Child Advocacy Organization Sponsors National Petition to Support Weather Prediction Funding

We at the Oklahoma Institute for Child Advocacy (OICA) extend our deepest condolences to families tragically impacted by the recent flooding in Texas. Flooding along the Guadalupe River early Friday caught residents, summer campers, and tourists off-guard. Monday, the death toll rose to 81 across six counties. In Kerr County, officials reported 68 deaths — 40 adults and 28 children. Camp Mystic said it was grieving the loss of 27 campers and counselors. The catastrophic flooding struck with a surge of 20-26 feet on the Guadalupe River near Kerrville, causing widespread damage. President Donald Trump has signed a major disaster declaration for Kerr County, which is west of Austin. People have asked how something like this could happen. A flood watch was issued at 1:18 p.m. on July 3, and then on July 4, a flash flood warning was issued at 1:14 a.m. The river was above flood stage between 3 and 4 a.m., and a flash flood emergency was issued at 4:03 a.m. in Hunt, Texas, then 5:34 a.m. in Kerrville. As this happened early in the morning, unless someone was prepared with a weather radio or had a mobile phone with service, they would not know of the severity of the weather. Kerr County had considered installing severe weather sirens and a flood monitoring system in 2017, but that was shelved due to costs. Most cellphone alerts came from the National Weather Service’s Austin/San Antonio station. But some alerts about life-threatening flooding didn’t come until the predawn hours, and this is located in areas where cellular reception was spotty. The holes in this warning system and others around the nation, as Oklahomans impacted recently by tornados can attest, are not new and highlight the challenge of urgently communicating weather risks across rural America. Added to this danger, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) just one week ago announced sweeping cuts to its programs, including the National Weather Service which is crucial for weather forecasting and severe weather alerts. These cuts include the potential closure of the National Severe Storms Laboratory in Norman and the elimination of nearly 300 jobs across various weather laboratories around the nation. The proposed cuts are part of an effort to support Trump Administration budget priorities, but meteorologists warn that these reductions could lead to a decline in forecasting quality and potentially cost lives. Project 2025, the policy blueprint suggested by the conservative Heritage Foundation, includes about four pages on NOAA and the National Weather Service. The document describes NOAA as a primary component “of the climate change alarm industry” and said it “should be broken up and downsized.” The document further cites “commercialization of weather technologies should be prioritized to ensure that taxpayer dollars are invested in the most cost-efficient technologies for high quality research and weather data.” Investing in commercial partners will increase competition, Project 2025 said. As someone who has lived in “Tornado Alley” in Oklahoma for most of my life, I cannot imagine what impact this could have on our safety. I understand cuts to help balance the budget, along with elimination of “waste, fraud and abuse” as is the rhetoric used for many of these overarching slashes in budgets without proper governmental budgeting review. I certainly do not recommend a “fee for service” weather alert system as this is simply passing the cost along to taxpayers to fund these alerts for those who can afford a subscription. Please contact our federal delegation of lawmakers to encourage them to continue federal funding for state-of-the-art emergency weather alert systems through NOAA and NWS. You can see federal lawmakers’ contact information at https://tinyurl.com/OKCongDel .

