OKLAHOMA CITY

When the 58th Oklahoma Legislature convened shortly after Joe Biden’s inauguration sealed the theft of the 2020 Presidential Election, no one knew whether the legislators would sense the urgency of the moment and finally push through the quagmire of “business as usual” politics.

As it turns out, the 58th Legislature will go down as one of the most staunchly conservative in Oklahoma’s history, with major advances taken to end abortion, protect 1st and 2nd Amendment rights, and stand up to the looming overreach of the Communists now in control of the Federal government.

With the session now in our rearview mirror, it’s a good time to look back and celebrate some of the historic achievements, as well as analyze a couple of head-scratching misses.

Abortion Ban Finally Passes

Perhaps the greatest disappointment in recent years was in 2016 when then-Governor Mary Fallin vetoed the Medical Licensing Bill that would have ended the horrific practice of abortion in the Sooner State, after promising to support it. This year, the Medical Licensing Bill was not only brought back up and passed, but two additional bills were added that will effectively criminalize 99% of all abortions performed in the state.

The Medical Licensing Bill, which reemerged as HB 1102, formally defined performing an abortion as “unprofessional conduct”, which justifies the Oklahoma State Board of Health to suspend the medical license of any medical practitioner who performs an abortion for “not less than 1 year.” The bill even included a much tougher “life of the mother” exception, stating, “an abortion may not be performed based solely on the mental or emotional health of the mother, notwithstanding a claim or diagnosis that the woman may engage in conduct which she intends to result in her death.”

Oklahoma also went after the medical licenses of abortion providers in HB 1904, which requires any physician performing an abortion to be board certified in obstetrics and gynecology. The significance of this bill is that none of the state’s abortion providers currently employ, or have, board certified OBGYNs performing abortions. The bill has strong legal precedent behind it since the State of Mississippi already passed a very similar piece of legislation several years ago which has stood the test in the courts. So even if the other two bills get struck down, this bill will make it impossible for abortion clinics to remain in business.

Lastly, Oklahoma also added its own version of the Heartbeat act (HB 2441), now requires anyone performing an abortion to conduct ultrasounds to detect a fetal heartbeat. If such heartbeat is detected, performing an abortion is now defined as a homicide in Oklahoma.

All three bills are set to become law on November 1st.

The Religious Freedom Acts

HB 2648 and SB 368 took two different approaches to protecting religious liberty in Oklahoma, in response to the unconstitutional restrictions placed on churches during the plandemic. Ignite Liberty interviewed Representative Brian Hill (R-Mustang), the driving force behind both bills along with Senator Bullard, to get a better understanding of the legislature’s strategy for protecting houses of worship throughout the state.

“SB 368 was the foundation, the backstop if you will, or our strategy,” Hill explained. “We had houses of worship that were being told by municipalities like Tulsa that they had to rope off every other pew, force the church staff to wear masks, and limit their capacity to 50%. These weren’t even restrictions that were placed on big box stores, yet they declared churches to be ‘super-spreaders’ and cracked down on them. It was absolutely preposterous! So we started off by declaring all gatherings of faith to be considered ‘essential’. That’s what SB 368 did.”

“But we didn’t stop there,” Hill continued. “We looked around the country and saw what was happening to churches and houses of worship in states like California and Louisiana, where pastors are under threat of arrest and jail just for having church, and knew we needed to do everything possible to make sure it didn’t happen here. So we crafted HB 2648 to declare that political entities in Oklahoma had absolutely no authority over churches whatsoever. Jay Sekulow and the ACLJ were a tremendous help to us in crafting the language of 2648.

“It really just echoed the principles already found in both the U.S. and Oklahoma Constitutions. Its a sad commentary on our times that we even had to do that here in Oklahoma, but when we had the City of Tulsa refusing to allow some churches to meet even outside, it was apparent that we as a legislative body had to do something to protect the religious liberty of all Oklahomans.

“If you had told me 5 years ago that we would even need to do that here in Oklahoma, I would have thought you were crazy,” Hill added. “If we lose the 1st Amendment we will lose the rest of them. I think it no small thing that our Founding Fathers placed the principles found in the 1st Amendment first, especially considering the situation they came out of. They knew that those liberties were, and still are, the foundation of all of our God-given liberties. It was incumbent upon us, as the people’s representatives to step up and do our job to defend those liberties. I am proud to have played a part in that effort.”

