Here is the audio of Oklahoma Watch’s published stories for the week of December 29, 2025.

– Full Week Playlist: Listen to all the stories back-to-back, without interruption.
– Individual Stories: Select and play any story you’d like to hear, at your convenience.

Full Week Playlist:

Individual Stories:

Fact Briefs:

Oklahoma Watch Is Looking for an Audio Story Sponsor
We’re currently seeking a sponsor for our audio stories. Thanks to our friends at Everlit for helping make this feature highly customizable for sponsorship.

Interested in becoming a sponsor or would like to learn more? Contact Shaun Witt at switt@oklahomawatch.org or 405-824-1469.

The post Audio Stories: December 29, 2025 appeared first on Oklahoma Watch.

Outbreaks of measles and whooping cough in Oklahoma have led to calls for greater transparency from the Oklahoma State Department of Health as the state stands alone in only sharing measles cases on a statewide basis. 

Infectious disease and public health experts said the timely sharing of cases with the public can help communities mitigate the spread of disease.

Dr. George Monks, a Tulsa dermatologist and former president of the Oklahoma State Medical Association, has been trying for months to get the state Health Department to share more data. He’s employed social media cajoling, open records requests and complaints to the attorney general’s public access counselor, to no avail. 

“This data is crucial for Oklahoma families to make informed decisions about their health, whether it be vaccine choice or avoiding high-risk areas,” Monks said. “Withholding that county-level measles data could delay the community response, especially since it is so contagious.” 

To date, Oklahoma has recorded 17 cases of measles in 2025. Nationally, the United States has had the highest number of measles cases in three decades. More than 800 of the 2,000 U.S. cases this year came in Texas back in the spring, although South Carolina is dealing with a current outbreak. 

Measles is a highly contagious, airborne virus with symptoms including rashes, high fevers, coughs, runny nose and red, watery eyes. The virus spreads through the air when an infected person coughs or sneezes. It can linger for up to two hours in a room after exposure.  

Monks first requested measles case data by county in March, along with agency communications with the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention about a measles outbreak in Oklahoma. The state Health Department provided some email correspondence with CDC, but it cited a section of the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA, in declining to release county measles data. Monks shared his requests and responses with Oklahoma Watch. 

In its Oct. 30 letter siding with the state Health Department, the attorney general’s office said the agency’s response was reasonable and noted its website has statistical information related to measles and potential public exposure. 

“Based on the information available to me at this time, I conclude that OSDH has a good-faith legal basis to deny access to the records sought by Dr. Monks,” wrote Anthony Sykes, the attorney general’s public access counselor. 

Oklahoma is the only state not providing measles cases by county or on a regional level, according to researchers at Johns Hopkins University. They published a study in September in JAMA, the journal of the American Medical Association, detailing their efforts to develop the U.S. Measles Tracker. 

Kansas only withholds county-level measles data if the cases are fewer than five, the researchers noted. Tennessee, Utah and Iowa provide regional case data, but not by county. 

“Single measles cases often represent the leading edge of potential outbreaks, making their rapid identification crucial for public health response,” the researchers said in a supplemental paper describing their methodology. “Geographic specificity, even for small case counts, enables public health officials to implement targeted contact tracing and exposure notifications. 

“Many state health departments routinely report individual measles cases in public communications, press releases, and exposure notifications, establishing precedent that individual case disclosure serves legitimate public health purposes.” 

Oklahoma used to disclose county-level measles cases as recently as 2019, during the last major measles outbreak. Media reports from that outbreak show measles in Okmulgee County. 

In an emailed response to questions from Oklahoma Watch, the state Health Department said its public data is sufficient to inform local communities of potential exposure to measles. 

It provides overall case counts, vaccination status, age range, median age of cases and any public exposure settings identified through investigation of a measles case. 

“Identified exposure locations are what pose a risk of spread to the public, and the county of residence may not always reflect the population or communities that may be at risk during a public health investigation,” the agency said. 

The state Health Department didn’t directly address questions on how other states are able to report county measles data. The agency said it continues to rely on its interpretation of federal HIPAA laws and Oklahoma’s public health code in not releasing county-level measles data. 

“Accordingly, OSDH has the discretion to determine the manner in which statistical communicable disease data may be released to the public to the extent that such release is in compliance with de-identification and disclosure requirements of HIPAA,” the department said in the email. 

Echoes of COVID

The debate over how and when to share infection data echoes those in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Oklahoma was slow to share community-level infection data. Even then, it provided county-level case information. 

In those first few months of the pandemic, Oklahoma Watch requested de-identified COVID-19 data from the state Health Department, including by city and ZIP code. Officials initially denied the request based on federal and state privacy laws, although those laws include exemptions to allow de-identified data. As the pandemic escalated, state health officials eventually provided localized data for COVID infections on an online data dashboard. 

