Insurance coverage, personal healthcare spending, longevity, mortality, health risks, and provider shortages.
Uninsured rate · all ages11.5%2024 · #3 of 50 · highest first
Uninsured rate · under age 6513.7%2024 · #3 of 50 · highest first
Private coverage · under age 6563.9%2024 · #47 of 50 · highest first
Oklahoma over time
Explore Oklahoma readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. Oklahoma officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a Oklahoma effect.
Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Oklahoma change.
Enacted / issuedDid not proceedPending / in progressStatus unclear
Colors show the latest recorded status. Passing one chamber is not enactment. A number groups actions with the same date, body and status.
Uninsured rate · all ages Oklahoma · source units
OklahomaPublished U.S. benchmark
Move across the chart to inspect the nearest observation. Click or tap to keep a reading selected, or focus the chart and use the arrow keys. Hover over or focus a marker to explore; click or tap to pin. Press Escape to clear.
21 of 21 reviewed Oklahoma actions match · 21 date markers shown. 21 major events shown separately.
Oklahoma · 2024: 11.5% · Rank #3 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 8.2%
FactVote uses the Census Bureau's HIC-4_ACS historical table. Rates and 90% confidence margins of error are the published ACS 1-year estimates for the civilian noninstitutionalized population. ACS annual estimates, all ages. Standard ACS 2020 one-year data were not released; the chart leaves a gap. Survey ranks describe point estimates and do not establish significant differences. Annual observations use December 31; monthly observations use the first of the month. Lines connect consecutive readings and do not supply values between them. Missing observations break the lines.
The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.
Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.
Oklahoma · state comparison
Who has health coverage?
Compare ACS annual estimates for all ages or people under 65. Coverage categories can overlap and do not sum to the insured share.
Oklahoma · 202411.5%
Oklahoma rank#3among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark8.2%Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Uninsured rate · all ages
FactVote uses the Census Bureau's HIC-4_ACS historical table. Rates and 90% confidence margins of error are the published ACS 1-year estimates for the civilian noninstitutionalized population.
ACS annual estimates, all ages. Standard ACS 2020 one-year data were not released; the chart leaves a gap. Survey ranks describe point estimates and do not establish significant differences.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
Oklahoma
2024 · Oklahoma: 11.5% · Rank #3 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 8.2% · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Oklahoma Uninsured rate · all ages history
Period
Oklahoma
Compare
2014
15.4%
2015
13.9%
2016
13.8%
2017
14.2%
2018
14.2%
2019
14.3%
2020
Not available
2021
13.8%
2022
11.7%
2023
11.4%
2024
11.5%
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Oklahoma stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Oklahoma has a dark outline.
Lower value · 2.8%Higher value · 16.7%Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Oklahoma · 11.5%2024 · Rank #3 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Oklahoma with every state · 50 ranked
Uninsured rate · all ages · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Texas
16.7%
—
#2
Georgia
12%
—
#3
Oklahoma · your comparison
11.5%
—
#4
Nevada
11.4%
—
#5
Alaska
11%
—
#6
Florida
10.9%
—
#7
Arizona
10.3%
—
#7
Wyoming
10.3%
—
#9
New Mexico
10.1%
—
#10
Mississippi
9.7%
—
#10
Tennessee
9.7%
—
#12
Arkansas
9.4%
—
#13
Idaho
9.2%
—
#14
South Carolina
9%
—
#15
Montana
8.8%
—
#16
North Carolina
8.6%
—
#17
Kansas
8.5%
—
#18
Utah
8.3%
—
#19
Alabama
8.2%
—
#20
South Dakota
8.1%
—
#21
Colorado
7.9%
—
#22
Louisiana
7.7%
—
#22
Missouri
7.7%
—
#22
New Jersey
7.7%
—
#25
Indiana
7.5%
—
#26
Nebraska
7.1%
—
#27
Delaware
6.9%
—
#27
Illinois
6.9%
—
#27
Virginia
6.9%
—
#30
Kentucky
6.8%
—
#31
Ohio
6.7%
—
#32
Washington
6.5%
—
#33
Maryland
6.3%
—
#34
North Dakota
6.1%
—
#35
California
5.9%
—
#36
Connecticut
5.8%
—
#36
Pennsylvania
5.8%
—
#36
West Virginia
5.8%
—
#39
Maine
5.5%
—
#40
Iowa
5.4%
—
#41
Wisconsin
5.3%
—
#42
Oregon
5.2%
—
#43
Michigan
5.1%
—
#43
Minnesota
5.1%
—
#45
New York
5%
—
#46
Rhode Island
4.6%
—
#47
New Hampshire
4.5%
—
#48
Vermont
4.2%
—
#49
Hawaii
3.5%
—
#50
Massachusetts
2.8%
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Share of Oklahoma’s civilian noninstitutionalized residents under age 65 who lacked comprehensive health-insurance coverage at the time of the ACS survey.
This source snapshot keeps its own definition and period. A rank shown elsewhere applies only to that comparison’s measure and period.
Method and limitations
U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts, sourced from the 2024 American Community Survey 1-year estimate.
This is a survey estimate for people under 65 and does not describe coverage type or continuity of coverage.
Insurance status alone does not measure affordability, access, quality, or health outcomes.
State spending is reported for 2020, the latest year available in this CMS state series. Choose a service to compare Oklahoma with every state.
Oklahoma · 2020$9,444
Oklahoma rank#33among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$10,191Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Personal healthcare spending per resident
Personal health care expenditure per resident, assigned to the state where the patient resides.
