Skip to main content

Lawmakers Foul Out on Occupational Licensing—Again


Oklahoma’s got a bad occupational licensing problem, worse than other states. We don’t just regulate too many occupations (almost as many as Kansas and Missouri combined), we also overregulate; our licensing laws are the 11th most burdensome nationwide. What concerns me most isn’t either of those points, though. It’s that many of our harshest, most suffocating regulations target occupations that no thinking lawmaker should be legislating about in the first place.

To illustrate this prevalent and truly bizarre phenomenon, take 1889’s latest report, which examines the Therapeutic Recreation Act. The report finds that the Act, which mandates getting government permission to sell or advertise recreational therapy services, is flagrantly unjustified. The practice targeted by the law simply isn’t dangerous or technical enough to warrant a license, not even close.

If any reader is clueless, such as a lawmaker, rec therapy is an allied healthcare profession whose specialists promote the health and overall welfare of patients coping with or recovering from an illness, disability, or injury by helping them enjoy a hobby. Specialists may use games, crafts, animals, music or other fun leisure activities to advance this goal. But they’re not just summer camp counselors. They view themselves as serious, legitimate professionals, and indeed they work in serious environments, like hospitals and rehab clinics. But they’re not doctors or nurses. They don’t prescribe meds or make diagnoses or handle needles. No technical medical schooling is needed for their job. What they do need is patience, good verbal skills, and enough physical fitness to lift the occasional bulky wheelchair. In short, the practice is totally innocuous.

Which is why the Act is so unjust. The case for licensing is typically strongest (albeit still often weak overall) when the practitioners in question can potentially cause real harm if they commit malpractice, like airline pilots or pharmacists. That is, a licensing law, as with all laws, is supposed to serve the common good. But the Act doesn’t do that. No one is kept safer by it. No consumer is made surer of the quality of their purchases, given how transparent the practice already is. Who then, does the law benefit?

Affluent, established specialists, that’s who. Obtaining a rec therapy license is so difficult that since the Act took effect in 2010, the number of active specialists in our state has plunged 28 percent. With that decline in competition came a handsome wage increase for the specialists who could afford the time and money investment to acquire legal permission to stay in business. Laws that serve private interests at the expense of consumers are absolutely unjustifiable, and this is such a law.

But that’s not to say concerned practitioners deserve no voice. Lawmakers should acknowledge with Aristotle that humans are social animals. We cherish our churches, schools, and families for the sense of dignity and identity that accompanies membership within them. For that same legitimate reason, we cherish our guilds and professional circles, which transmit old knowledge to their new members, and confer exclusive honors and titles on them. It’s actually a fine idea to offer legal protection for this tradition, to enshrine it in the law, but only if it can be done without creating artificial monopolies that restrict economic opportunities for disadvantaged populations.

Fortunately, 1889 has written elsewhere about how to design just such a system, one based on private and voluntary certification. Such a system would allow anyone, disadvantaged or otherwise, to seek responsible financial opportunities where they exist, while also offering privately certified practitioners legal protection against those who would fraudulently claim membership in their guild. Lawmakers should act fast to install this win-win solution.

Luke Tucker is a PhD student in Philosophy at the University of Oklahoma.

Popular posts from this blog

Dear GT Bynum, Let the Children Play

I live close to a large City of Tulsa park that has a golf course, walking trail, green spaces, and a couple of playgrounds. My (almost) three-year old son loves the playgrounds, and often begs us during walks in our neighborhood to detour to “for-chun” (LaFortune Park). This seemingly innocent request can become a hassle when we don’t really have time, but we indulge him as much as possible. It’s good for kids to play outside, especially with other kids they might not otherwise come into contact with. But sometimes we have to contend with an upset toddler who doesn’t understand why we can’t go to the playground right this minute. I’m not complaining, every parent of young kids deals with similar stuff. But during the COVID lockdown, we’ve had to contend with an altogether different LaFortune Park situation with our son. As part of the mayor’s shelter-in-place overkill, all city-owned playgrounds were closed “ indefinitely .” This wasn’t a guideline or suggestion, the city meant busine

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 episod

COVID Inspires Tyranny for the "Good" of Its Victims

The Christian philosopher, C.S. Lewis, once said, "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies." The moral busybodies C.S Lewis warns of reminds me of those who would have Americans give up their liberty to combat COVID-19.   A recent Oklahoman op-ed compared COVID-19 to World War II, stating that the number of deaths from COVID-19 is approaching the number that died fighting for this country and the freedoms it protects. This comparison is, of course, nonsense. This suggests that a virus with a high survivability rate is an equivalent threat to the Nazi and Japanese regimes that brutally murdered millions. The piece uses wartime rationing of meat and cheese, a sacrifice necessary to ensure men on the front lines had adequate nutrition, to justify Americans accepting counterproductive lockdowns in exchange for additional stimulus c

The High Duty of Elected Officials and Ways They Fall Short

With an election just completed (the alleged voting, anyway), a legislative session coming up, constant talk of spending to offset the impacts of COVID-19, and elected officials trying to mandate our way out of a disease, the duty of elected officials in their official positions is worth considering. The 1889 Institute recently published a booklet for state lawmakers that discusses various issues and possible solutions. Included in that booklet is a short discussion of the central duty of elected officials, which is expanded here. What is the central, over-arching duty of an individual after having been elected to public office? Public oaths of office give a strong hint, and the Oklahoma Constitution is a good place to start. Article XV includes the oath of office, which states that an Oklahoma public official swears to “support, obey, and defend” the constitutions of the nation and the state, that the official will not take bribes, and that the official will discharge duties as best