The state Health Department said it used a risk-based approach to reporting COVID-19 cases to make recommendations around public gatherings and school closures. 

“The only way to implement such a system was to report ZIP code-level data,” the department said. “For measles, using exact public setting location and time provides individuals the information necessary to communicate the risk to the public. Again, it’s all about risk and managing it in such a way as to balance the public’s need to know with our obligation to protect an individual’s health information.” 

The state Health Department sent out potential measles exposure alerts earlier this year. The alerts included the addresses of stores and restaurants an infected person had visited. 

Oklahoma public health officials withholding of county-level measles data contrasts with the state’s tracking for West Nile virus, a mosquito-borne disease. The state Health Department’s infectious disease website includes the number of cases and county of incidence for that virus. 

“I don’t get it,” Monks said. “They’re citing these privacy concerns (for measles), but there’s no patient data assigned to this. It’s all just aggregate data. I don’t get how they can come down on one side and then a different side based on the infectious disease.” 

The state Health Department said decisions about releasing county-level data are made based on a number of factors, including overall case count, population of the county and case investigation impact. 

“For some diseases, like West Nile, it is important that the public is aware of the geographic location of the case to communicate the risk of disease to the public,” the agency said. “The majority of diseases publicly reported on our website are stratified by their respective region, rather than county-level, to help protect patient privacy, while still providing the public with a geographic distribution of disease burden.” 

Monks continues to request disease data from the Health Department. He’s asked for more information about pertussis, commonly called whooping cough, and tuberculosis. 

“This is a really important time to get this data out to the public,” Monks said. “In Oklahoma, this is the worst whooping cough outbreak in 70 years and the worst measles outbreak we’ve had in 35 years.” 

Monks said it’s a policy decision, not necessarily a public health decision, to withhold detailed data about respiratory disease outbreaks. Monks, who describes himself as a Reagan Republican, suspects some state leaders don’t want to raise the ire of the federal Health and Human Services Department under the leadership of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a longtime vaccine skeptic. 

“From the Republican standpoint, some have taken this position that this is a political football, and they really want to get away from pro-vaccinations and pro-science, especially in a primary,” Monks said. 

Paul Monies has been a reporter with Oklahoma Watch since 2017 and covers state agencies and public health. Contact him at (571) 319-3289 or pmonies@oklahomawatch.org. Follow him on Twitter @pmonies. 

The post Oklahoma Health Department Refuses to Share County-Level Measles Data appeared first on Oklahoma Watch.

The Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board can’t sidestep the Department of Corrections in determining medical parole eligibility, the attorney general’s office decided last month. 

The Parole Board voted 4-0 in October to request an attorney general’s opinion on the matter, asking whether its executive director had the statutory authority to place an inmate on the medical parole docket at a request made by any party. The request followed litigation filed by James Havens, a terminally ill Oklahoma prisoner who alleges the Department of Corrections did not adequately advance his medical parole application as his health deteriorated. 

State law stipulates that the Department of Corrections director has the authority to recommend medical parole. But as the number of medical parole referrals plummeted, the Board says it received several requests to adopt an expansive view of medical parole and take docketing requests from additional parties. 

“The state’s exposure to litigation will increase as long as the question remains outstanding, and the status quo unquestioned,” former Pardon and Parole Board Executive Director Tom Bates, who retired last month, wrote to Attorney General Gentner Drummond. 

Just 12 prisoners have been referred to a medical parole docket since the Legislature modified the statute in 2021, with half of them ultimately securing release. In 2020 alone, a dozen prisoners were granted medical parole. 

Meanwhile, the state’s aging prison population has doubled since 2009. 

The Department of Corrections adopted a multi-step bureaucratic process for medical parole after Senate Bill 320 became law. 

The agency’s policy, adopted in July 2022, requires a comprehensive public safety assessment after medical staff deems a prisoner eligible for medical parole. While other prisoners seeking parole face similar evaluations, they are not a prerequisite for securing a hearing before the Pardon and Parole Board. 

The policy also does not stipulate a timeline for the agency director to act on recommendations from medical and security staff. 

In a Dec. 19 opinion, the Attorney General’s office concluded that the Legislature had the authority to grant such discretion to the Department of Corrections director. The Pardon and Parole Board’s role in the medical process may begin only “on receipt of the DOC Director’s request.”

“The choice to initiate the medical parole process by requiring a request from the DOC Director falls within the Legislature’s power,” the opinion reads. “Ultimately, the PPB still has authority to recommend parole, and the Governor still has the final decision to grant parole.” 

Pardon and Parole Board Executive Director Kyle Counts said the opinion provides clear confirmation that the board is in compliance with the 2021 law change. 

