What’s up this week at Oklahoma Policy Institute? The Weekly Wonk is dedicated to this week’s events, publications, and blog posts.

This week at OK Policy, we reported that June General Revenue (GR) collections came in $66.2 million, or 13.0 percent, above the official certified estimate.  While revenues are on an upwards swing, they still face a steep upward climb and will have little, if any, impact on the current year budget.

Also this week, we detailed the toll of budget cuts to education on programs promoting high-quality teaching and schools.  If Oklahoma is to have any chance of improving our students’ educational performance, we need to support excellence in our teachers and administrators.  Read an interview on OK Policy’s Blog with Dr. Thomas Benediktson about the University of Tulsa’s new focus on urban education. Read the rest of this entry »

A few months ago, we blogged about a special screening of the feature-length documentary Panic Nation at the University of Tulsa, and the film did not disappoint.  Filmaker George Adams was on hand to discuss the movie and the rise of state-sponsored immigration laws in the U.S.  The film addresses Oklahoma’s HB 1804 in depth, which at the time it passed in 2007 was seen as the most restrictive state immigration law in the country.

Panic Nation is available for sale online.  If you’ve seen the film, share your thoughts in the comments section below.  If you’re curious, check out this preview trailer:

It was a busy session.  Last Friday marked the deadline for Governor Fallin to take final action on bills that landed on her desk. Now that sine die has passed, we thought it would be useful for OK Policy to do inventory and update you on the status of the bills we wrote about this session on our blog.

There were over two dozen immigration bills introduced this session.  Neither of the ‘English only’ bills, HB 2083 and SB 905, intended as implementing legislation for State Question 751, were approved by the legislature.  On our blog, we advised against passage and pointed out that the bills would have imposed new and draconian restrictions on speech and potentially entangled state officials in a legal double bind.  We also blogged about two bills, SB 683 and HB 1446, that sought to rescind resident tuition eligibility for undocumented high school students enrolling in public colleges and universities.  The stand alone bill, SB 683, died in House committee and the sections pertaining to resident tuition eligibility were removed from HB 1446 in conference committee.  We have blogged extensively about other sections of HB 1446, the omnibus immigration legislation which went through several incarnations and was eventually defeated on the House floor by a vote of 62 (N) to 31 (Y). Read the rest of this entry »

With Oklahoma again debating bills to impose new restrictions on immigrants, a documentary that looks at the impact of the state’s first foray into the immigration field will have a showing in Tulsa next week.  Panic Nation, a multi-award winning documentary on the rise of state-sponsored immigration laws will be shown at the University of Tulsa’s John Rogers Hall on Monday, April 11, at 6 p.m.  The documentary film examines how laws like Oklahoma’s HB 1804 and Arizona’s SB 1070 are affecting more than just those without documentation.  Panic Nation approaches these recent state moves towards stricter immigration policy from a unique prospective:

This distinctive motion picture examines state sponsored immigration laws with an open, direct approach.  There must be a balance among subjects including national security, job protection, labor concerns, and our economy.  We need to create a dialogue sitting at a table rather than yelling at each other from across the street. Read the rest of this entry »

What’s up this week at Oklahoma Policy Institute? The Weekly Wonk is dedicated to this week’s events, publications, and blog posts.

This week OK Policy released a new issue brief outlining 2011 immigration legislation.  To clarify the key issues and help you interpret the debate, our Overview of 2011 Immigration Legislation provides a clear and concise summary of the four remaining bills before the 53rd Legislature.  The issue brief also provides in-depth coverage of the central omnibus bill, HB 1446, with a breakdown of each provision’s potential implications.  Along with the brief, yesterday’s blog post surveys the political landscape surrounding the immigration debate in Oklahoma.  Next Monday April 11th, the University of Tulsa will screen Panic Nation, a multi-award winning documentary on the rise of state-sponsored immigration laws. Read the rest of this entry »

© 2011 Caroline Cook

Immigration is back on the agenda in Oklahoma, four years after passage of  HB 1804, a law intended to give the state new powers to stem illegal immigration.  The issue is once again highly contentious, as Oklahoma wades further into areas of law traditionally reserved for the federal government.  Some are urging Oklahoma to push beyond HB 1804 and pass legislation akin to Arizona’s SB 1070 that received national attention as one of the strictest immigration laws in the country.  On the other side,  prominent business, religious, and community leaders caution lawmakers against enacting sweeping measures that target working families, are likely unconstitutional, and tarnish the state’s image.  They point to the mounting economic toll of similar legislation in other states – 45 million in hotel industry losses alone in Arizona – and worry that laws targeting employers scare off prospective investment and slow economic development.