Hill concluded, “I want to also express my gratitude to the organizations of faith and the various denominations that rallied around this crucial legislation. As a 4th generation preacher myself, this goes to the core of what it means for me to be an Oklahoman. We had so many pastors and groups of faith support it because they understood the importance of what we were fighting for. I also appreciate Gov Stitt and his team coming alongside the House in full agreement. They recognized that administrations change, and if we’re not prepared for what the next thing could be we could be in a much worse place as people of faith and as Christians. Hopefully Oklahoma, as a state, is leading the way to show other states how critical it is that they stand up for our essential rights.”

The Big Misses

Despite the overwhelming successes of this session, no legislative term is ever perfect. There were two bills in particular that caused a great deal of frustration for their failure to pass, or to how they were altered.

The first was the debacle around HB 1236, the State’s Rights Bill. We’ve covered this bill extensively, so we won’t revisit it here. Though a version of it did eventually pass, the perhaps the most astonishing moment of the session occurred when Senate Pro Tem Greg Treat (R-Oklahoma City), stripped the language out of the original House bill on the grounds that it violated the Separation of Powers clause in the U.S. Constitution.

That particular clause essentially states that the three branches of the Federal Government have to stay in their lane, so to speak. Congress legislates, the Executive Branch enforces, and the Judicial Branch interprets. Treat inexplicably decided to try and apply those principles to the House version of HB 1236 by stating that the State legislature couldn’t just overrule the Federal government, a concept foreign to any understanding of the 10th Amendment.

Speaker Charles McCall correctly argued that it was well within the State’s power to keep the Federal government in check. Ultimately, Treat used the bill to expand government and add an additional bureaucracy onto the Attorney Generals office (the State Reserved Powers Unit) to handle any objections to Federal statutes, rules, or orders. The move infuriated conservatives in Treat’s district, which is comprised of NE Oklahoma County. Unfortunately, because he is termed out, the anger of his constituents had little impact.

The other major debacle was Treat’s refusal to allow SB 2, the Save Women’s Sports Act, to be heard on the Senate floor. The act, supported by every major conservative group in the state, would have banned biological males from competing in organized girls sports in Oklahoma, whether OSSAA or college. Treat’s excuse for stonewalling the bill was that this really wasn’t a problem yet in Oklahoma. Contrast that statement with the proactive approach of Representative Hill above, and you have a crystal clear picture of why Oklahoma’s legislature has been known more for what they haven’t done in recent years than for what they have.

Election Integrity In Focus For 2022

In addition to trying to get the Save Women’s Sports Act passed next year, several conservative groups in the metro area (including Ignite Liberty) have already stated that election integrity bills will be their primary focus going into next legislative session. Part of the reason why it wasn’t addressed this term is that the full analysis of Oklahoma’s elections was not yet complete. Ignite Liberty, along with the Oklahoma County GOP, has been meeting with election integrity experts over recent months to complete that analysis. A full report is expected by the end of the summer.

A large part of the success enjoyed this term was due to the citizens and voters getting actively involved with the legislative process. As has been often said about elections, if we aren’t involved in the process we can’t really complain about the results. We are blessed to have many outstanding legislators in our State House. Senators Rob Standridge, Nathan Dahm, Jake Merrick, and Representatives Denise Crosswhite-Hader, Brian Hill, and many, many others who we won’t name here are the very definition of public servants.

In order for them to serve us effectively, we need to be involved in the process. From our experience this session, they are happy to listen to our input, take our suggestions, and in many cases put them into action. We just have to do our part. After all, that’s what government “of the people, by the people, and for the people,” is all about.

 

Oklahoma City

After the passage of State Question 802 last summer mandated the expansion of Oklahoma’s medicare to, “include those individuals over age 18 and under age 65 whose income does not exceed one-hundred thirty-three percent (133%) of the federal poverty level,” the Oklahoma Health Care Authority sent out Requests for Proposals (RFP) to private companies to help manage the Medicaid expansion in Oklahoma. After receiving those proposals, the OCHA then signed the contracts with several private managed care organizations (MCOs) to manage SoonerCare’s (Oklahoma’s Medicaid program) expansion without the Legislature having a chance to review the proposals or contracts.

