Skip to main content

1889 Institute's Statement Regarding School Closures


The 1889 Institute, an Oklahoma think tank, has released the following statement regarding Joy Hofmeister’s proposal to keep schools closed for the remainder of the school year.

We at the 1889 Institute consider Joy Hofmeister’s proposal to close Oklahoma’s schools for the rest of the school year a gross overreaction to the coronavirus situation. Even in the best of times and circumstances, suddenly shifting every student in the state from traditional classrooms to online distance learning will have negative educational consequences. This in addition to the economic burden on two-earner families forced to completely reorder their lives with schools closed.

We believe many of our leaders have overreacted to worst-case scenarios presented by well-intended health experts with no training or sense of proportion in weighing the collateral damage of shutting down our economy versus targeting resources to protect the truly vulnerable. We say reopen the schools and stop the madness. Only truly vulnerable students and staff should stay home.

Our position is buttressed by Dr. David L. Katz, a specialist in preventive medicine and public health, president of True Health Initiative and the founding director of Yale University’s Yale-Griffin Prevention Research Center. In a recent New York Times editorial, he suggested a more surgical approach given that the current actions shutting down our society and economy are likely worse than the disease. He suggests only those over 75, and other high-risk individuals, shelter in place. Everyone else should take sanitation precautions, practice social distancing, and carry on normally, with those over 60 being especially careful. 

No children less than 10 years old have been documented to have died from Covid-19. Yet, the response on the part of local and national leaders has been as if every individual is at mortal risk and grossly disproportionate to the danger. The same point has been made by Dr. John P.A. Ioannidis, co-director of Stanford’s Meta-Research Innovation Center and professor of medicine, biomedical data science, statistics, and epidemiology and population health of Stanford University. His data analysis indicates that the response to Covid-19 may well be “a fiasco in the making.”

We should follow the advice of Dr. Katz and have truly vulnerable populations shelter themselves while the rest of us carry on our daily lives and provide for the vulnerable, with resources readily available but for hoarding caused by some leaders’ overreactions. This approach would maximize protection for those truly at risk while minimizing losses for the rest of society, including Oklahoma’s children and their parents. 

Byron Schlomach is Director at the1889 Institute. He can be contacted at bschlomach@1889institute.org.

Popular posts from this blog

Can Government Force You to Close Your Business?

1889 Institute takes no position on whether any or all of these measures are warranted or necessary, or whether their economic fallout would inflict more human suffering than they prevent. We are simply evaluating whether they are legal.   With the unprecedented (in the last 100 years at least) reaction surrounding the outbreak of Covid-19, questions that few living legal scholars have considered are suddenly relevant.   Can a quarantine be ordered?   Can a mass quarantine, lockdown, or “cordon sanitaire” be ordered? Can businesses be ordered to change their behavior?   Can businesses be ordered to close? Can state governments order these measures? Can local governments order these measures? My legal brief addresses these issues from a statutory point of view; it is clear that state law gives the governor and mayors broad authority in a state of emergency. They must, of course, do so in a neutral way that they reasonably believe will help prevent the spread of in

Present Reforms to Keep the Ghost of State Questions Past from Creating Future Headaches

Oklahoma, like many western states, allows its citizens to directly participate in the democratic process through citizen initiatives and referendums. In a referendum, the legislature directs a question to the people — usually to modify the state constitution, since the legislature can change statutes itself. An initiative requires no legislative involvement, but is initiated by the people via signature gathering, and can be used to modify statute or amend the constitution. Collectively, the initiatives and referendums that make it onto the ballot are known as State Questions.   Recently, there have been calls to make it more difficult to amend the constitution. At least two proposals are being discussed. One would diversify the signature requirement by demanding that a proportional amount of signatures come from each region of the state. The other would require a sixty percent majority to adopt a constitutional amendment rather than the fifty percent plus one currently in place. Both

Friday Special: The Left’s New Fear of Speech

As we said there in rejecting Virginia's claim that the only way it could enable its citizens to find their self-interest was to deny them information that is neither false nor misleading: "There is… an alternative to this highly paternalistic approach. That alternative is to assume that this information is not in itself harmful, that people will perceive their own best interests if only they are well enough informed, and that the best means to that end is to open the channels of communication rather than to close them. - Thurgood Marshall, Linmark Associates, Inc. v. Township Of Willingboro , 431 U.S. 85 (1977) With 2020 being such a caustic year, many novel innovations will be forgotten. Does anyone remember that the global shutdown was supposed to last three weeks to “flatten the curve?” The phrase probably rings a bell now that you hear it, but I bet you haven’t thought of it lately. We took for granted that something had to be done. We blithely accepted that lockdowns wer

Why Does Oklahoma License Polygraph Examiners?

Should polygraph examiners be licensed? In Oklahoma, a license is required to work as a polygraph examiner (a professional who applies lie-detector tests), and it is not at all obvious why. Generally, an occupation is licensed if it is obviously in the public’s interest to prevent potential bad actors from practicing. So, for example, it is argued that doctors must be licensed because, otherwise, some idiot might open a hospital in his garage and really hurt someone. And it is argued that accountants must be licensed because, otherwise, some college-dropout might offer to do accounting for an unsuspecting mom-and-pop shop, tell them their numbers look great (when, in fact, they don’t), and cause them to go bankrupt. In short, occupational licensing is supposed to either (1) prevent real, tangible harm, or (2) assure customers that their service-provider is trustworthy. However, interestingly, licensing polygraph examiners does not accomplish either of those goals because polygraph e