Over the past month, I have highlighted portions of the federal “Big Beautiful Bill” as passed by the U.S House of Representatives. Currently, the bill is under consideration by the U.S. Senate, but significant changes have been made, both by lawmakers and by the Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough. Over the past few days, significant amendments have been suggested in response to provisions the Parliamentarian ruled out of order. Many have discussed what this role entails and how a person hired by the legislative body can do this. The Parliamentarian of the U.S. Senate is the official advisor to the senators on the interpretation of Standing Rules of the Senate and parliamentary procedure. This person helps determine if provisions are allowable within certain pieces of legislation. For example, a multipart “Byrd Rule” test – named for former West Virginia Sen. Robert Byrd – is used to examine budget reconciliation legislation to determine whether the provisions are primarily budgetary in nature. Reciliation bills, which are used to pass budgetary measures with a simple majority instead of the standard 60 votes. This process has existed since the 1980s and, under the rule, each of the bill’s provisions must comply with three guidelines: 1) It must primarily be a change to spending or revenue. Provisions with no or minimal budgetary impact, or those that are mostly there for policy reasons, are supposed to be struck. 2) May not increase the deficit outside of the budget window. In this case, provisions cannot add to deficits past 2034. 3) May not make changes to Social Security. The Parliamentarian ruled that Sect. 71120 of the bill covering health care provider taxes, among other provisions, violates the Byrd Rule. This section deals with the cap on health care provider taxes in both states that expanded Medicaid (including Oklahoma) and those that did not expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act. This is projected to save hundreds of billions of dollars over the next 10 years in federal funds but will force states to shoulder more of the cost for Medicaid coverage. An amendment allocates $25 billion incrementally for rural hospitals over the first five years that the provider taxes would be lowered. Several provisions have generated strong pushback from several Senate Republicans, including Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky and Thom Tillis of North Carolina. Tillis warned deep cuts to federal Medicaid spending could cause dozens of rural hospitals in his state, and here in Oklahoma, to close. A few of the other areas of the budget bill challenged include a private school scholarships and a tax credit, removing taxes and regulations on silencers and certain guns, requiring states pay a portion of food aid costs in the SNAP program, vehicle emissions rule removal, increasing required contributions to the federal retirement system for those who do not give up some civil service protections, requiring workers and former workers to pay filing fees when they make complaints, and reducing Defense Department spending if plans are not submitted on time. As you can see, much of this has nothing to do with spending and should be run in separate bills. In fact, Oklahoma’s Constitution requires legislation must comply with a single subject, and it is overdue that the federal government also implements something similar to avoid multiple issues being packed into one bill. The Senate bill in its version prior to amendments this week could add $3.5 to $4.2 trillion to the debt through Fiscal Year (FY) 2034, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. It could go even higher, causing $500 billion to $1.5 trillion more in borrowing than under the bill when it passed the House of Representatives. We are awaiting further amendments to see what impact changes might have on the legislation. If you have concerns, please contact our federal delegation at https://tinyurl.com/OKCongDel .

Each year, the Oklahoma Institute for Child Advocacy (OICA) examines the voting records of members of the Oklahoma Legislature to determine how child-friendly each lawmaker’s record is. From that nonpartisan evaluation of the voting records of all 101 state representatives and 48 state senators, Oklahomans can see which lawmakers put children first during their deliberations for the 2025 session of the Oklahoma Legislature. There were some vacancies during the session, so those seats were not scored, as well as former Rep. Jason Lowe, D-Oklahoma City, who resigned when elected as an Oklahoma County commissioner. One lawmaker, Rep. Preston Stinson, R-Edmond, was awarded points for votes missed during his recovery period from a medical condition. “Our desire with the ‘Children’s Legislative Report Card’ is to cut through the haze of rhetoric that tends to permeate lawmakers’ achievements and provide Oklahomans with an unbiased view of how their representatives and senators voted on issues critical to our state’s children,” said Joe Dorman, OICA’s CEO. “The goal of the ‘Children’s Legislative Report Card’ is simple: to ensure Oklahomans have clear information on which lawmakers place a priority on children's issues during this year’s session of the Oklahoma