, informs the state’s alcohol commission that portions of the state constitution (Article 28A, Section 4(A) & (B)) are unenforceable. These provisions require that ABLE issue a Retail Spirits License or Wine and Spirits Wholesaler License only to someone who has been a resident of Oklahoma for the previous five years. Presumably ABLE, who requested the opinion, will now begin issuing licenses to otherwise qualified applicants regardless of how long they have lived in Okl...
Read more

Our Black-Robed Legislators on the Oklahoma Supreme Court

W hen   the nine lawyers on the Oklahoma Supreme Court meet to hear a case, no legislation is safe. That's because the justices on the Supreme Court regularly act as though they are lawmakers instead of judges. My most recent paper , Legislators in Black Robes: Unelected Lawmaking by the Oklahoma Supreme Court , explains how the justices achieve this lawmaking.  When the justices decide their mission is to take out a law, they weaponize otherwise mundane provisions of the state constitution (the single subject rule and the ban on special laws, for example) to strike the law down. If that tool is too blunt of an instrument for their purpose, they declare a law “ambiguous” and go about re-writing it from the bench. They justify the re-writing as an attempt to conjure the “intent” of the statute, regardless of what the actual words on the page say. If the law the justices want to strike down isn’t ripe for review, no problem. The Court has invented a concept called “pub...
Read more

The Problem of Diffuse Costs and Concentrated Benefits

Do you ever find yourself observing a seemingly illogical government program , spending decision, or other strange practice and ask “how is it that no one has fixed that?” If you are like me, you encounter this phenomenon regularly. This often takes the form of a curious headline (Save Federal Funding for the Cowboy Poets!) that most people see and can’t believe is real. I would like to suggest that this phenomenon often results from the problem of diffuse costs and concentrated benefits. To understand this concept, consider a hypothetical law that assessed a $1 tax on everyone in the United States with the proceeds to be given to one individual for unrestricted use as he sees fit. The people harmed by such a law—the individual taxpayers—will not be very motivated to spend the time and effort to convince Congress to change the law. They might resent the dollar taken from them for a silly cause they don’t support, but the lost dollar isn’t worth the trouble of doing something about i...
Read more