At least one change to the statute has been proposed ahead of the 2026 legislative session, which begins Feb. 2. 

Senate Bill 1255 by Darcy Jech, R-Kingfisher, proposes transferring authority to recommend medical parole from the Department of Corrections director to the agency’s medical director. Jech organized an interim study on improving Oklahoma’s pardon and parole processes in October. 

Chris Garinger, an Oklahoma City-based attorney representing Havens, said giving the Department of Corrections discretionary authority over medical parole decisions defeats the purpose of having a parole board. 

“When a finding is made that somebody qualifies medically, it’s not DOC’s role to deny that person parole or approve that person’s parole,” he said in an October interview. “It’s their job to place them in front of the Parole Board to make that determination.” 

Keaton Ross covers democracy and criminal justice for Oklahoma Watch. Contact him at (405) 831-9753 or Kross@Oklahomawatch.org. Follow him on Twitter at @_KeatonRoss.

The post Attorney General: Only the DOC Director Can Refer Prisoners For Medical Parole appeared first on Oklahoma Watch.

On Dec. 30, in a hearing over Attorney General Gentner Drummond’s effort to intervene in a homeowner’s lawsuit against State Farm, Oklahoma District Court Judge Amy Palumbo wasted no time in announcing her belief that the maneuver was supported by Oklahoma law.

Drummond in a Dec. 4 court filing accused the insurance giant of racketeering. Tuesday’s proceeding kicked off with brief presentations that Palumbo interrupted with questions about what an intervention would look like and whether the homeowners objected to the attorney general’s maneuver.

Satisfied by the answers, Palumbo appeared ready to issue a ruling that may eventually enable release of documents in a case that has been mired in baroque legal shenanigans.

“I just fail to see how what State Farm has filed is anything other than irrelevant and disparaging material,” Palumbo said. “I understand what State Farm wanted me to get distracted by, but I do not find it to be on point or relevant. Having given it extensive thought, I believe the law does allow the attorney general to intervene. I do not think I require any further argument or explanation.”

Further argument is exactly what she got.

120,755 Claims

Hursh v. State Farm has become the symbolic figurehead of an alleged scheme to deny hundreds of wind and hail claims.

Drummond’s petition to intervene was the second time, at least, that State Farm has been accused of racketeering — in 2018, State Farm paid $250 million to settle a RICO case in which they were accused of buying a seat on the Illinois Supreme Court.

In the Hursh case, State Farm has consistently argued that what is at issue is a single family’s roof. This is incorrect. The Hursh case was always connected to another case known as Faust v. State Farm, and together the two cases have come to represent nearly 200 total homeowners represented by Oklahoma City law firm Whitten Burrage.

It’s even bigger than that. State Farm acknowledged in a Dec. 23 motion that denied wind and hail claims in Oklahoma actually number in the thousands.

Specifically, between 2019 and 2024, Oklahoma policyholders filed 120,755 claims of wind and hail damage, State Farm said. Of these, 27,764 policyholders were denied any kind of compensation at all.

Of the 91,588 policyholders who received full or partial payments, some who sustained comprehensive damage but were denied total roof replacement sought legal representation. Subsequently, State Farm paid tens of millions of dollars to secretly settle those cases.

In court on Tuesday, Deputy Attorney General Cameron Capps emphasized that the concerns raised by the Hursh case stretched well beyond the story of the Hursh’s roof or the 200 cases similar to it.

“This is a much bigger issue, because State Farm’s actions are impacting the state interest,” Capps said.

Seldom Used Legal Maneuver

Drummond’s petition to intervene — a rare legal maneuver that would give the attorney general special discovery powers — argued that his office’s authority to intervene was granted by Title 12 and Title 74 of Oklahoma law, the latter of which grants special powers when the interests of the state or the people are at issue.

Drummond’s request described State Farm’s alleged scheme as a shock to the conscience.

“These practices upset the essential bargain of risk and premium that anchors a lawful insurance market, leaving Oklahoma consumers bearing disproportionate risk,” the petition reads.

Alongside full intervention, Drummond’s petition proposed an option for Palumbo that would grant limited intervention focusing on discovery alone.

“Alternatively, limited intervention and access to discovery materials subject to a protective order should be granted,” the petition reads.

A Cynical Note

In court, State Farm attorney Lance Leffel spoke quickly, appearing to attempt to sneak his arguments in before Palumbo issued a ruling. On five occasions, Palumbo asked him to slow down for the court reporter.

In the main, Leffel repeated arguments contained in State Farm’s Dec. 22 response, arguing that Drummond did not have authority to intervene in an insurance case.

“The Attorney General’s attempt at intervention is nothing more than a ploy that violates constitutional separation of powers,” the response reads.