In response, earlier this year the OHCA by the Oklahoma State Medical Association, Oklahoma Dental Association, the Oklahoma Osteopathic Association, the Oklahoma Society fo Anesthesiologists, Inc., and the Oklahoma Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, Inc., alleging that the OCHA violated state law by attempting to, “implement a species of managed care not validly authorized by statute and without conforming to the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act.”

CRT-based Healthcare

Though the contracts themselves have not been made available to the public, the RFP’s bring deep concern as to the direction that OHCA is taking SoonerCare…and for good reason. In an interview with Fox 25, Kevin Corbett, Governor Stitt’s appointed CEO of the OHCA, stated, “There is much work to be done and countless problems that must be fixed, but the first step to addressing any of these issues is to acknowledge they exist. As a white male, I have been ignorant for too long about the privilege I have been afforded due to the color of my skin and my gender.”

These views seem to have found their way into the RFP as to the expectations for what the MCO’s were to incorporate into their contracts. On page 193 of the RFP, under the section titled Cultural Competency, the contractors are required to, “develop a cultural competency and sensitivity plan for review and approval by OHCA at the time of Readiness Review. The plan shall include guidelines for evaluating and monitoring disparities in membership and service quality, especially with regard to minority groups.” In short, it is implementing the standards of Critical Race Theory to determine who gets service under the state’s Medicaid plans, and who doesn’t.

CRT’s influence is further see on page 189 of the RFP under the Health Disparities section, where it requires the contractor to, “maintain health equity representatives who are actively involved in improvement initiatives to reduce disparities.” So if you happen to be a struggling “white” Oklahoman that relies on SoonerCare to provide healthcare for your family, you could be discriminated against based upon those standards alone.

Sidestepping Abortion Bans

The RFP also, on page 154, would permit the funding of abortion along federal guidelines…not state guidelines. As such, SoonerCare would still be permitted to pay for abortions where rape or incest have occurred, regardless of whether the anti-abortion laws just passed by the legislature goes into effect on November 1st or not. By using the weaker language federal language for the “life of the mother exception” it allows doctors to perform abortions if in their judgement the believe that, “the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term.”

The language in the anti-abortion bills just signed into law require a much higher burden of proof for a doctor to use this exception. HB 2441, the “medical licensing bill” signed into law a couple weeks ago, stated, “an abortion may not be performed based solely on the mental or emotional health of the mother, notwithstanding a claim or diagnosis that the woman may engage in conduct which she intends to result in her death.”

The Legislature’s Solution

In addition to these concerns, members of the legislature have expressed deep concerns about what outsourcing SoonerCare to out-of-state MCO’s could do to healthcare costs in Oklahoma. In an interview Friday with Ignite Liberty, Senator Rob Standridge (R-Norman) pointed to nearby examples of what policies like this can do. “To believe the likely increase in costs to taxpayers, look no further than Texas or Kansas where the costs have skyrocketed since outsourcing to MCOs.” Meanwhile, Sen. Standridge pointed out that during that same period “Oklahoma’s cost per recipient has remained flat.”

To address this issue, Senator Jessica Garvin (R-Duncan) authored Senate Bill 131, the “Oklahomans Caring for Oklahomans Act”, which would immediately invalidate the contracts signed by the OCHA without the legislature’s approval, and would slow the rush for outsourcing SoonerCare. The Act requires the creation of a “program that controls costs and improves health outcomes for Medicaid recipients.”

The program does not come without its costs, as the estimated fiscal impact is in excess of $263M per year for the first 5 years. The money would go to, “continue building and sustaining infrastructure and maintaining a statewide staff…additional personnel, upgraded IT systems, data analytics, infrastructure needs, web portals/tools to reach members, etc.”

The price tag and new government program has caused some in conservative circles to balk. Jonathan Small, the President of OCPA (Oklahoma Center for Public Policy), has organized a rally next Tuesday against the passage of SB 131. In am email sent out Friday, Small claimed, “Instead of reforming Oklahoma’s Medicaid program and cutting waste from the medical welfare program—like Gov. Stitt’s plan would do—SB 131 would create a new government program that would cost up to $277 million and require hiring 1,200 welfare workers.”

Small also accused liberal Democrats and special interest groups of being behind SB 131, however the measure does have support from the vast majority of the conservatives in the legislature. Additionally, as has been pointed out by Ignite Liberty President, Bryan Armstrong, the Democrats lack the political power in Oklahoma to get anything passed.