2020 is the last year in this CMS state series. Personal health care excludes administration, public health, and investment included in national health expenditures. This is spending by all payers, not a household bill.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
Oklahoma
2020 · Oklahoma: $9,444 · Rank #33 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $10,191 · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Oklahoma Personal healthcare spending per resident history
Period
Oklahoma
Compare
2014
$7,658
2015
$7,902
2016
$8,132
2017
$8,382
2018
$8,625
2019
$8,923
2020
$9,444
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Oklahoma stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Oklahoma has a dark outline.
Lower value · $7.52KHigher value · $14.01KStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Oklahoma · $9,4442020 · Rank #33 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Oklahoma with every state · 50 ranked
Personal healthcare spending per resident · 2020 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
New York
$14,007
—
#2
Alaska
$13,642
—
#3
Massachusetts
$13,319
—
#4
Delaware
$12,899
—
#5
West Virginia
$12,769
—
#6
Vermont
$12,756
—
#7
South Dakota
$12,495
—
#8
Connecticut
$12,489
—
#9
Maine
$12,077
—
#10
New Jersey
$11,868
—
#11
New Hampshire
$11,793
—
#12
Rhode Island
$11,694
—
#13
Pennsylvania
$11,603
—
#14
North Dakota
$11,301
—
#15
Wyoming
$10,989
—
#16
Minnesota
$10,846
—
#17
Maryland
$10,839
—
#18
Indiana
$10,517
—
#19
Louisiana
$10,515
—
#20
Nebraska
$10,514
—
#21
Ohio
$10,478
—
#22
California
$10,299
—
#23
Hawaii
$10,291
—
#24
Kentucky
$10,257
—
#25
Montana
$10,212
—
#26
Illinois
$10,190
—
#27
Oregon
$10,071
—
#28
Wisconsin
$9,982
—
#29
Missouri
$9,921
—
#30
Michigan
$9,897
—
#31
Florida
$9,865
—
#32
Iowa
$9,789
—
#33
Oklahoma · your comparison
$9,444
—
#34
Kansas
$9,408
—
#35
Mississippi
$9,394
—
#36
Arkansas
$9,338
—
#37
Tennessee
$9,336
—
#38
Alabama
$9,280
—
#39
Washington
$9,265
—
#40
Virginia
$9,195
—
#41
North Carolina
$8,917
—
#42
New Mexico
$8,902
—
#43
South Carolina
$8,766
—
#44
Georgia
$8,758
—
#45
Arizona
$8,756
—
#46
Colorado
$8,583
—
#47
Texas
$8,406
—
#48
Nevada
$8,348
—
#49
Idaho
$8,148
—
#50
Utah
$7,522
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Use age-adjusted mortality to account for different age distributions; life expectancy summarizes period death rates.
Oklahoma · 202273.8 years
Oklahoma rank#44among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark77.5 yearsSame measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Life expectancy at birth
FactVote uses CDC National Center for Health Statistics annual complete life-table estimates for the total Oklahoma population. Values are rounded to the published tenth of a year.
The latest published comparable state series ends in 2022, even though newer national life-expectancy estimates may be available. Period life expectancy summarizes current mortality rates; it is not a forecast of how long a particular person will live. The 2020 and 2021 estimates reflect the mortality shock during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
Oklahoma
2022 · Oklahoma: 73.8 years · Rank #44 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 77.5 years · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Oklahoma Life expectancy at birth history
Period
Oklahoma
Compare
2018
75.6 years
2019
75.7 years
2020
74.1 years
2021
72.7 years
2022
73.8 years
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Oklahoma stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Oklahoma has a dark outline.
Lower value · 72.2 yearsHigher value · 80 yearsStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Oklahoma · 73.8 years2022 · Rank #44 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Oklahoma with every state · 50 ranked
Life expectancy at birth · 2022 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Hawaii
80 years
—
#2
Massachusetts
79.8 years
—
#3
New Jersey
79.6 years
—
#4
New York
79.5 years
—
#5
Connecticut
79.4 years
—
#6
California
79.3 years
—
#6
Minnesota
79.3 years
—
#8
Rhode Island
79.2 years
—
#9
Utah
79 years
—
#10
New Hampshire
78.7 years
—
#11
Colorado
78.5 years
—
#12
Idaho
78.4 years
—
#12
Washington
78.4 years
—
#14
Nebraska
78.3 years
—
#14
Vermont
78.3 years
—
#16
Wisconsin
78.1 years
—
#17
Florida
77.9 years
—
#17
Iowa
77.9 years
—
#17
North Dakota
77.9 years
—
#20
Maryland
77.8 years
—
#21
Oregon
77.7 years
—
#22
Illinois
77.5 years
—
#22
Virginia
77.5 years
—
#24
Montana
77.3 years
—
#24
Pennsylvania
77.3 years
—
#24
South Dakota
77.3 years
—
#27
Texas
77.1 years
—
#28
Michigan
76.8 years
—
#28
Wyoming
76.8 years
—
#30
Arizona
76.7 years
—
#31
Maine
76.6 years
—
#32
Delaware
76.5 years
—
#32
Kansas
76.5 years
—
#34
Nevada
76.4 years
—
#35
Georgia
75.9 years
—
#35
North Carolina
75.9 years
—
#37
Alaska
75.8 years
—
#38
Ohio
75.6 years
—
#39
Indiana
75.4 years
—
#40
Missouri
75.2 years
—
#41
South Carolina
75.1 years
—
#42
New Mexico
74.5 years
—
#43
Arkansas
73.9 years
—
#44
Alabama
73.8 years
—
#44
Louisiana
73.8 years
—
#44
Oklahoma · your comparison
73.8 years
—
#44
Tennessee
73.8 years
—
#48
Kentucky
73.6 years
—
#49
Mississippi
72.6 years
—
#50
West Virginia
72.2 years
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Compare age-adjusted adult prevalence using the same survey year and definition.
