Skip to main content

10 New Years Resolutions for Oklahoma


The new year brings with it the promise of new beginnings. A chance to reset. To do better. In that spirit, 1889 offers the following resolutions to policymakers across the state. 


1. Reduce occupational licensing
This originally read “End (or greatly reduce) occupational licensing,” but let’s be a little more realistic. If Oklahoma would even start moving the right direction (that is, shrinking the number of occupations for which a license is required, instead of growing it), it would be a huge win for the state. It would improve the overall economy. It would allow more people to find a job they are good at. Government rarely gets a shot at such an obvious win-win. 

2. Reduce the number of branches of government to a manageable number. 
We will follow John Adams’ lead and suggest only three – legislative, executive, and judiciary – and recommend getting rid of the TSET, the Corporation Commission, and the host of other independent agencies with unelected oversight in Oklahoma. Agencies with no accountability to the executive or the legislature end up forgetting they are ultimately accountable to voters and taxpayers. When they don’t have to convince the legislature to fund them every year, and don’t answer for their jobs to the governor, agencies run amok and pursue their own goals. 

3. Teach students to read.
As 1889 has previously written, the evidence shows that phonics works for (nearly) every student. Whole word instruction does not. 

4. Open up school choice for all. 
We know that competition brings out the best in businesses. Why should schools be any different? And why should state funding be used to prop up failing local school districts? Let parents decide what school is right for their kids - whether it’s their local public school, a school in a nearby district, charter, or private. 

5. Prioritize classrooms when creating school budgets.
Research shows that past a certain minimum funding threshold, additional education dollars do very little to improve education outcomes, unless they are properly directed. There does not need to be a separate non-teaching employee for every teacher. 

6. Encourage high school students to graduate with 60 hours of college credit through policy changes.
This is the lowest hanging fruit on this list. Between Advanced Placement, CLEP, and online schools offering dual enrollment, every interested student should be able to leave high school with an associate’s degree, saving two years of tuition and getting them into the work force two years earlier. 

7. Fix the courts.
We’ve written about this one a lot. It starts with selecting the right judges. This requires a better selection method, including public access to the process and the right selection criteria, such as a commitment to interpreting the law, not creating policy. 1889 Institute favors a selection method based on the federal method where the governor nominates and the senate confirms, with a single, long term - somewhere in the range of 18 - 20 years. 

8. Stop gambling on ways to bring the next big big thing to Oklahoma.
By the time plodding bureaucrats get the next big thing, developed elsewhere, to come here, its pinnacle has already passed. Instead, make the state welcoming to all businesses. Create low tax rates with a broad bases. Preferably, eliminate the work-discouraging income tax. Taxation discourages the taxed activity. Production is hard. Consumption is easy. Taxing consumption will interfere less in the free market - consumers are less likely to under-consume because consumption is easy. 

9. Reject Obamacare Medicaid expansion.
How could anyone look at the mess Obamacare has created in other states and in the national economy and say “Yes, I want more of THAT!”? 

10. Set measurable goals for outcomes when creating or renewing spending programs.
Assume for a minute that eventually we really do run out of other people’s money. Shouldn’t we prioritize spending programs that do what they’re supposed to? Isn’t a good way of knowing which programs work to attach measurable outcomes to the spending, and measure those outcomes year after year? And wouldn’t it make sense to kill programs that don’t work or don’t work well enough to justify their cost? 

Oklahoma, we can do better this year.

Mike Davis is Research Fellow at 1889 Institute. He can be reached at mdavis@1889institute.org.


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...

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...

When It Comes to the Cox Center, “What if I Get to Meet a Movie Star?” Isn’t Good Enough

In a recent   post , 1889 Institute expounded on the fiduciary duty of elected officials “to act in the best interest of the people of the state as a whole,” a “high duty, executed as a public trust … wherein one puts the people’s interest above one’s own.” This fiduciary duty must not stop with elected officials. Once an elected body or an elected official – the legislature, a city council, the governor, or a mayor – has taken final action, the faithful implementation of each enacted law, policy, or program falls to an army of bureaucrats. Thus, a fiduciary duty to execute laws and policies with diligence and integrity, tantamount to that of elected officials, must extend to government employees. Recently, I had a few moments to sit down and watch a show with my children. Unsurprisingly, my son picked a series entitled “The Stinky and Dirty Show.” I was naturally skeptical that the show would yield any real value. However, as I watched, I found myself pleasantly surprised. Each ep...

Robbing the Poor to Give to the Rich: Corporate Welfare in Oklahoma

Imagine that someone forcibly takes your hard-earned money and then simply gives it to a multi-billion dollar corporation such as Home Depot, Wal-Mart, or Boeing. You receive no benefit from this forcible redistribution of wealth, and the sole beneficiary is the corporation. You would most likely be outraged, and justifiably so. Unfortunately, this forced redistribution of wealth happens in Oklahoma (and the nation as a whole) all the time via a variety of state and local corporate welfare schemes.   Policymakers either take your hard-earned money (via taxes), and directly subsidize large corporations or give those corporations tax breaks nobody else can get. All of this is done in the name of jobs and economic development, but these favors bring very little (if any) benefit to you. This is tyranny, plain and simple. In fact, it is not unlike the sort of advantage nobility took of commoners before the American Revolution, only the modern nobility is just very good at lobbying. In ...