Skip to main content

OKC Public Schools Elevating a Privileged Elite over Oklahoma Taxpayers


The hypocrisy of the Soviet Union’s pretense of egalitarianism was well known enough to be the subject of mockery and parody. Ronald Reagan never tired of the jokes. Soviet communism espoused equality, but the reality is that party apparatchiks and government officials enjoyed special perks that no one else had access to. This special class wasn’t officially paid much more than the average skilled worker, but enjoyed privileges like dachas on the coast or countryside, special stores with imported goods and without the endless lines that were commonplace everywhere else, and more advanced medical treatment. For all their talk about eliminating class distinctions, the Soviet nomenklatura—those “doing the people’s work”—could feather their nest with the best of ‘em.


Apparently, a similar attitude reigns in our government schools. Our friends at OCPA report that Oklahoma City Public Schools (OKCPS) will not offer in-person instruction to students for the first nine weeks of school this year, but “plans to allow staff members to keep their children gathered in groups on site with the district providing supervision of those pupils’ on-site ‘distance’ learning, even as other parents throughout the district must either forgo income to stay at home with children or pay other individuals to watch them during the day.”


So, OKCPS is closing the public schools to the bulk of working parents (who pay OKCPS’s bills), but is providing free child care to the apparatchiks, at taxpayer expense. OKCPS administrators and school board members should familiarize themselves with a few provisions of the Oklahoma Constitution.


First, the Oklahoma Constitution in not one, but two places requires the state government to maintain a system of free public schools open to all children in the state. The Oklahoma Supreme Court recognized shortly after statehood that these provisions require “some degree of uniformity and equality of opportunity” among students, and are intended to extend “equal rights and privileges to all [the state’s] youth to obtain such mental and moral training as will make them useful citizens of our great commonwealth.” About 20 years later, the Court held the constitution assures “a minimum educational program for all children of the state” and was designed “to insure uniformity of opportunity to all children of the state to receive at least the degree of instruction embraced by the minimum program.”


Almost from the jump, therefore, it was understood that the free public schools provisions of the state constitution required some uniformity with respect to the educational opportunities for all children. These provisions are to ensure government is not creating privileged classes, especially when the favored group consists of those who control the levers of government. Who would’ve guessed we’d end racial segregation after years of struggle only to deal with a new class system of government-conferred hereditary privilege?


That’s what this is. It’s an ugly, but simple to understand setup in Oklahoma City in 2020. If you are a teacher in OKCPS, you and your kid will be accommodated at taxpayer expense. Your kid will attend school and you won’t have to pay for childcare like all the chumps who also have to work, even though their kids are forced to do virtual school. If you are one of the chumps paying for all of this, good luck figuring it out. And don’t complain or you will be accused of selfishly endangering public health and the very teachers who make up the privileged class.


Second, the Oklahoma Constitution contains an anti-gift clause (actually, two), which prohibits the government from gifting public funds to private entities and individuals. This provision is supposed to prevent cronyism, best understood as government-granted privilege. It’s been interpreted to ban even altruistic-seeming expenditures of public funds, such as support for worthy charities like Meals on Wheels and the VFW.


How is free childcare for teachers not a taxpayer-funded gift? Teachers are not providing any additional service on top of what they are already contracted to do—teach. They are already compensated for this service, and childcare is not part of the compensation, last I checked. From this former government lawyer’s vantage, OKCPS-provided childcare looks like an unconstitutional, gratuitous perk for teachers.


I don’t know if either of these constitutional provisions (or others, like the special laws provisions) provide a legally cognizable claim against OKCPS. There are no Oklahoma cases directly on point (why would there be? Pre-pandemic, can you imagine anyone proposing such a scheme?). In the case of the free public schools provision, it’s not clear individuals are given a remedy for its violation (that is, they may not have standing to sue). I’m sure there are crafty technical arguments for OKCPS lawyers’ to deploy in litigation to wiggle the district out of any real accountability. Given the well-documented, sorry state of the Oklahoma courts, those arguments would likely find a favorable audience.


Nonetheless, there is no doubt that OKCPS is trampling all over the spirit of the law, if not the letter. Perhaps parents will get fed up enough with this type of offensive, privileged behavior to retain the services of some enterprising attorney and they’ll make a go of it. I’d be happy to file an amicus brief giving my two cents on the matter.


Besides, we don’t need a cognizable violation of the law to know right from wrong. This is wrong.


Perhaps something positive will come out of this pandemic freakout after all. Maybe more parents will wake up to the unfair realities of the public school system we have constructed in this country, and we’ll demand our elected leaders do something about it. As far as I’m concerned, now would be a good time for Education Savings Accounts, which would empower parents to take some of the funding intended for their child’s education and use it for that purpose, rather than it being misappropriated to modern-day versions of the Soviet dachas.


Benjamin Lepak is Legal Fellow at the 1889 Institute. He can be reached at blepak@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

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. ...
Read more

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

Protecting Unlicensed Occupations from Government-Sanctioned Cartels

Great care must be taken in repealing occupational licensing laws. No, not care in which licensing regimes are repealed or how quickly we are rid of them. They can all go, post haste (yes, that includes doctors and lawyers). Licensing hurts the economy to the tune of $200 Billion each year. A practitioner in a licensed field can expect to charge an unearned premium of 10-12 percent over his unlicensed peers. And licensing has shown almost no benefits in terms of improving public safety. The small benefits - such as a shorthand indicating which practitioners have received a minimum amount of training - could be better achieved through private certification without the economic harms visited by licensing regimes.   No, the care that must be taken is in the unintended consequences of repealing individual licenses. There are times when groups of practitioners will ask the government to regulate them not because they want those sweet monopoly profits (though surely they reali...
Read more

School Teachers Begging for Basics

What if a hospital’s administrators regularly told surgeons to make do without bandages, with dull scalpels, and little to no anesthetic while claiming tight finances? With all the money hospitals have , there would be questions about the administrators’ competence and possibly audits to look for malfeasance. Something like this needs to happen at Oklahoma City Public Schools. My wife is a teacher working in the Oklahoma City Public Schools (OKCPS) system. Last year, she came home telling me how there was no paper available for the notoriously few and regularly broken, undersupplied duplicating machines at her school. What’s more, there was no plan for the district to provide any. In the past, she was told, a parent had donated paper to that particular campus, but that parent had transferred his child to a private school. The school had surplus paper from previous years, but that was gone. There were no plans for the district to provide more. Now, I am well aware that educatio...
Read more