State Farm did not object to Drummond’s characterization of the alleged scheme, but asserted that the hundreds of millions of dollars allegedly bilked from Oklahomans was not an interest of the state.

“There is no public interest implicated in this case,” Leffel said, in court.

The State Farm response cited a NonDoc article in which Drummond appeared to criticize then-Attorney General Mike Hunter’s intervention in an earlier case that also involved Whitten Burrage. 

Notably, even though State Farm paid $250 million to settle a case in which they were accused of buying a seat on the Illinois Supreme Court, the State Farm response cited an Illinois Supreme Court case to argue that regulation of the insurance industry, by itself, did not justify intervention by an attorney general.

State Farm’s response appeared to split fine hairs. On one hand, it argued that Drummond was wrongly seeking dominion over litigation in Oklahoma. On the other hand, it argued that Oklahoma law granted dominion to the insurance commissioner over insurance law.

In court, Capps argued that this threatened the attorney general’s fundamental ability to enforce laws.

“They are conflating regulatory authority and enforcement authority,” Capps said. “They are saying that law enforcement has no authority.”

A Particularly Cynical Note

To assert the insurance commissioner’s sole regulatory authority, State Farm cited Article 6 of the Oklahoma Constitution and various sections of Title 36, primarily the problematic Property and Casualty Competitive Loss Cost Rating Act, which has been criticized by former politician Kevin Easley, who lamented changes to the law that were introduced after he helped to pass the bill decades ago.

“If they changed a law that was meant to apply to business, and was never meant to apply to homeowners’ insurance, then they can damn sure change it back, can’t they?” Easley said in May.

Legislators are currently considering changes to Oklahoma insurance law.

The State Farm response struck a particularly cynical note: Palumbo should deny the attorney general’s petition to intervene, the response argued, because the request would be denied at the Oklahoma Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court has already weighed in on a separate tranche of Whitten Burrage’s wind and hail cases. On Dec. 15, the Court sided with State Farm on a technicality, vacating two of Palumbo’s earlier orders and complicating attorneys’ effort to expose State Farm’s alleged scheme.

Notably, Justice Travis Jett recused from the ruling. Prior to being named to the Court in April — despite lacking judicial experience — Jett was employed by Oklahoma City law firm GableGotwals, which has represented State Farm for many years and was representing State Farm in court on Tuesday.

That’s not the only connection between State Farm and the Oklahoma Supreme Court.

Attorney Mary Quinn Cooper, vice-chair of the Judicial Nominating Commission that advanced Jett’s name to Gov. Kevin Stitt, is a principal in a law firm that has openly bragged of defending State Farm.

“McAfee & Taft successfully represented State Farm Fire and Casualty Company in a lawsuit arising from State Farm’s handling of plaintiff’s homeowner’s insurance claim arising from a hot water tank leak,” a profile of the firm reads.

“Oklahomans Know the Answer”

On Tuesday, Whitten Burrage attorney Blake Sonne lashed out at State Farm’s argument about the authority of Oklahoma’s insurance commissioner.

“This idea that the insurance commissioner has a carte blanche dominion over insurance law is completely false,” Sonne said. “The attorney general does have the statutory authority to represent insurance consumers.”

Whitten Burrage’s Dec. 23 response for Tuesday’s hearing argued that the insurance commissioner had no authority outside of Title 36.

“State Farm’s reliance on the Oklahoma Constitution and Title 36 is misplaced and misleading,” the response reads.

The response posed a list of questions at the core of all of Whitten Burrage’s lawsuits: Did State Farm identify hail claims as a bucket of opportunity to save money on denying claims? How much money has State Farm withheld from policyholders with valid damage claims? Have State Farm executives publicly boasted of 50% savings on hail claims?

The response accused State Farm of slinging mud against attorneys to deflect attention from their alleged scheme.

In court, Sonne went a step further than that.

“State Farm is offering a masterclass on how to deflect on their wind hail claims,” Sonne said. “They are pulling out old newspaper articles published during a political campaign and pretending that it’s binding. It’s insulting.”

The response suggested that the true motives behind State Farm’s tactics were easy to discern.

“Why deflect?” the response reads. “Oklahomans know the answer.”

This is Not a Game

After an hour of argument, Palumbo had had enough.

“Your motion is going to be granted,” Palumbo told Capps, granting the attorney general full intervention in Hursh v. State Farm — that is, more than the limited intervention the original petition said it would have accepted.

Heaving a deep sigh from the bench, Palumbo warned that the intervention might slow down discovery in the short term, but vowed to do everything she could to move the case forward despite a pattern of obstruction from State Farm.

“If my orders are not followed, fully and flawlessly, sanctions or other options I will certainly entertain,” Palumbo said. “We’re going to get this thing streamlined. I am going to concisely steer this ship to eliminate obstacles along the way.”