Oklahoma · 202311.3%
Oklahoma rank#12among 48 states with data
U.S. benchmark10.7%Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted
Adult self-reported prevalence, age-adjusted to a common population.
Published CDC 2019–2023 series. Missing or suppressed estimates remain unranked. Confidence intervals describe sampling uncertainty; point ranks are not significance tests.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
Oklahoma
2023 · Oklahoma: 11.3% · Rank #12 of 48, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 10.7% · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Oklahoma Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted history
Period
Oklahoma
Compare
2019
11.2%
2020
12%
2021
11.8%
2022
12.2%
2023
11.3%
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Oklahoma stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Oklahoma has a dark outline.
Lower value · 7.8%Higher value · 15.1%Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Oklahoma · 11.3%2023 · Rank #12 of 48, highest first95% confidence interval: 10.5% – 12.1%Selected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Oklahoma with every state · 48 ranked, 2 unavailable
Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted · 2023 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Mississippi
15.1%
95% CI: 13.7–16.6
#1
West Virginia
15.1%
95% CI: 13.9–16.3
#3
Louisiana
14.6%
95% CI: 13.4–15.8
#4
Alabama
14%
95% CI: 12.7–15.3
#5
Arkansas
13.1%
95% CI: 12–14.3
#6
South Carolina
12.7%
95% CI: 11.9–13.6
#6
Tennessee
12.7%
95% CI: 11.7–13.8
#8
Texas
12.1%
95% CI: 11–13.3
#9
Indiana
11.7%
95% CI: 11.1–12.4
#10
Georgia
11.5%
95% CI: 10.7–12.3
#10
Ohio
11.5%
95% CI: 10.8–12.2
#12
Oklahoma · your comparison
11.3%
95% CI: 10.5–12.1
#13
Delaware
11.1%
95% CI: 9.8–12.6
#14
North Carolina
11%
95% CI: 9.8–12.3
#15
Illinois
10.9%
95% CI: 9.9–12.1
#15
Maryland
10.9%
95% CI: 10.2–11.7
#15
Michigan
10.9%
95% CI: 10.1–11.8
#18
Nevada
10.8%
95% CI: 8.9–13
#18
New Mexico
10.8%
95% CI: 9.3–12.6
#20
Missouri
10.7%
95% CI: 9.9–11.7
#20
South Dakota
10.7%
95% CI: 8.9–12.8
#22
California
10.6%
95% CI: 9.8–11.4
#23
Kansas
10.5%
95% CI: 9.7–11.3
#24
Virginia
10.4%
95% CI: 9.5–11.4
#25
Florida
10.1%
95% CI: 9.1–11.1
#26
Rhode Island
10%
95% CI: 9.1–11
#27
Arizona
9.9%
95% CI: 9.2–10.7
#27
Iowa
9.9%
95% CI: 9.2–10.7
#29
Nebraska
9.7%
95% CI: 9–10.3
#30
Wisconsin
9.6%
95% CI: 9–10.2
#31
Hawaii
9.5%
95% CI: 8.7–10.5
#31
New York
9.5%
95% CI: 8.9–10.1
#31
Oregon
9.5%
95% CI: 8.7–10.5
#34
Wyoming
9.4%
95% CI: 8.5–10.5
#35
Minnesota
9.3%
95% CI: 8.6–10
#36
New Jersey
9.1%
95% CI: 8.4–9.9
#37
Maine
9%
95% CI: 8.4–9.7
#38
North Dakota
8.9%
95% CI: 8.1–9.7
#39
Idaho
8.7%
95% CI: 7.9–9.6
#40
Washington
8.6%
95% CI: 8.2–9
#41
Massachusetts
8.5%
95% CI: 7.8–9.4
#42
Connecticut
8.4%
95% CI: 7.6–9.3
#43
Alaska
8.2%
95% CI: 7.4–9.2
#44
Utah
8.1%
95% CI: 7.5–8.7
#45
Colorado
8%
95% CI: 7.3–8.7
#46
Montana
7.9%
95% CI: 7.2–8.7
#46
New Hampshire
7.9%
95% CI: 7.1–8.8
#48
Vermont
7.8%
95% CI: 7–8.7
—
Kentucky
Not available
No comparable published observation for this period; excluded from rank.
—
Pennsylvania
Not available
No comparable published observation for this period; excluded from rank.
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Compare coverage of need, practitioners needed, or affected population for each discipline.
Oklahoma · June 30, 202628.6%
Oklahoma rank#48among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark47.4%Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Primary care · need met
HRSA-designated shortage areas; measures describe need within those areas, not the entire state population.
National report totals can include territories. Designation rules and populations differ by discipline; do not add disciplines. Absolute population and practitioner ranks also reflect state size.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Oklahoma stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Oklahoma has a dark outline.