Legislature.” This year’s scores ran from a high of 110 points for House Speaker Kyle Hilbert, R-Bristow, and House Speaker Pro Tempore Anthony Moore, R-Clinton. They and four members of the state Senate and two representatives scored 105 to earn “valedictorian” honors. Those were: Sen. Christi Gillespie, R-Broken Arrow; Sen. Dave Rader, R-Tulsa; Sen. Aaron Reinhardt, R-Jenks; Rep. Danny Sterling, R-Tecumseh; and Rep. Preston Stinson, R-Edmond. Of the 148 lawmakers scored, 20 had scores of 100 or better, and an additional 62 representatives and senators had scores of 80 or better. The average score of all lawmakers was 79, and only 25 lawmakers had scores of below 60. Lawmakers received five bonus points given for authoring a positive child-related policy. A total of 73 lawmakers got the five point bill author extra credit. Additional points were also provided to the Senate and House presiding officers, minority leaders, majority floor leaders, and appropriations chairs and vice-chairs. Lawmakers of the year were selected for their overall work on key issues in the First Session of the 60th Legislature, and not necessarily their grade. The 2025 OICA Lawmakers of the Year are Sen. Brenda Stanley, R-Midwest City; Sen. Dave Rader, R-Tulsa; Sen. Julia Kirt, D-Oklahoma City; House Speaker Pro Tempore Anthony Moore, R-Clinton; Rep. Nick Archer, R-Elk City; and Rep. Suzanne Schreiber, D-Tulsa. “This was a very positive session for Oklahoma’s children, with both a high average score for lawmakers and far more than half the Legislature scoring 80 or above,” Dorman said. “This shows that advocacy works, and that our lawmakers are responsive to the caring Oklahomans who make their voices heard to their elected officials.” The full scorecard, with lawmakers’ ranks, can be found at https://www.oica.org/advocacy-resources . Also available is a color-coded chart showing lawmakers’ votes on the bills that were scored, giving voters a chance to see how the scores were developed. “Congratulations to the several lawmakers who had positive scores on children’s issues,” Dorman said. “We tried to make this similar to the report card given to students and schools, so that voters have a clear view of what is happening at their State Capitol.” Dorman concluded by noting that even though the 2025 session just adjourned, OICA is already working with lawmakers for next year’s session of the Oklahoma Legislature, requesting interim studies on critical children’s issues. OICA is collecting ides for interims study requests. Dorman said if anyone has a child-related issue they would like for us to recommend lawmakers study, they can fill out an online form at https://tinyurl.com/IntStudy25 . “The work of advocates never ends,” he said. “We look forward to continuing our positive relationships with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle and from all areas of the state to improve the lives of our state’s children. Working together, we will continue to make progress for our state’s most valuable resource, our children. To learn more about how you can help, go to oica.org to be a part of the effort.”

As a former lawmaker and someone who continues to work publicly in policy, the horrific act which happened over this past weekend in Minnesota with the murder and attempted murder of state lawmakers and their spouses is truly frightening. As always, many people are making assumptions on the motivation of the perpetrator. Fortunately, he was captured and can be questioned to determine what led him to kill two people, attempt to kill two others, and have a list with more than 70 politicians and others on it. This news hit me hard. I have friends in both parties from Oklahoma and across the United States who serve as lawmakers at the state and federal levels. A majority of those going to the polls decide who represents the 7,386 state legislative seats across the 99 state legislative chambers in the United States, along with the 535 members of Congress and the President. That someone would attempt to change the outcome of an election with the murder of an elected official or candidate is despicable. I have received death threats before because of my work and the title that I held. That unfortunately goes with the job now, which is a sad commentary. Still, this is also nothing new considering the history of political assassinations in our nation. Last year’s attempts on President Trump and several years ago on members of Congress at their annual baseball game, including many other incidents through the years are just a few known. Thankfully, most are prevented. Thank you to those men and women who step up to run for and serve in office, as well as their families. While violence is a rarity, it is still possible. I pray this does not stop good people from serving or seeking office. We need you now, more than ever, no matter what political party, if your intentions to serve are noble and just a desire to “hate” the other side of the political aisle. And no, I am not running for anything. I simply felt compelled to share this as my heart is hurting right now for the state of our world. Now, for something positive, I want to thank lawmakers at the State Capitol who voted in the best interests of Oklahoma’s children. Our Oklahoma