She ended with a stern warning.

“This is not a game,” Palumbo said. “Discovery games are going to stop. I am telling you now that I am not going to be pleased if there is a continuous pattern to disregard the orders of this court.”

JC Hallman covers a variety of topics for Oklahoma Watch. Contact him at jchallman@oklahomawatch.org.

The post Judge Allows Attorney General to Intervene in State Farm Hail Lawsuit appeared first on Oklahoma Watch.

J.C. Hallman’s coverage of insurance in Oklahoma continued this week with a wrap-up of voices responding to the Oklahoma Insurance Department’s suggestions of new insurance laws for the legislative session starting in February. Keaton Ross reported that Oklahoma’s prison population increased for a third consecutive year in 2025. Reporter Paul Monies looked into the spread of the Save Oklahoma Plan, a conservative policy proposal developed by a freshman lawmaker that has been adopted by some statewide GOP candidates. Shaun Witt hosts.

The post Long Story Short: Too Little, Too Late, Too Weak: Critics React to Proposed Insurance Legislation appeared first on Oklahoma Watch.

While the Bible includes passages describing gendered roles within specific cultural and theological contexts, it does not explicitly say that eliminating gender roles is “detrimental” or that doing so is contrary to God. 

Some, such as the University of Oklahoma student who recently received a zero on an essay in which she mentions the Bible to support this view, interpret certain passages this way, but theological interpretation is distinct from direct biblical statements. 

The interpretation that gender roles are ordained by God is complementarianism, which lays out its views in the 1988 Danvers Statement. 

Passages where the Bible discusses gender roles include the creation of man and woman in Genesis, Old Testament laws and practices, and New Testament household and congregational roles; those describe cultural roles rather than universal mandates.

The Bible also undercuts the idea of rigid gender roles by emphasizing egalitarianism and featuring prominent women leaders. 

This fact brief is responsive to conversations such as this one.

Oklahoma Watch partners with Gigafact to produce fact briefs — bite-sized fact checks of trending claims.

Sources

• Got Questions What is complementarianism?
• Grace Refomed Baptist Church The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood
• Bible Gateway Genesis 1:27
• Bible Gateway Exodus 20:17, Deuteronomy 5:21
• Bible Gateway Leviticus 12
• Bible Gateway Ephesians 5:22-33, 1 Peter 3:1-7
• Bible Gateway Galatians 3:28

The post Does the Bible say eliminating gender roles is ‘detrimental’ because it would put people ‘farther from God’s plan for humans’? appeared first on Oklahoma Watch.

Here is the audio of Oklahoma Watch’s published stories for the week of December 22, 2025.

– Full Week Playlist: Listen to all the stories back-to-back, without interruption.
– Individual Stories: Select and play any story you’d like to hear, at your convenience.

Full Week Playlist:

Individual Stories:

Fact Briefs:

Oklahoma Watch Is Looking for an Audio Story Sponsor
We’re currently seeking a sponsor for our audio stories. Thanks to our friends at Everlit for helping make this feature highly customizable for sponsorship.

Interested in becoming a sponsor or would like to learn more? Contact Shaun Witt at switt@oklahomawatch.org or 405-824-1469.

The post Audio Stories: December 22, 2025 appeared first on Oklahoma Watch.

A freshman Oklahoma lawmaker who upset a powerful House Republican incumbent last year is trying to turn grassroots energy into a broader policy movement, rolling out a seven-point conservative agenda that has already drawn support from several statewide candidates ahead of the 2026 elections. 

Rep. Jim Shaw, R-Chandler, said the Save Oklahoma Plan grew out of frustrations he encountered both as a candidate and during his first session at the Capitol, where he said some popular conservative priorities are routinely blocked by lobbyists and legislative leadership. 

“I got into politics because of issues directly impacting my family, my home, my property and my community,” Shaw said in a recent interview. “And on those issues, we were losing every single time at the Capitol. The mainstream lobby and special interests are openly fighting every single one of those items.” 

The seven-point plan, which Shaw released in the summer, focuses on eliminating taxpayer-funded lobbying, anti-renewable energy policies, investigating turnpikes and opposing vaccine mandates. Shaw said he tested the ideas through a statewide poll of Republican primary voters, finding all seven items “overwhelmingly favorable” with the base. 

Shaw said he stayed away from typical Republican policy fare like tax cuts in the Save Oklahoma Plan because they don’t tell GOP primary voters much about how a candidate will govern. 

“Regardless of where a legislator stands on the conservative spectrum, you can’t really be a Republican and say, ‘I want more taxes,’” Shaw said. “These are not all-encompassing of every issue we’ve got in Oklahoma. We’ve got issues with DHS and property taxes and what have you, but these are seven items that are really being fought by the lobbyists.” 