Lower value · 11.2%Higher value · 83.2%Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Oklahoma · 28.6%June 30, 2026 · Rank #48 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Oklahoma with every state · 50 ranked
Primary care · need met · June 30, 2026 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
New Jersey
83.2%
—
#2
Vermont
82.6%
—
#3
South Carolina
79.4%
—
#4
New Hampshire
74.8%
—
#5
Rhode Island
74.3%
—
#6
Louisiana
72.1%
—
#7
Hawaii
67.1%
—
#8
Utah
65.4%
—
#9
Wisconsin
65.2%
—
#10
Alabama
63%
—
#11
Connecticut
60.3%
—
#12
Massachusetts
58%
—
#13
Tennessee
58%
—
#14
Virginia
57.2%
—
#15
Pennsylvania
56.7%
—
#16
Maine
56%
—
#17
Minnesota
55.4%
—
#18
Wyoming
54.4%
—
#19
Indiana
54.2%
—
#20
California
53.2%
—
#21
Arkansas
52.6%
—
#22
Texas
49.8%
—
#23
Ohio
49.7%
—
#24
Nebraska
49.1%
—
#25
Alaska
48.9%
—
#26
North Carolina
48.1%
—
#27
Colorado
47.5%
—
#28
Michigan
44.9%
—
#29
Oregon
43.9%
—
#30
Idaho
43.9%
—
#31
Washington
42.4%
—
#32
Illinois
41.5%
—
#33
Nevada
41.5%
—
#34
Arizona
41.2%
—
#35
Kansas
41.1%
—
#36
Iowa
40.5%
—
#37
Florida
39.7%
—
#38
Georgia
39.1%
—
#39
Montana
38.5%
—
#40
West Virginia
38.3%
—
#41
North Dakota
36.5%
—
#42
New York
35.3%
—
#43
South Dakota
34.6%
—
#44
Mississippi
34.1%
—
#45
Maryland
31.6%
—
#46
New Mexico
31.4%
—
#47
Kentucky
30.8%
—
#48
Oklahoma · your comparison
28.6%
—
#49
Missouri
23.7%
—
#50
Delaware
11.2%
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Premium comparisons use a published historical all-state employer survey. Total premiums combine employer and employee payments.
Oklahoma · 2020$7,058
Oklahoma rank#27among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$7,149Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Single coverage premium · all firms
Average total annual employer-plan premium per enrolled employee at private-sector establishments offering coverage.
Historical 2020 published all-state table; not a current quote. Includes both employer and employee contributions, rather than just a worker’s payment. Survey estimates and small firm samples carry uncertainty. Missing estimates remain unavailable.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Oklahoma stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Oklahoma has a dark outline.
Lower value · $6.39KHigher value · $8.64KStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Oklahoma · $7,0582020 · Rank #27 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Oklahoma with every state · 50 ranked
Single coverage premium · all firms · 2020 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Alaska
$8,635
—
#2
New York
$8,177
—
#3
New Hampshire
$7,991
—
#4
Vermont
$7,868
—
#5
Wyoming
$7,743
—
#6
Nebraska
$7,611
—
#7
South Carolina
$7,516
—
#8
Connecticut
$7,501
—
#9
Maine
$7,496
—
#10
Massachusetts
$7,452
—
#11
Washington
$7,440
—
#12
New Mexico
$7,424
—
#13
Illinois
$7,376
—
#14
New Jersey
$7,373
—
#15
Maryland
$7,352
—
#16
Rhode Island
$7,326
—
#17
Indiana
$7,319
—
#18
Delaware
$7,280
—
#19
Wisconsin
$7,250
—
#20
Pennsylvania
$7,246
—
#21
North Dakota
$7,216
—
#22
Colorado
$7,206
—
#23
Missouri
$7,179
—
#24
California
$7,173
—
#25
Florida
$7,078
—
#26
South Dakota
$7,070
—
#27
Oklahoma · your comparison
$7,058
—
#28
Hawaii
$7,040
—
#29
North Carolina
$7,036
—
#30
Texas
$7,017
—
#31
West Virginia
$6,993
—
#32
Ohio
$6,989
—
#33
Kentucky
$6,949
—
#34
Iowa
$6,932
—
#35
Virginia
$6,928
—
#36
Oregon
$6,917
—
#37
Minnesota
$6,910
—
#38
Georgia
$6,876
—
#39
Montana
$6,860
—
#40
Idaho
$6,744
—
#41
Louisiana
$6,713
—
#42
Michigan
$6,683
—
#43
Kansas
$6,675
—
#44
Arizona
$6,612
—
#45
Utah
$6,593
—
#46
Mississippi
$6,561
—
#47
Nevada
$6,493
—
#48
Tennessee
$6,485
—
#49
Arkansas
$6,414
—
#50
Alabama
$6,393
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Adult statewide estimates use the same SAMHSA model and survey period. Treatment use is a share of all adults, not a share of adults with mental illness.
Oklahoma · 2023–202422.6%
Oklahoma rank#37among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark23.1%Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Any Mental Illness · adults 18+
Civilian noninstitutionalized adults age 18+, past-year prevalence or treatment use, estimated by small-area survey models.
Mental illness and depression estimates pool 2023–2024; treatment use covers 2024 only. Definitions and model-based uncertainty differ from the national page’s annual 2025 survey estimates. Point-estimate ranks do not establish significant differences. Serious mental illness is a subset of any mental illness, so their percentages must not be added.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Oklahoma stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Oklahoma has a dark outline.