Institute for Child Advocacy (OICA) Children’s Legislative Report Card will be issued soon, but I want to recognize our selected Lawmakers of the Year first. The 2025 OICA Lawmakers of the Year are Sen. Brenda Stanley, R-Midwest City; Sen. Dave Rader, R-Tulsa; Sen. Julia Kirt, D-Oklahoma City; House Speaker Pro Tempore Anthony Moore, R-Clinton; Rep. Nick Archer, R-Elk City; and Rep. Suzanne Schreiber, D-Tulsa. Those receiving honorable mentions for their work in 2025 are Sen. Paul Rosino, R-Oklahoma City; Sen. Chuck Hall, R-Perry; Sen. Adam Pugh, R-Edmond; Rep. Trey Caldwell, R-Lawton; Rep. Mark Lawson, R-Sapulpa; Rep. Ellyn Hefner, D-Oklahoma City; and Rep Melissa Provenzano, D-Tulsa. In the first session after an election, OICA recognizes new lawmakers for their achievements. The OICA Freshmen Legislators of the Year are Sen. Christi Gillespie, R-Broken Arrow; Sen. Nikki Nice, D-Oklahoma City; Rep. Emily Gise, R-Oklahoma City; and Rep. Ronald Stewart, D-Tulsa. Lawmakers will begin their summer work with interim studies soon. These are deep dives into policy that are requested by lawmakers which are reviewed by legislative committees. If you have suggestions for a study idea pertaining to children, please submit your idea by June 25 at https://tinyurl.com/IntStudy25 for us to forward to lawmakers. Together, we all can be a part of the process, helping our state lawmakers pursue policies to benefit our youth.

As we continue our examination of the massive federal legislation called the “Big Beautiful Bill” by proponents, it is important to look at the education portion of the bill. As you can see from the analysis below, the federal funding and policy changes will be a tremendous change in how Kindergarten through twelfth grade (K-12) classes and access to college courses are supported by federal dollars. The bill would create an unprecedented $5 billion national school voucher program under K-12 called the Educational Choice for Children Act (ECCA). Families making up to 300% of area median income would be able to apply for and receive scholarships to use toward private school tuition, homeschooling books, or tutoring, for example. The money would be distributed by third-party scholarship granting organizations (SGOs) certified by the U.S. Treasury and IRS. Donors to SGOs would reap the tax benefits from this system. Anyone would be able to donate to one of these SGOs like a charitable organization. The difference, instead of getting a deduction from your taxable income, donors will receive a dollar-for-dollar full tax credit for up to the greater of $5,000 or as much as 10% of one’s income. For example, $1,000 donated to an SGO would result in $1,000 deducted off one’s tax bill. This is an unprecedented dollar-for-dollar charitable donation tax credit at the federal level. The changes are not limited to just young Americans in the education system. For America’s college students, the news is very concerning to many, especially community colleges. The bill proposes to: • Raise the definition of “full-time” to 15 credits per semester to get full Pell (from the current 12 credits) • Eliminate Stafford subsidized loans • Eliminate graduate student PLUS loans and limits parent PLUS loans. • Eliminate existing income-contingent repayment plans and create one new income-based repayment plan, increasing the percentage of discretionary income allowed and the number of payments needed before a loan can be forgiven. This will place extreme hardships many, including those who choose to work while taking college courses. By current standards, only 36% of undergraduate Pell Grant recipients attempted 30 or more credits in one academic year, the newly proposed definition of full time. This means that in the 2024-25 academic year, only about 2.5 million of the 6.9 million Pell Grant recipients nationwide would have qualified under the new definition. Further, about 1.4 million, or 20%, of Pell Grant recipients would lose their Pell Grant funding entirely due to the limitation on awards for less than half-time enrollment. This would include 810,000, or about one-third, of the 2.5 million Pell Grant recipients who are currently enrolled at community colleges, according to Center for American Progress. For part-time adult students who work while attending school, this could have a devastating impact on enrollment numbers. Most students who register in less than full time enrollment have jobs to help cover the rising cost of college and often have families to support. These programs currently provide an offset opportunity to complete courses more quickly, therefore allowing entry into the job market at a quicker pace. The low interest loans these students would lose under this bill will likely have a devastating impact on enrollment, depriving many of the chance for better lives and opportunities through higher education.  You can read my previous two columns at https://www.oica.org/weekly-columns which discuss changes to SoonerCare and food assistance programs. A future column will look at the tax provisions of the bill being discussed. Should you have concerns about the legislation and wish to contact members of Oklahoma’s federal delegation, you can find their information at https://tinyurl.com/OKCongDel .

