Oklahoma is known as a conservative state, but you wouldn’t know it from the number of regulations imposed.

In its “Snapshots of State Regulations” report, the Mercatus Center at George Mason University ranked Oklahoma 17th nationally in the number of regulatory restrictions imposed.

Oklahoma had 142,313 regulations. Idaho, the nation’s least-regulated state, had just 31,497.

Sadly, Oklahoma had more state regulatory restrictions than liberal states such as Minnesota, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

Granted, Oklahoma’s regulatory burden is still much lower than in California, the nation’s most-regulated state with 420,434 regulations, or New York, the second-most regulated state with 300,095 restrictions.

But that’s a small comfort to most Oklahomans. The amount of state regulation is clearly excessive, which creates economic headwinds.

Mercatus researchers have found that “regulatory accumulation worsens economic conditions, inadvertently increasing poverty rates, destroying jobs, and raising prices.”

However, Mercatus officials note, “The path to reversing these trends is clear: Improve regulations by reducing their number.”

First, state officials must count the number of regulatory restrictions in place. Second, they must offset new regulations by repealing old ones.

That was the plan used in Idaho. Six years ago, Idaho had more than 72,000 regulatory restrictions. Today, it has just 31,497. Officials in that state repealed two regulations for every new regulation imposed, and all regulations expire within five years unless re-authorized.

During his first term, Gov. Kevin Stitt ordered agencies to repeal old regulations whenever new ones are proposed. But it’s obvious more should be done.

State Sen. Micheal Bergstrom, who chairs the Senate Administrative Rules Committee, notes the Legislature and governor receive about 400 packets of new proposed permanent rules from state agencies each year. Those packets run tens of thousands of pages. Lawmakers must review them all and vote to reject any improper regulations within the four-month session. 

The sheer volume of regulations makes quality oversight very difficult, which is why Bergstrom and House Administrative Rules Committee Chair Gerrid Kendrix are exploring ways to reform the process.

Oklahomans should hope they succeed.

In a column for North Carolina’s News & Observer, Patrick McLaughlin, the Mercatus Center at George Mason University’s director of policy analytics, noted that the “default setting” of government entities is to allow regulations to build up over time. Eventually, that makes it all but impossible for citizens to stay compliant.

“While ignorance of the law may not be a valid defense in court, for the average person or small business owner, this layer cake of regulations makes ignorance inevitable,” McLaughlin wrote.

When it comes to government regulation, less is best. But Oklahoma has a long way to go to achieve that goal.