Lower value · 18.1%Higher value · 31.6%Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Oklahoma · 22.6%2023–2024 · Rank #37 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Oklahoma with every state · 50 ranked
Any Mental Illness · adults 18+ · 2023–2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Oregon
31.6%
—
#2
Vermont
29.1%
—
#3
West Virginia
28.1%
—
#4
Washington
27.9%
—
#5
New Hampshire
27.7%
—
#6
Tennessee
27%
—
#7
Utah
26.7%
—
#8
Maine
26.7%
—
#9
Arkansas
26.6%
—
#10
Colorado
26.4%
—
#11
Rhode Island
25.8%
—
#12
Missouri
25.7%
—
#13
Montana
25.6%
—
#14
Indiana
25.3%
—
#15
Kentucky
25.3%
—
#16
Georgia
25.2%
—
#17
Iowa
25%
—
#18
Massachusetts
24.9%
—
#19
Wyoming
24.7%
—
#20
Nevada
24.6%
—
#21
Arizona
24.6%
—
#22
Wisconsin
24.6%
—
#23
Idaho
24.5%
—
#24
Nebraska
24.1%
—
#25
Louisiana
24.1%
—
#26
Alaska
24%
—
#27
Pennsylvania
23.9%
—
#28
New Mexico
23.9%
—
#28
Ohio
23.9%
—
#30
Connecticut
23.7%
—
#31
Kansas
23.7%
—
#32
Michigan
23.6%
—
#33
Virginia
23.1%
—
#34
Alabama
23%
—
#35
North Dakota
23%
—
#36
Maryland
22.7%
—
#37
Oklahoma · your comparison
22.6%
—
#38
Minnesota
22.6%
—
#39
Illinois
22.2%
—
#40
Delaware
22.1%
—
#41
New York
21.9%
—
#42
South Dakota
21.8%
—
#43
California
21.6%
—
#44
North Carolina
21.4%
—
#45
Florida
20.8%
—
#46
Texas
20.7%
—
#47
Mississippi
20.5%
—
#48
Hawaii
19.8%
—
#49
South Carolina
19.8%
—
#50
New Jersey
18.1%
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Explore current officeholders and explicitly reviewed historical executive officials, labeled at the time of their actions. Timeline dates, action type, status and search also filter this list. Read any record’s summary, latest recorded status and official evidence below, or open it beside the timeline.
21 of 21 reviewed Oklahoma actions · newest first
Jun 4, 2026 · Executive Order 2026-21 · Federal-benefit screening for children in state custody · IssuedGovernor · Executive Order 2026-21
Federal-benefit screening for children in state custody
Jun 4, 2026 · Issued
Gov. Kevin Stitt · Issued
FactVote reviewed summary
Executive Order 2026-21 directs DHS to assist eligible children in state custody with federal-benefit applications, identify suitable representative payees, and conserve survivor benefits rather than use them for ordinary state care costs, subject to legal exceptions. The Social Security connection concerns its SSA survivor-benefit component; VA, Railroad Retirement, and savings accounts are separate.
Historical executive order issued. Implementation, later amendments and current enforceability are not inferred.
Why this record is included
The fact counts Social Security retirement, survivors, and disability beneficiaries in current-payment status. Benefit administration concerns a component of that population; SSI, Medicare, and state pensions are separate programs. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Oklahoma evidence context: People receiving Social Security benefits. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
1. DHS shall take appropriate steps to screen every child currently in the legal custody of the Jepartment, and every child entering the legal custody of the Department, to determine whether the child receives, or may be eligible to receive, federal benefits, including but not limited to benefits administered by the SSA, the VA, the RRB, or any other federal agency. 2. Upon determining that a child in the legal custody of DHS may be eligible to receive federal benefits, DHS shall take appropriate steps to ensure that an application is filed on behalf of the child or that an appropriate person or entity is identified to file the application on behalf of the child. 3. DHS shall develop policies and procedures to identify, whenever appropriate, a representative payee who is independent of the Department and capable of managing the child's benefits in the child's best interests. If no appropriate independent representative payee is identified, DHS may apply to serve as representative payee when necessary to protect the child's interests. 4. DHS shall not use a child's federal survivor benefits to reimburse itself, the State of Oklahoma, or any contractor for the ordinary cost of the child's care or maintenance while the child is in the legal custody of the Department, except to the extent expressly required by federal law, court order, or other binding legal authority. 5. When DHS serves as representative payee or otherwise manages a child's federal survivor benefits, the Department shall select an account or savings vehicle that best preserves the child's funds, protects the child's eligibility for other benefits and services, and serves the child's long-term interests. Appropriate vehicles may include, but are not limited to, ABLE accounts, personal needs accounts, trust-style savings vehicles, or other lawful accounts suitable for the child's circumstances. […] 7. DHS shall, to the extent such information is available to it, provide each child receiving federal survivor benefits with an annual accounting detailing the use, conservation, and balance of the funds in any such account.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑May 14, 2026 · HB 4423 · Oklahoma Health Care Authority; federal immigration reporting systems; requiring Authority to report certain applicants to the Attorney General; notification to Immigration and Customs Enforcement; effective date. · Not enactedOklahoma Legislature · HB 4423
Oklahoma Health Care Authority; federal immigration reporting systems; requiring Authority to report certain applicants to the Attorney General; notification to Immigration and Customs Enforcement; effective date.
HB 4423 proposed SAVE immigration-status verification before Medicaid benefits, referral of final adverse determinations to the attorney general for review and possible ICE referral when lawful status cannot be verified, and disclosures on the agency website and application portals. Those disclosures are not an individual notice-and-cure procedure. The session ended without enactment.
The reviewed regular session ended without recorded enactment. Latest legislative entry: Coauthored by Senator Seifried (2026-05-14). Proposed effective dates do not establish enactment.