Out of two dozen immigration bills introduced during the 2011 Legislative session, four are still active. Attention has focused on HB 1446, co-authored by the chairs of the special Joint Immigration Reform Committee, Rep. George Faught and Sen. Ron Justice, which legislative leadership has identified as “a starting point for the discussion” on immigration.  HB 1446 covers vast territory, with provisions pertaining to day labor, hiring, record-keeping, ‘human smuggling,’ and higher education.  Those who support additional state legislation on immigration cite the need to expand the authority of law enforcement to deal with drug trafficking, gang activity, human trafficking and human smuggling, problems which are seen to be exacerbated by illegal immigration.  Yet, HB 1446 (and sections of SB 908) only address the human smuggling concern and would make it arguably more difficult to isolate perpetrators of human smuggling. Read the rest of this entry »

What’s up this week at Oklahoma Policy Institute? The Weekly Wonk is dedicated to this week’s events, publications, and blog posts.

This week OK Policy released a fact sheet on gross production tax exemptions.  Gross production of oil and gas is normally taxed at seven percent, but various types of production are fully or partly exempt from the tax.  Monday’s blog post, “I don’t need it but I’ll take it,” ponders the fiscal wisdom of handing out tens of millions of dollars in exemptions when even oil industry executives admit the breaks are of the least importance in their decision to drill.  The Tulsa World reports on OK Policy’s research and the millions in lost revenue from oil and gas exemptions.

Tuesday’s blog highlighted legislative efforts to rescind higher education benefits for undocumented students.  Two bills working their way through the legislative process seek to turn back the clock by repealing a 2003 law that allowed undocumented Oklahoma high school students to be eligible for resident tuition status at public colleges and universities.  Despite the claim that tax-payers are subsidizing ‘illegal aliens,’ the amount in tuition and fees paid into the higher education system by undocumented students – $1,074,693 between 2005 and 2009 – far exceeded the amount the state waived for in-state status ($254,026). Read the rest of this entry »

In the spring of 2003, Saul Munoz* was a Tulsa high school senior thinking seriously about his future.  Saul’s parents had moved the family to Oklahoma years earlier, leaving Mexico at a time of increasing violence and instability, and he was not a legal U.S. resident.  A member of the National Honor Society, ranked in the top ten in his class, and enrolling in extra math and science classes to graduate with a Certificate of Distinction, Saul worried constantly about what would happen after graduation.  He couldn’t enroll in college and even if he were allowed to enroll he knew his family would struggle with the tuition payments.  His teachers, unaware of his immigration status, peppered him with questions about his plans and couldn’t understand why a student so smart and so clearly driven was not more proactive about applying for admission and scholarships. In February, a few months before graduation, Saul heard about a bill making its way through the state legislature. Read the rest of this entry »

Note: These remarks were originally delivered by  Alice Blue upon receiving the Tulsa Coalition of Hispanic Organizations Annual Thanksgiving Award in November 2010. Alice  is a Senior Planner with the Community Service Council of Tulsa.

I come to this gathering and to my work in our community as the youngest child in a family of survivors. My parents, Rose and Daniel Blue, of blessed memory, gave me their love, their name, and their history. When their lives were just beginning to unfold, they were swept up in a unique and terrible storm. They were Polish Jews in a fateful time and place, where their ancestors had lived for centuries. Hardly anyone came through alive. My mother’s parents and brothers were murdered. My father’s young wife was killed along with his sister and brother and their families. When my parents found each other and married in Bergen Belsen, their survival was a piece of rare good fortune. Jewish life in Poland had come to a terrible end.

But their survival was not the end of the story. Belsen was in the American zone, but that did not mean a speedy exit from the DP camp. My parents waited for visas, and continued to wait while the great wheels turned with great inefficiency. I am absolutely certain that they would have entered this country illegally had it been possible to go by foot from Europe to America. The only thing that kept them waiting was an ocean, and their faith that America would eventually do the right thing. Read the rest of this entry »

Our public schools already shoulder a great deal of responsibility. They are expected not only to teach our children reading, writing and arithmetic, but also, in many cases, to help make sure that they are adequately fed and nourished, to help them cope with disabilities, to instill in them core values of good citizenship, and to help those who come from afar integrate into our community. But should our schools also have the responsibility to serve as arms of the immigration enforcement authorities?