A total of 25 civic organizations and 135 individuals have signed on to a letter to Oklahoma’s members of Congress expressing concern about the “Big Beautiful Bill” passed recently by the U.S. House of Representatives. The organizations and individuals are among those “charged with protecting and improving the quality of life for several marginalized communities in Oklahoma,” they wrote. Specifically, they asked federal lawmakers to “do all you can to protect funding for Medicaid, SNAP, FEMA and other critical life-saving services supporting Oklahoma’s children in need.” The group noted that they “support efforts to eliminate waste, fraud and abuse of programs, we encourage you to not slash essential services supporting children.” The cuts to Medicaid in the federal legislation received the most attention from the advocates, as they noted the program is “critical to the long-term health of Oklahomans.” The letter goes on to say that “(m)ore than a million Oklahomans, one-fourth of our population – are enrolled in SoonerCare (the state’s Medicaid program). The split between adult and child enrollees is fairly equal, with 47 percent adults and 53 percent children.” The advocates noted, “protection of Medicaid funding is wholly consistent with each of your stated views regarding the birth of children. In fact, Medicaid pays for more than half of Oklahoma births and covers 47% of all Oklahoma children. It is no exaggeration to suggest that Oklahoma’s future depends on the protection of Medicaid funding.” The campaign to sign on to the letter was coordinated by the Oklahoma Institute for Child Advocacy (OICA), in concert with Child Focus, a national organization that shares much of its mission with OICA. “This letter is a chance to remind our Senators and Representatives about how families in Oklahoma benefit from Medicaid, SNAP, and other critical support services in particular, and the impact of cuts to Medicaid on children and families in the child welfare system,” wrote Joe Dorman, OICA’s CEO.  The “Big Beautiful Bill,” as it is called, is slated to be taken up by members of the U.S. Senate this week after having passed the House of Representatives by a single vote before the Memorial Day recess. Dorman noted that it was important to get the letter into lawmakers’ hands this week as the bill continues to be considered. “There is hardly any Oklahoman that will not in some way be impacted by this bill,” Dorman said. “Whether it is rural families who may lose a hospital in their community, or a hungry child who will not be able to get food, this bill’s impact is virtually universal across the state.” To read the full letter, and the names of the organizations and individual who signed it, go to https://tinyurl.com/LTCOICA6-3 . In conclusion, Dorman suggested every Oklahoman who may have thoughts on parts, or all of the legislation, should reach out to our federal delegation. “Our elected officials work for us,” he said. “Therefore, it is our responsibility to give them instructions on the kind of state and nation we want. Again, they are public servants.” To get federal lawmakers’ contact information, go to https://tinyurl.com/OKCongDel .