SB 131 initially passed the Senate 45-0, and passed the House 73-17. The bill now heads back to the Senate for final approval. Due to changes in the bill from the original language, the vote is expected to be much closer the second time around.

The Big Question

Big question remain about the measure. For instance, who should be in charge of Oklahoman’s healthcare? Oklahomans or private out-of-state companies? The deep concern among conservative Oklahomans is that the out-of-state MCO’s will see this as a way of sidestepping the huge leaps that the Oklahoma Legislature has taken this term to eliminate abortion and Critical Race Theory from our state. From the looks of it, it appears like it is a concern that is well-founded.

However, is an expansion of state government a good idea? The conservative position is usually no, especially if the government is expanding in an area that it shouldn’t. However, the reality is that State Question 802 was passed by Oklahomans. The real concern is should healthcare be weaponized against conservatives, like disabled veterans, who need to use SoonerCare to provide healthcare to their families?

Would SB 131 increase the tax burden on Oklahomans? Yes. As has been seen in our neighboring states, allowing out-of-state MCO’s to manage SoonerCare will undoubtedly cause all Oklahomans healthcare prices to skyrocket, whether they use SoonerCare or not. Such policies can be devastating to any attempts to grow Oklahoma’s economy to the level that it can compete with for jobs and businesses with our neighbors to the south. That affects all Oklahomans in a very real way.

Perhaps the biggest question of all is if we, as Oklahomans, can afford to allow a state agency to bind the state to contracts which that agency had no authority to sign. Doing so would essentially invalidate the legislature’s authority and turn Oklahoma into nothing more than a massive bureaucracy where we are governed by unelected bureaucrats shoving their godless world views down our throats.

While all of these are an uncomfortable concepts, for most conservatives the latter is far more repulsive.

Oklahoma City

Panic set in over the weekend throughout the various conservative groups across the metro area as rumors began to swirl about a possible veto of HB 1775 from Governor Stitt. HB 1775 is the measure which would ban teaching the principles of Critical Race Theory in any public school or university in Oklahoma.

Monday morning Don Spencer, President of OK2A, put out an alert to his subscribers about the possible veto, spurring a tidal wave of action from nearly every conservative group in the Metro area, as well as the newly-minted OKGOP Chairman, John Bennett. By Monday afternoon, the Governor’s office was flooded with calls from concerned Oklahomans encouraging him to sign the legislation.

Ignite Liberty reached out to Senator Rob Standridge, the Senate author of the bill, to confirm the rumors of the potential veto.

As it turns out, the concerns may have been overstated. Though he could only confirm the rumors he had heard, Sen. Standridge stated that there had been an error in the tabulation of the voting in the house upon the bill’s final passage. Such procedural errors could have doomed the legislation should the bill had been challenged on Constitutional grounds in court. To fix this, the measure was withdrawn from the Governor’s desk as given a fourth reading and vote on the House floor.

In the end, the measure actually gained 7 votes as it passed with the emergency intact by a vote of 77-18. It had originally passed 70-19.

As of yesterday, May 4th, the bill was sent back to the Governor’s office for approval. It is widely expected that he will sign it into law, though he usually has 5 days from its arrival on his desk to sign it.

The measure, once signed, will bring much-needed relief to parents throughout the state, but especially in Edmond, Norman and Jenks School Districts where conservative parents and students have been suffering under the racist, Marxist ideology being force-fed to them by the radicals in charge of the schools.

While the measure does immediately ban the principles of Critical Race Theory from being taught in Oklahoma, it refers the measure over to the state’s regulatory authority over for enforcement. As such, the implementation and punitive aspects will be determined by the State Department of Education. Though the measure will absolutely give Oklahoma parents a much needed victory over CRT, it is still incumbent upon each parent to ensure that the local school districts are adhering to the new legislation.

As John Philpot Curran stated in a 1790 speech, “Eternal vigilance is indeed  the price of liberty.” For Oklahoma parents and schoolchildren, that vigilance is more important now than ever.

 

Oklahoma City – In a continuing assault on the abortion industry in Oklahoma, today Governor Stitt signed into law SB 584, the Defunding Fetal-Body-Parts Trafficking Act. Authored by Senators Dahm, Bullard, Treat, Jett, Stephens, Bergstrom and Taylor, the bill is a continued response to Project Veritas’ investigation in recent years of Planned Parenthood’s involvement in trafficking fetal body parts.