A political newcomer, Shaw ran against Rep. Kevin Wallace in the Republican primary in 2024. He beat Wallace, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee at the time, in a primary runoff. The election was the most expensive state House race to date, with candidate and independent expenditure spending surpassing $1.4 million. 

Shaw started his oil and gas career at Chesapeake Energy Corp. and later joined a former boss at an energy consulting company. He became president, chief operating officer and eventually co-owner of Land Information Services LLC before selling the software company in 2022. 

Shaw said his first year in office revealed how House rules and leadership control which bills advance, sometimes unevenly. Motions to waive the rules are a frequent complaint of those in the minority party, and sometimes even among factions of the governing party. 

“Rules are waived sometimes for some people, but they’re in place and very rigid for other people,” Shaw said. “There is this discriminatory practice or preferential treatment for certain folks that was frustrating to really realize and witness in person.” 

Instead of pitching the Save Oklahoma Plan directly to GOP candidates, Shaw said he took a bottom-up approach, sharing it first with more than a dozen conservative grassroots organizations across the state. In some cases, members of those groups asked candidates directly at town hall meetings and other political gatherings if they’d sign on to the plan. 

Several of the grassroots groups pledged to back only candidates who signed on to all seven items, creating what Shaw described as a new accountability mechanism for Republican primary voters. Former House Speaker Charles McCall and former state Sen. Mike Mazzei, both of whom are running for governor, and Jeff Starling, who is running for attorney general, are among the Republican statewide candidates endorsing the plan. 

“For too long, we’ve had people campaign one way and legislate another,” Shaw said. “I think this brings some much-needed accountability to the equation.” 

Shaw committed up to $100,000 to help grassroots groups promote the Save Oklahoma Plan. The money is to boost message advocacy, not to support or oppose any particular candidate. 

“My commitment to them was, ‘Hey, if you’re willing to sign on to the plan and support it and want to take the extra step, I’m happy to provide a donation to your group specifically for that messaging,’” Shaw said. “It wasn’t a requirement; it was just there if they wanted it.” 

Mazzei said many of the ideas in the Save Oklahoma Plan were issues he pursued while he was a state senator. Mazzei, a financial advisor, served in the Legislature for 12 years until reaching term limits in 2016. 

“As I got to know Rep. Shaw a little bit after he got into the Legislature and he was focusing on many of these items which became the Save Oklahoma Plan, it reminded me of many of the policies and ideas I had been fighting for when I was in the senate, and a significant level of priorities that I wanted to focus on as a candidate for governor,” Mazzei said. 

Mazzei said he hears funding and eminent domain concerns about the state turnpike system at campaign events across Oklahoma. He said he’s long harbored doubts about renewable energy. As a senator a decade ago, Mazzei wrote the bill ending the state’s transferable tax credits for wind. 

“I love the emphasis on fighting the green energy agenda because I’ve never understood why we would subsidize with taxpayer dollars massive wind and solar projects that compete directly against Oklahoma energy, particularly Oklahoma natural gas,” Mazzei said.  

Mazzei has made eliminating property taxes on seniors and veterans a central part of his gubernatorial campaign. Lawmakers this year cut income taxes by a quarter percentage point and set a mechanism to take the income tax to zero if benchmarks are met in future years.

“With my background in money and finance, both of those goals are very doable, and we can still handle core services for education, law enforcement and health care,” Mazzei said. 

Campaign representatives for McCall and Starling did not return requests for comment on their endorsements of the Save Oklahoma Plan. They have mentioned their support in social media posts and in campaign emails and press releases. 

Speculation about a run for higher office swirled around Shaw in late spring and early summer. He said some supporters circulated a petition asking him to run for governor. But he decided against it after much reflection. 

“It was something I didn’t immediately dismiss,” Shaw said. “I prayed about it a lot. I thought about it a lot, and ultimately didn’t see this being the right time or having the right path to do that. Ultimately, it was which path is going to give us victory on the issues.” 

In the meantime, Shaw is focused on his reelection campaign and the next session. Shaw said the 2026 session will include renewed efforts to pass legislation aligned with his seven-point plan. Some of his bills carried over from last year are still pending in committee. Shaw said he will continue working with colleagues, including some in the like-minded Freedom Caucus, who want to carry portions of the agenda themselves. 

Shaw said one of the most challenging items is ending taxpayer-funded lobbying, an issue that has stalled in past years. Gov. Kevin Stitt, who is term-limited, called for an end to taxpayer-funded lobbying when he took office in 2019. Shaw said closing loopholes that allow agencies, schools and municipal groups to employ lobbyists will require statutory changes, not just executive orders. 

Despite the obstacles, Shaw said the early response to the Save Oklahoma Plan shows the power of grassroots organizing, especially in Republican primaries. 