That, in practice, is what a bill introduced this legislative session by Representative Randy Terrill would force our schools to become. HB 3384, under the guise of collecting data on the population of students who are not lawfully present in the United States, would require the presentation by parents “for inspection to a designated school official at the school in which the child is enrolled of official documentation establishing the citizenship or immigration status of the child.”  Each school district would be required to make a determination of the student’s legal status and then compile and report this information to the State Department of Education. Read the rest of this entry »

No piece of legislation in Oklahoma in the past decade was more controversial or contentious than HB 1804. Passed in 2007, HB 1804 – officially designated the Oklahoma Taxpayer and Citizen Act – enacted a series of restrictions intended to limit access to jobs and public services for undocumented immigrants and to expand the powers of state and local law enforcement to verify the legal status of those they encounter.

Supporters and critics alike labeled HB 1804 as among “the toughest anti-illegal immigrant bills in the nation”. Supporters fervently hoped, while opponents fervently feared, that passage and implementation of HB 1804 would have a significant effect on the undocumented population of the state, encouraging many to leave the state and deterring others from coming, while making life harder and more precarious for those who remained. Read the rest of this entry »

In the last days of this year’s legislative session, House Bill 2250 passed with little fanfare. HB 2250 puts a  tax on wire transfers–$5 plus one percent on the amount over $500, with proceeds going to the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs. It’s  a good example of how bad law–in this case, an unfair and regressive tax that hurts Oklahoma businesses, threates to create an illegal money transmission market, and risks legal challenges–happens when people aren’t watching.

Don’t be surprised if you have not heard of this bill. The tax was never publicly discussed before appearing in a conference committee report just days before the Legislature adjourned. All indications are that few legislators were aware that the final version of the bill added a new tax. That suggests something is fundamentally wrong with our legislative system.

What did we get from this exercise in closed-door government? Three potential problems, at a minimum:

• The new law hurts low-income people. Person-to-person wire transfers are most often used by those who don’t have bank accounts, are transient, or are here from other countries. While the last group was the intended target, many others will be hurt. The law’s provision for an income tax credit for the wire transfer tax does not eliminate its sting. People with incomes below a certain threshold are not currently required to file federal and state income tax returns and so will be unlikely to claim the remittance credit. Even Oklahomans of all income levels who do file state tax returns–including parents sending money to college students– will face a substantial administrative burden to qualify for the credit. Many will fail to claim the credit for all their transfers and will end up paying a tax not intended for them.
• The law punishes legitimate businesses and encourages illegitimate ones. Wire transfer agents provide an important service and they are regulated by both the federal and state governments. This law cannot help but to reduce their revenue in an already difficult economy. Worse, some federal agencies have previously expressed concern that laws like this will drive transfers out of legitimate businesses and into the underground money transfer market, which is widely recognized as supporting money laundering practices. Appleseed, a network of public interest justice centers,  has called upon the U.S. Department of the Treasury to issue a statement about the risks of this illicit market and has asked the administration to issue a statement similar to the one President Bush issued on cutting costs of remittances.
• The new remittance charge may  open the state up to needless, costly legal challenges, which Mike Jones describes in the Tulsa World:

There is a question, however, whether it is a tax and a revenue bill or simply a fee. If it is a tax it could be in violation of the state Constitution because it passed in the final five days of the legislative session and takes effect Nov. 1, less than 90 days from passage, which is prohibited by the Constitution.

Similar laws have been challenged in other states, including Georgia and Texas. To be classified as a fee it has to go to the entity regulating the service for which the fee is charged. Under this bill, the beneficiary of the fee seems to be the Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs, which has no authority over illegal immigration, other than drug issues.

It also could be challenged as a restraint of interstate commerce. Congress has the power to regulate commerce among the states and states cannot place undue burden on that commerce.

At Oklahoma Policy Institute, we believe Oklahoma should be a model for open government, policies that do not punish people based on their income, and programs that encourage and protect individuals who want to improve their financial security. This law does not move us in that direction, but away from it. We hope all Oklahomans–those affected directly by this law and those who share our goals for the state–will learn more and ask if this is where our state should be headed.