Last week, we discussed the cuts to programs through HR 1 at the federal level and what those cuts would do to Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) funds allocated to states. You can read the column at https://tinyurl.com/FTCVoice . The legislation passed by a single vote along a mostly party line vote and is in the hands of U.S. senators now, weighing if they will make changes. This week let us examine the impact of the “Big Beautiful Bill” on Oklahoma’s state Medicaid program, SoonerCare, and other state programs that receive this heavily subsidized federal match to operate. Currently, one in four Oklahomans receive health insurance coverage through SoonerCare. The Medicaid sections of HR 1 would: Impose work or community engagement activities for recipients to begin no later than December 31, 2026. Exemptions for this are: pregnant women, individuals under the age of 19 or over the age of 64, foster youth and former foster youth under the age of 26, members of a Tribal nation, and individuals considered “medically frail,” once verified as such. Reduce by 10% the Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP) for Medicaid expansion states that cover the cost of Medicaid for immigrants who are not “qualified aliens.” The FMAP is calculated based on each state's average per capita income relative to the national average. Sunset FMAP increase for Medicaid expansion states on January 1, 2026. This is a 5% FMAP increase for 2 years for states, like Oklahoma, which opted for Medicaid expansion; 10 States have not yet opted for expansion. Oklahoma is one of three states which enshrined Medicaid expansion within our state Constitution. Reduce retroactive coverage for Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) to one month from three months beginning December 31, 2026. Prohibit Medicaid funding of gender-affirming care for all individuals. Require redetermination of eligibility every six months for expansion populations beginning on December 31, 2026. Freeze the current amount of provider taxes for states. These taxes are state-imposed assessments on healthcare providers to help fund Medicaid services. Many states use provider taxes to increase provider payments or to offset potential cuts. Require states to impose co-pays on Medicaid Expansion adults with incomes over 100 percent of the federal poverty level (FPL). This cost-sharing may not exceed $35 per service. Exempted services include primary care services, mental health care services, or substance use disorder services. Prohibit federal funding for certain entities providing abortion services. Increase the state share of Medicaid expansion from 10% to 20% for states that use state-only funds to provide health coverage to undocumented immigrants, placing a greater burden on state budgets should states choose to continue this service. It is estimated that approximately $880 billion will be reduced over the next decade through the Medicaid provisions of the legislation, with much of that shifted to states if they want to continue providing services at current levels. The Kaiser Family Foundation estimates that 174,000 Oklahomans will lose SoonerCare benefits under this proposal, with uninsured rates increasing by roughly 95,000 or 2 % of our population. Rural hospitals face the greatest risk under this proposal. According to the Center of Health Care Quality and Payment Reform “Sixty-seven percent of rural facilities operate with losses on services, and 59% are at risk of closing.“ The center’s report states that most at-risk hospitals are in isolated communities where closures would force residents to travel long distances for emergency and inpatient care. Nine rural hospitals have closed since 2005 in Oklahoma. If you have thoughts on parts or all of this legislation, please reach out to our federal delegation for your input on what should happen. You can find their contact information at https://tinyurl.com/OKCongDel .

Prior to the Memorial Day weekend, the U.S. House of Representatives passed HR 1, commonly called the “Big, Beautiful Bill” Act. The vote of 215-214 fell almost exactly on a party-line vote. The bill now moves the bill to the Senate for consideration. It is expected that a vote will occur within the next few weeks. Much of this legislation will have a significant impact on children and families across the country. I wanted to share a synopsis of the legislation which was prepared for one of our collaborative partners at the national level, SPARC. Over the next three weeks, I will highlight some of the major portions of this legislation tying to Medicaid modifications and how it will impact Americans, including those in Oklahoma receiving SoonerCare, educational support programs for students, and tax reform. I first want to highlight what the bill would do to the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP). SNAP provides food benefits to low-income families to supplement their grocery budget so they can afford the nutritious food essential to health and well-being, along with providing many with basic survival through this program. The SNAP-related sections of the bill propose to: • Limit the frequency of updates to the Thrifty Food Plan (TFP)—the basis for calculating SNAP benefits—to once every five years and requires cost neutrality in updates. • Impose work requirements for able-bodied adults without dependents (ABAWDs), raising the age to which an ABAWD must work from 49 to 64, and narrowing the definition of a dependent child to those under age 7, and limiting caregiving exemptions • Limit state flexibility by allowing ABAWD work requirement waivers only in areas with over 10% unemployment and reduce the allowable exempt population from 8% to 1%. • Restrict the automatic qualification for utility deductions in SNAP calculations to households with elderly or disabled members and limit income exclusions for state energy assistance. • Require states to contribute at least 5% toward SNAP benefit costs starting in FY 2028, with higher contributions (up to 25%) required for states with high SNAP error rates. Currently the federal government pays 100% of the SNAP benefit. • Reduce the federal contribution to SNAP administrative costs from 50% to 25%, increasing the state share to 75%. What does this mean to families who depend on SNAP? • Nearly 11 million people — about 1 in 4 SNAP participants, including more than 4 million children and more than half a million adults aged 65 or older and adults with disabilities — live in households that would be at risk of losing at least some of their food assistance under the legislation. • Shifting the cost of SNAP and program administration to the states will force states to have to make hard decisions about how they provide SNAP. If every state had needed to pay 5 percent of food benefit costs last year, states would have collectively paid about $4.7 billion. Much of this federal legislation would apply to the following fiscal year or later, so immediate modifications to state budgets by state lawmakers and governors would not be necessary. As I mentioned, I will highlight other areas of this bill in the coming weeks. If you would like to join us in calling for federal lawmakers to carefully consider the changes to SNAP, SoonerCare, emergency management support and other provisions directly impacting children, please sign on to our letter of encouragement for them to weigh their decisions. Of course, you can reach out to our federal delegation on your own. If you want to join our effort, you can read the letter at https://qrco.de/CongressLetter . If you wish to sign on to the letter as an individual, go to https://qrco.de/IndSignOn , or if an organization wishes to join in, they can sign on at https://qrco.de/OrgSignOn .