Why this record is included
The fact measures residents under 65 without health insurance. Insurance eligibility, enrollment, coverage continuity and premium assistance concern the covered population. Provider payments and covered services alone do not establish a coverage change, and Medicare-only changes mostly concern a different age population. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Oklahoma evidence context: People under 65 without health insurance · Residents who are foreign-born. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
B. 1. The Oklahoma Health Care Authority shall verify a Medicaid applicant's status by utilizing the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services' Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) system. An applicant's legal status in the United States shall be confirmed prior to an applicant receiving benefits conferred by the Oklahoma Health Care Authority. 2. Upon final determination that an applicant's SAVE status does not indicate the person is lawfully in the United States, the Authority shall notify the Office of the Attorney General. The Office shall review the case and shall notify the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency if an applicant's legal presence in the United States is unverifiable. 3. The Oklahoma Health Care Authority shall post a notice on its website providing information about Medicaid programs and on its application portal notifying applicants that their immigration status will be reviewed and if unverified the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency will be notified.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑May 11, 2026 · SB 372 · Firearms; modifying scope of lawful carry. Effective date. · EnactedOklahoma Legislature · SB 372
Firearms; modifying scope of lawful carry. Effective date.
May 11, 2026 · Enacted
Sen. Kelly Hines · Sponsored / Rep. Jay Steagall · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
SB 372 adds state-owned hotels, cabins, and lodges to places where carrying a concealed or unconcealed firearm is lawful under the amended statute. This is a firearm-carry rule, not evidence of a change in mortality.
Signed by Kevin Stitt on 2026-05-11. Latest legislative entry: Approved by Governor 05/11/2026 (2026-05-12). Historical enactment does not establish implementation or current enforceability.
Why this record is included
Firearm mortality includes suicide, homicide, and other intents. The provision concerns firearm access, safety, or prevention of firearm injury and may address only part of the death count. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Oklahoma evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
B. It shall be lawful for a person to carry a concealed or unconcealed firearm on the following properties: […] and 7. Any state-owned hotel, cabin, or lodge. Nothing contained in any provision of this subsection or subsection C of this section shall be construed to authorize or allow any person in control of any place described in subsection A of this section to establish any policy or rule that has the effect of prohibiting any person in lawful possession of a handgun license or otherwise in lawful possession of a firearm from carrying or possessing the firearm on the property described in this subsection.
Firearms; modifying scope of lawful carry. Effective date.
May 11, 2026 · Signed
Gov. Kevin Stitt · Signed
FactVote reviewed summary
Kevin Stitt signed SB 372. SB 372 adds state-owned hotels, cabins, and lodges to places where carrying a concealed or unconcealed firearm is lawful under the amended statute. This is a firearm-carry rule, not evidence of a change in mortality.
Signed by Kevin Stitt on 2026-05-11. Latest legislative entry: Approved by Governor 05/11/2026 (2026-05-12). Historical enactment does not establish implementation or current enforceability.
Why this record is included
Firearm mortality includes suicide, homicide, and other intents. The provision concerns firearm access, safety, or prevention of firearm injury and may address only part of the death count. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Oklahoma evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
B. It shall be lawful for a person to carry a concealed or unconcealed firearm on the following properties: […] and 7. Any state-owned hotel, cabin, or lodge. Nothing contained in any provision of this subsection or subsection C of this section shall be construed to authorize or allow any person in control of any place described in subsection A of this section to establish any policy or rule that has the effect of prohibiting any person in lawful possession of a handgun license or otherwise in lawful possession of a firearm from carrying or possessing the firearm on the property described in this subsection.
Rep. Denise Crosswhite Hader · Sponsored / Sen. David Bullard · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
HB 1168 creates a felony for knowingly delivering, or possessing with intent to deliver, abortion-inducing drugs for an unlawful abortion. Its definitions and exceptions preserve lawful medical uses, ectopic-pregnancy and miscarriage treatment, and preventive contraception.
Signed by Kevin Stitt on 2026-05-05. Latest legislative entry: Approved by Governor 05/05/2026 (2026-05-06). Historical enactment does not establish implementation or current enforceability.
Why this record is included
The fact counts abortions performed in Oklahoma in 2025, regardless of residence. Access, restrictions and reporting concern this occurrence-based measure. Procedures performed outside Oklahoma are outside its scope. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Oklahoma evidence context: Abortions reported as occurring in Oklahoma. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
SECTION 1. NEW LAW A new section of law to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 1-756.30 of Title 63, unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows: A. As used in this act: 1. "Abortion" means the use or prescription of any instrument, medicine, drug, or any other substance or device intentionally to terminate the pregnancy of a female known to be pregnant with an intention other than to increase the probability of a live birth, to preserve the life or health of the child after live birth, to remove an ectopic pregnancy, or to remove a dead unborn child who died as the result of a spontaneous miscarriage, accidental trauma, or a criminal assault on the pregnant female or her unborn child; 2. "Abortion-inducing drug" means a medicine, drug, or any other substance prescribed or dispensed with the intent of inducing an abortion. This includes off-label use of drugs known to have abortion-inducing properties, which are prescribed specifically with the intent of causing an abortion, such as misoprostol (Cytotec) and methotrexate. This definition does not apply to drugs that may be known to cause an abortion but which are prescribed for other medical indications, such as chemotherapeutic agents or diagnostic drugs, or for treatment of an ectopic pregnancy or spontaneous miscarriage; 3. "Preventive contraception" means any drug, chemical, biological product, or device used with the intent to prevent pregnancy and that is used in accordance with manufacturer instructions; 4. "Trafficking" means the act of buying, selling, or delivering medicine, drugs, or any substance illegally; and 5. "Unborn child" means the unborn offspring of human beings from the moment of conception, through pregnancy, and until live birth, including the human conceptus, zygote, morula, blastocyst, embryo, and fetus. B. A person who knows or has reason to know that another person intends to use an abortion-inducing drug to cause an unlawful abortion and who knowingly or intentionally: 1. Delivers an abortion-inducing drug to that person; or 2. Possesses an abortion-inducing drug with the intent to deliver the abortion-inducing drug to that person, commits trafficking in an abortion-inducing drug and is guilty of a felony upon conviction. C. A person convicted of trafficking or attempting to traffic abortion-inducing drugs shall be guilty of a felony punishable by a fine not to exceed One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00), or by confinement in the custody of the Department of Corrections for a term not to exceed ten (10) years, or by both such fine and imprisonment. D. This act does not apply to a pharmacist or a manufacturer or distributor of drugs or surgical supplies who lawfully manufactures, possesses, offers, sells, or distributes, in the usual course of that entity's business or profession, any drug, medicine, or instrument intended for any lawful medical purpose. E. Nothing in this act may be construed to prohibit the use, sale, prescription, or administration of a preventive contraceptive measure, drug, chemical, or device if the preventive contraceptive measure, drug, chemical, or device is used, sold, prescribed, or administered in accordance with manufacturer instructions.
