Just when I think we’ve plumbed the depths of disgusting and immoral legislation in this state, here comes brand-new Republican state senator Lisa Standridge, who has kicked off her term of office by introducing a bill this session that makes it illegal for towns under the population of 300,000 to provide homeless programs and services, including providing shelters. For reference, that means the only municipalities in Oklahoma who could provide homeless services would be OKC and Tulsa (which only barely clears the bar.)
I’m not entirely sure what problem Senator Standridge is trying to solve here, but I guess that’s the wrong question to ask: governance by cruelty is the new Republican M.O. in the Trump era, especially here in Oklahoma, where our local elected officials are all doubling down as fast as they can to see who can get Trump to notice them first. It’s pathetic, and for a bunch of folks who want to remind us what good Christians they are every chance they get, it’s decidedly anti-Christian to push legislation like this. Those without a roof over their head in this state – about 26,000 of whom are children – have committed no crime that makes them deserving of such treatment. Homeless folks exist outside the metro areas of Oklahoma, and one of the things we owe one another in our social contract is to take care of those going through hard times, by making sure they have a little to eat and a roof to sleep under, especially in a state with such extreme weather swings.
I know the usual right wing response to this kind of thing is that private entities and churches should be doing this work, not the government. But such responses showcase a shocking ignorance about how our services and programs for the homeless work, as well as a completely expected hypocrisy: I doubt whatever megachurch Senator Standridge attends is opening its doors every night in Norman to scores of homeless folks. Churches across the state can’t do this themselves; instead, they look to partner with municipal organizations to provide care and resources for those in need. This kind of legisaltion won’t shift the burden of care to churches and private orgs; it will simply eradicate options for the homeless in 90% of the state. But, again, I understand, that’s the point: governance by cruelty. Make things hard enough on homeless folks, and they’ll move on, and you can go back to pretending they don’t exist anymore.
Any right wing folks out there want to defend this? What are we doing here? Do you enjoy cruelty?
Justin DaMetz 