“If we win on just one of these issues, I believe we will have shifted the Legislature to becoming more afraid of the grassroots and the people than they are of special interests,” he said, “If we do that, we will fundamentally change politics across the state.” 

Paul Monies has been a reporter with Oklahoma Watch since 2017 and covers state agencies and public health. Contact him at (571) 319-3289 or pmonies@oklahomawatch.org. Follow him on Twitter @pmonies. 

The post Freshman GOP Lawmaker Finds Statewide Backers For Save Oklahoma Plan  appeared first on Oklahoma Watch.

Jake Ramsey on an out-of-state trailer park owner hiking rents and forcing vulnerable tenants into rent-to-own deals. Keaton Ross about the Ethics Commission’s decision to restore public access to an online campaign finance database. J.C. Hallman broke the story of a large number of lawsuits involving State Farm Insurance Company, and followed that up with news of Attorney General Gentner Drummond stepping in to intervene in the case with a charge that the insurance giant may be guilty of racketeering. Now, J.C. does a deep dive on the history of insurance and racketeering. Shaun Witt hosts.

The post Long Story Short: Trailer Park Owner Hikes Rents, Forces Tenants Into Rent-to-Own Deals appeared first on Oklahoma Watch.

The Oklahoma Insurance Department announced a package of preliminary legislative proposals that fail to directly address skyrocketing premiums and suggest measures that would make it more difficult for policyholders to fight back, critics say.

Instead, the proposals announced Dec. 10 seek to expand Oklahoma’s fortified roof program and require insurance companies to cover roofs that are not too old or worn out, presumably to address the types of wind and hail damage that have become a flashpoint in Oklahoma. In addition, the proposals call for shorter response times from companies on claim acknowledgement and decisions and propose a not yet detailed homeowners bill of rights.

Most troubling to critics, the proposals seek to impose new obstacles to policyholders suing insurance companies, on the claim that litigation costs translate to rate increases. Rep. Mark Tedford, R-Jenks, and Sen. Aaron Reinhardt, R-Jenks, in a press release, laid blame for rate hikes on attorneys’ fees in lawsuits rather than the peculiarities of Oklahoma law that permit insurers to raise rates without scrutiny.

Tedford, who in November acknowledged that there had been discussions among politicians about modifying the problematic Property and Casualty Loss Cost Rating Act that governs homeowners insurance, confirmed that the Insurance Department had specifically requested that the law not be altered.

Now writing bills for the upcoming legislative session based on the department’s requests, Tedford expressed preference for third-party adjusters to settle claim disputes.

“I really don’t like litigation in a property claim,” Tedford said. “In my opinion, when there’s litigation it drags the claim out, adding costs to both sides.”

Oklahoma Insurance Department Commissioner Glen Mulready did not respond to an interview request.

Skepticism Over Legal Reforms

Last month, Tulsa Police Lt. Billy Hursh, one of hundreds of State Farm policyholders who have taken legal action after being denied a claim on roof damage, became the public face of the effort to fight back against against what Attorney General Gentner Drummond described, in a Dec. 4 petition to intervene in Hursh’s case, as racketeering in the insurance industry.

Hursh was nonplussed at the proposed new laws.

“Some of it seems encouraging, but the parts about tort reform are concerning,” Hursh said. “Preventing attorney’s fees from being awarded seems like it would make it harder for regular people to bring litigation against insurance companies. Most people don’t have room in their budgets to pay for attorney fees. Insurance companies definitely do.”

The amount of money insurance companies spend on litigation is not publicly available, but spending on lobbying is: from 2014-2023, U.S. insurance companies spent an average $130 million annually.

Hursh had doubts about whether the proposed changes would address the challenges Oklahomans are now facing.

“I’m also really skeptical that what they’re calling frivolous lawsuits have anything to do with insurance companies charging us more and cheating us on our policies,” Hursh said.

The proposals are too little, too late and too weak, said Robert Hunter, former commissioner of the Texas Department of Insurance and for decades a leading expert on policyholder protections with the Consumer Federation of America. 

“Let’s reduce the consumer’s ability to get an attorney and fight abusive claim practices,” Hunter said, making no effort to mask sarcasm in characterizing the proposed changes. “Also, let’s speed up the denials. And thank you so much for letting me get my own inspection at my own cost.”

For Hunter, the department’s proposal signals anxiety at the enthusiasm for substantive change that has been growing across Oklahoma for months.

“You can smell the fear that generated these weak proposals,” Hunter said. “‘Oh, my gosh, they’re on to us. What can we offer to stop the real reform that is coming?’”

Hunter called for remedies to what he characterized as long-standing industry wrongdoing.

“Where are the significant penalties for these abuses?” Hunter said. “Where are the fines? Where are the criminal charges?”