Gov. Kevin Stitt and legislative leaders have announced an agreement for the key elements to the Fiscal Year 2026 state budget. The plan for the estimated $12.6 billion budget includes an income tax cut of a quarter percent and consolidation of the lowest income tax brackets. Based on modeling from the Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy, a 0.25% cut to Oklahoma’s personal income tax rate is estimated to reduce collections by $338 million annually. By flattening the bottom three income tax brackets, this is expected to lower the state budget by $87 million annually. The negotiating parties agreed on key spending priorities, including funds for a new, state-of-the-art veterinary hospital at OSU in Stillwater for $250 million; a world-class pediatric heart hospital at OU in Oklahoma City for $200 million; and funds for various infrastructure investments across the state. Other items in the budget include the purchase of a private prison in Lawton for $312 million and funding for the Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services so they can make payroll for the rest of this fiscal year ending June 30. There will also be $41.6 million for the Oklahoma National Guard to do needed maintenance and $5 million for state employee maternity leave costs. “Enhanced tort reform” is included in the agreement, further limiting lawsuits against doctors and some businesses. Other “business-friendly” policies include “Behind the Meter” to allow power generation by large-scale manufacturers and data centers, the establishment of business courts, and expense recovery for utilities. The agreement also boosts public school funding by $25 million and private school vouchers by $50 million, while raising the ceiling on teacher pay. A pair of programs — for statewide inhaler access and school panic buttons — will be moved out of the State Department of Education into other agencies. The deal also will make the children of teachers eligible for the Oklahoma Higher Learning Access Program scholarships. Lawmakers are spending $8 million for a partnership between the OSU Medical Authority and St. Francis Hospital to capture federal funding to establish a Level 1 trauma center in Tulsa; currently, the state’s only Level 1 trauma center is in Oklahoma City. Lawmakers must constitutionally adjourn by 5 p.m. on the final Friday in May. These agreements, along with other bills yet unresolved, must make it to the desk of the governor by then. Many issues discussed this year, including an increase of $5 per day for traditional foster care to meet the growing costs of the economy - a detriment to recruiting much-needed foster families – will be held over until next year. Some have called for eliminating the state’s income tax. This would slash an estimated $5.8 billion annually from the current state budget. Obviously, many government services such as public schools, SoonerCare, and highway maintenance would face severe shortages if this were to happen. Of great concern, state lawmakers still do not know the impact of cuts looming with the upcoming federal budget. In Oklahoma, our state budget includes 43-47% matching federal funds. Early indicators predict that there will likely be between $400-$800 million of federal funds to Oklahoma eliminated. This could require some potentially unpleasant actions. One is a special session to modify the budget. Governor Stitt would need to call lawmakers back to adjust agency allocations, or lawmakers could try to call themselves back by a two-thirds vote of both the state House of Representatives and Senate. The second option is for agencies to absorb those cuts in the programs funded by federal dollars and reduce services. There are still many unknowns about what will happen with the federal budget. The Oklahoma Institute for Child Advocacy will keep you informed once more is revealed.