While Oklahoma has had laws against the trafficking of fetal body parts for some time, SB 584 specifically targets State funding to organizations that participate in this despicable practice. The bill amends 56 O.S. Supp. 2020, Section 1005.4, and inserts the following underlined language:

Oklahoma City – In a flurry of activity today, Governor Stitt signed 3 bills targeted at ending abortion once and for all in the Sooner State, as well as the much-lauded Second Amendment Sanctuary Act, into law today, making this one of the most productive days of the legislative session for the state’s Chief Executive. All three abortion bills go into effect November 1st, while the Second Amendment bill goes into effect immediately.

Abortion Criminalized in Oklahoma

The three bills targeting abortion were led by Oklahoma’s version of the Heartbeat Act that has already passed in several other states. The bill, HB 2441, now requires anyone performing an abortion to conduct ultrasounds to detect a fetal heartbeat. If such heartbeat is detected, performing an abortion is now defined as a homicide in Oklahoma.

The only exception allowed in the bill is if, “the mother has a condition that so complicates her medical condition that it necessitates the abortion of her pregnancy to avert her death or to avert serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function.” However, the measure goes onto to clarify that, “No such condition may be determined to exist if it is based on a claim or diagnosis that the woman will engage in conduct which she intends to result in her death or in substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function.”

While this bill is unlikely to appease the ultra-abolitionists, the reality is that this bill practically eliminates all abortions performed in the State of Oklahoma. A fetal heartbeat is detectable at 5-6 weeks gestation, usually before a woman knows she is pregnant. As for the “life of the mother” exception, most “high-risk” pregnancies aren’t diagnosed until second trimester at the soonest, long after the heartbeat is detected. As such, the Heartbeat Act as written criminalizes every abortion performed in Oklahoma except for those performed using RU-486 (the “morning after” pill). Most importantly, the bill only criminalizes those performing the abortion, not the mother.

Medical Licensing Bill Passed

In addition to the Heartbeat Act, HB 1102, known as the Medical Licensing Bill, was also signed into law. This bill was passed by the legislature in 2016 under strong support from the pro-life community in Oklahoma, led by Pastor Paul Blair of Fairview Baptist – Edmond. At the time, Governor Fallin had promised Pastor Blair and others that she would sign the bill. Fully expecting a fight, Pastor Blair had even lined up support from the Liberty Counsel who agreed to help defend the bill in court once the ACLU sued. However, at the last second Governor Fallin went back on her word and vetoed the legislation.

HB 1102 formally defines performing an abortion as “unprofessional conduct”, which justifies the Oklahoma State Board of Health to suspend the medical license of any medical practitioner who performs an abortion for “not less than 1 year.” The bill does include a similar “life of the mother” exception as HB 2441, to include the provision that, “an abortion may not be performed based solely on the mental or emotional health of the mother, notwithstanding a claim or diagnosis that the woman may engage in conduct which she intends to result in her death.”

The last bill targeting abortion is HB 1904, which requires any physician performing an abortion to be board certified in obstetrics and gynecology. The significance of this bill is that if immediately puts one of the metro-area’s most prolific and long-standing abortion providers out of business. Dr. Larry Burns’ office in Norman has been open and performing abortion since 1975. Effective November 1st, he will be out of business.

Oklahoma now a Second Amendment Sanctuary State

The last of the bills signed today was a measure that officially makes Oklahoma a “Second Amendment Sanctuary.” The bill, back by OK2A, “preempts the entire field of legislation by any agency of this state, or any political subdivision in this state to infringe upon the rights of a citizen of the State of Oklahoma the unalienable right to keep and bear arms.” It further clarifies that, “any federal, state, county or municipal act, law, executive order, administrative order, court order, rule, policy or regulation ordering the buy-back, confiscation or surrender of firearms, firearm accessories or ammunition from law-abiding citizens of this state shall be considered an infringement on the rights of citizens.”

Such bill would have gone hand-in-hand with the original language of HB 1236 in giving the Legislature the statutory authority to override any Federal Law or Executive Order which infringed upon the Second Amendment rights of Oklahomans. Since Senator Greg Treat gutted the original language of the bill, essentially forcing the legislature to abdicate it’s responsibility to protect Oklahomans from Federal overreach, that role, should the measure pass the House, will go to a board of unelected bureaucrats.