Drummond’s press secretary, Leslie Berger, said in a written statement that the office of the attorney general would continue to hold accountable insurance companies that break the law. Berger addressed the proposed laws only obliquely.

“We welcome efforts to address rising homeowners insurance costs and consumer protection through legislation,” Berger said. “We look forward to seeing the legislation and how it can help consumers in the future.”

A Definition of Competition

Senate Minority Leader Julia Kirt, D-Oklahoma City, who mounted an interim study on homeowners insurance in October, joined the chorus of voices lamenting the proposed laws’ focus on constricting the rights of policyholders seeking justice.

“I’m concerned about these bills limiting Oklahomans’ right to get justice through lawsuits,” Kirt said. “I’ve talked to many people who have had to turn to the courts because insurance companies would not honor their contracts.”

Kirt has previously called for profit caps for insurance companies and a precise definition of competition codified in Oklahoma law. She praised consumer protections included in the package but lamented the omission of measures that would directly address affordability.

“I appreciate any work to improve consumer protections for people buying insurance, but I refuse to accept that state law can’t make insurance more affordable,” Kirt said. “We know it can, and that’s what I’ll be working on this session.”

Rep. Andy Fugate, D-Del City, who mounted a separate interim study on homeowners insurance in the House of Representatives, echoed the praise of certain reforms but noted that the proposed barriers to taking legal action conflicted with testimony that Mulready gave during Fugate’s study. Mulready admitted that Oklahoma does not have a lawsuit problem, Fugate said.

Like Kirt, Fugate lamented that the proposals did not directly address rate controls.

“A fundamental missing piece is restoring the power of the insurance commissioner to ensure rates are supported by actuarial data,” Fugate said, referring to a portion of the Property and Casualty Loss Cost Rating Act. “Without that, Oklahoma rates will remain among the highest in the nation.” 

“Oklahoma Families Deserve More”

Oklahoma Watch contacted the four candidates who have launched campaigns to replace Mulready, who is term-limited and cannot run for reelection.

The candidates include Chris Merideth, a legislative affairs specialist with Farmers Insurance Co.; Marty Quinn, former chairman of the Senate insurance committee with 40 years of industry experience; Greta Shuler, a 10-year veteran of the insurance industry and a Shawnee city commissioner; and Bob Sullivan, a 20-year veteran of the insurance industry specializing in property and casualty insurance.

Merideth, Sullivan and Shuler responded.

In offering praise for a call for a homeowners bill of rights and for discounts for fortified construction, Merideth lauded the groundwork of the proposals but said that Oklahoma must go further to address rising premiums, claim decision confusion and inconsistent standards that affect homeowners across the state.

A registered lobbyist for Farmers Insurance from 2016 to 2023, Merideth called for movement in a new direction.

“Oklahoma can’t afford a reactive approach to insurance anymore,” Merideth said. “We need proactive leadership, clear statewide standards, and a long-term resiliency strategy that lowers costs and strengthens our communities.”

Sullivan described the proposals as a solid starting point, and praised the legislative process for permitting discussion and refinement of ideas.

“I will be watching closely and hope to engage significantly on the campaign trail,” Sullivan said. “We must make insurance fair again in Oklahoma.”

Shuler repeated qualified praise of the proposals while pivoting to indicate the complete absence of any suggestion of changes to health care law. In particular, Shuler called attention to a lack of oversight of medical decision-making processes that may result in insurers inserting themselves between patients and their doctors.

Of the department proposals, Shuler spoke as a homeowner who has herself experienced a total loss due to an Oklahoma tornado.

“We need stronger protections to ensure insurers meet their obligations, pay claims promptly, and treat Oklahomans with the respect they deserve during the hardest moments of their lives,” Shuler said. “These consumer-first reforms are still missing from this agenda, and I believe Oklahoma families deserve more.”

Ongoing Efforts

The Insurance Department press release said that the proposals announced on Dec. 10 are the result of cooperation with numerous interested parties.

“Insurance Commissioner Glen Mulready emphasized that the proposals reflect ongoing efforts to collaborate with lawmakers, industry stakeholders, and consumer advocates,” the release reads.

Tedford said that he would welcome additional input from policyholders as the composition of legislation continues, adding that he expects to hear from insurance companies, the agent community, and advocates for tort reform.

“I would love to hear from consumer advocacy groups,” Tedford said. “I want to have a system where everybody wins, where the policyholder is treated fairly on their claims.”

The OID can be reached at its Oklahoma City and Tulsa offices, at 405-521-2828 and 918-295-3700, respectively. The department can be messaged here.

Ed. Note: This story is part of a series on property insurance in Oklahoma.

The post Too Little, Too Late, Too Weak: Critics React to Proposed Insurance Legislation appeared first on Oklahoma Watch.