Kevin Stitt signed HB 1168. HB 1168 creates a felony for knowingly delivering, or possessing with intent to deliver, abortion-inducing drugs for an unlawful abortion. Its definitions and exceptions preserve lawful medical uses, ectopic-pregnancy and miscarriage treatment, and preventive contraception.
Signed by Kevin Stitt on 2026-05-05. Latest legislative entry: Approved by Governor 05/05/2026 (2026-05-06). Historical enactment does not establish implementation or current enforceability.
Why this record is included
The fact counts abortions performed in Oklahoma in 2025, regardless of residence. Access, restrictions and reporting concern this occurrence-based measure. Procedures performed outside Oklahoma are outside its scope. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Oklahoma evidence context: Abortions reported as occurring in Oklahoma. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
SECTION 1. NEW LAW A new section of law to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 1-756.30 of Title 63, unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows: A. As used in this act: 1. "Abortion" means the use or prescription of any instrument, medicine, drug, or any other substance or device intentionally to terminate the pregnancy of a female known to be pregnant with an intention other than to increase the probability of a live birth, to preserve the life or health of the child after live birth, to remove an ectopic pregnancy, or to remove a dead unborn child who died as the result of a spontaneous miscarriage, accidental trauma, or a criminal assault on the pregnant female or her unborn child; 2. "Abortion-inducing drug" means a medicine, drug, or any other substance prescribed or dispensed with the intent of inducing an abortion. This includes off-label use of drugs known to have abortion-inducing properties, which are prescribed specifically with the intent of causing an abortion, such as misoprostol (Cytotec) and methotrexate. This definition does not apply to drugs that may be known to cause an abortion but which are prescribed for other medical indications, such as chemotherapeutic agents or diagnostic drugs, or for treatment of an ectopic pregnancy or spontaneous miscarriage; 3. "Preventive contraception" means any drug, chemical, biological product, or device used with the intent to prevent pregnancy and that is used in accordance with manufacturer instructions; 4. "Trafficking" means the act of buying, selling, or delivering medicine, drugs, or any substance illegally; and 5. "Unborn child" means the unborn offspring of human beings from the moment of conception, through pregnancy, and until live birth, including the human conceptus, zygote, morula, blastocyst, embryo, and fetus. B. A person who knows or has reason to know that another person intends to use an abortion-inducing drug to cause an unlawful abortion and who knowingly or intentionally: 1. Delivers an abortion-inducing drug to that person; or 2. Possesses an abortion-inducing drug with the intent to deliver the abortion-inducing drug to that person, commits trafficking in an abortion-inducing drug and is guilty of a felony upon conviction. C. A person convicted of trafficking or attempting to traffic abortion-inducing drugs shall be guilty of a felony punishable by a fine not to exceed One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00), or by confinement in the custody of the Department of Corrections for a term not to exceed ten (10) years, or by both such fine and imprisonment. D. This act does not apply to a pharmacist or a manufacturer or distributor of drugs or surgical supplies who lawfully manufactures, possesses, offers, sells, or distributes, in the usual course of that entity's business or profession, any drug, medicine, or instrument intended for any lawful medical purpose. E. Nothing in this act may be construed to prohibit the use, sale, prescription, or administration of a preventive contraceptive measure, drug, chemical, or device if the preventive contraceptive measure, drug, chemical, or device is used, sold, prescribed, or administered in accordance with manufacturer instructions.
Records come from published fact relationships or reviewed topic records with official supporting evidence and verified Oklahoma officeholder attribution. Historical executive officials require evidence tied to the action date and are excluded from incumbent proposals. Inclusion follows an explicit topic review, a related state fact, or the action’s title and supporting evidence. Explicit topic reviews take priority; repeated actions use the most recent explicit review for this topic. Duplicate actions attached to several facts appear once. This topic match is not a new finding that an action caused a result, and the reviewed collection is selective. Collection reviewed Sep 16, 2026.
What candidates are saying
Explore statements about health coverage, healthcare costs, access to care and public health from FactVote’s Oklahoma candidate profiles. Compare candidates within each recorded race, with each person’s matching statements kept together. These are candidate and campaign statements, not verified outcomes.
43 statements from 15 candidates
2026 Oklahoma Commissioner of Labor — General Election Field
1 candidate with matching statements · 1 statement
Consumers should be free to decide whether they want to pay extra for a licensed professional's service. I would propose a risk-based regulatory framework where mandatory licensure is reserved for high-stakes professions impacting public health and safety. For lower-risk occupations, I propose a tra…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Candidate statement
Candidate campaign source
Consumers should be free to decide whether they want to pay extra for a licensed professional's service. I would propose a risk-based regulatory framework where mandatory licensure is reserved for high-stakes professions impacting public health and safety. For lower-risk occupations, I propose a transition to a voluntary certification model.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 17, 2026
Cyndi will protect attempts to cut Medicaid and other programs that help lower costs of health insurance for Oklahomans. She also will create programs that increase access to prenatal and maternity care in rural Oklahoma and expand access to mental health services. Cyndi believes that healthcare dec…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Reproductive rights and health care
Candidate campaign source
Cyndi will protect attempts to cut Medicaid and other programs that help lower costs of health insurance for Oklahomans. She also will create programs that increase access to prenatal and maternity care in rural Oklahoma and expand access to mental health services. Cyndi believes that healthcare decisions should be left between families and their doctors and will oppose attempts by the government to insert themselves into those decisions. Oklahoma has one of the strictest abortion bans in the country, with no exceptions for rape or incest. Cyndi will support a state question to overturn Oklahoma’s extreme abortion ban and codify abortion access into our constitution.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 19, 2026
Oklahomans face barriers getting the healthcare they need. Rural and smaller clinics often struggle to hire and retain qualified staff. As Lieutenant Governor, Dr. Forbes will build strong partnerships to expand access, incentivize healthcare professionals working in underserved areas, and ensure cu…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Health care
Candidate campaign source
Oklahomans face barriers getting the healthcare they need. Rural and smaller clinics often struggle to hire and retain qualified staff. As Lieutenant Governor, Dr. Forbes will build strong partnerships to expand access, incentivize healthcare professionals working in underserved areas, and ensure culturally responsive care. By using technology and working with local providers we can close gaps, lower costs, and ensure every Oklahoman can access quality care.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 23, 2026
This section matches specific health coverage, healthcare costs, access to care and public health terms in retained, attributed source text from published Oklahoma candidate profiles. A profile heading or biography alone does not qualify. The Florida geography is fixed; saved state preferences cannot change these results. A mention can concern a community or group rather than Florida’s statewide measure.
Matching is automatic and does not establish a candidate’s stance, the accuracy of a claim, or an effect on the measured result. Results are grouped by recorded race, then by candidate name. Within each candidate, the matching issue mentions appear first. Only candidates with matching retained statements are shown; this is not a complete race roster. Repeated identical text for the same candidate is shown once. Coverage follows the existing state profiles and is not a complete record of all candidates or everything they have said. Review dates are not statement dates.
Oklahoma incumbents
What incumbents are proposing
Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current Oklahoma legislators and Oklahoma’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from Oklahoma’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.
20 matching sponsorships or proposals · 16 Oklahoma incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.
Rep. Anthony Moore
Oklahoma House of Representatives, District 57 · R–OK
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Anthony MooreOklahoma Legislature · SB 1847
Medicaid home- and community-based services; modifying eligibility criteria for the ADvantage Waiver Program. Effective date. Emergency.
Apr 28, 2026 · Enacted
Sen. Grant Green · Sponsored / Rep. Anthony Moore · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
SB 1847 became law without the governor’s signature. It adds an ADvantage Waiver eligibility route for adults ages 19–64 with a clinically documented progressive or degenerative disease that responds to treatment and previously required hospital or long-term-care treatment to prevent deterioration. Financial Medicaid eligibility, nursing-facility level of care and the other setting and service requirements remain. This is a limited waiver-eligibility route, not general Medicaid expansion or evidence of fewer uninsured residents.
Became law without the governor’s signature on 2026-04-28. Latest legislative entry: Becomes law without Governor's signature 04/28/2026 (2026-04-28). Historical enactment does not establish implementation or current enforceability.
Why this record is included
The fact measures residents under 65 without health insurance. Insurance eligibility, enrollment, coverage continuity and premium assistance concern the covered population. Provider payments and covered services alone do not establish a coverage change, and Medicare-only changes mostly concern a different age population. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Oklahoma evidence context: People under 65 without health insurance. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Section 1017.3. To be eligible for the ADvantage Waiver Program, a person shall: 1. Qualify financially for Medicaid; 2. Be: a. sixty-five (65) years of age or older, or b. nineteen (19) to sixty-four (64) years of age and: (1) be a physically disabled adult, as determined by the Social Security Administration, (2) have a developmental disability; provided, the individual does not have an intellectual disability or cognitive impairment related to the developmental disability, or (3) have a clinically documented, progressive, and degenerative disease that responds to treatment and previously required hospital- or long-term- care-facility level of care to maintain the treatment regimen to prevent health deterioration; 3. Be determined to meet the nursing facility institutional level of care by the Department of Human Services; 4. Reside in his or her own home , a family member's home, or an assisted living center contracted with the Department of Human Services under the ADvantage Waiver Program; and 5. Have needs that can be safely met with waiver services and family or community supports. SECTION 2. This act shall become effective July 1, 2026. SECTION 3. It being immediately necessary for the preservation of the public peace, health or safety, an emergency is hereby declared to exist, by reason whereof this act shall take effect and be in full force from and after its passage and approval.
Oklahoma House of Representatives, District 47 · R–OK
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Brian HillOklahoma Legislature · SB 202
Medicaid; modifying eligibility requirements for self-funded or self-insured health care plan to participate in certain premium assistance program. Emergency.
Mar 4, 2026 · Not enacted
Sen. Julie Daniels · Sponsored / Rep. Brian Hill · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
SB 202 proposed premium-assistance participation for self-funded plans used by an employer participating as of May 1, 2024, or owned and operated by a qualifying interlocal public trust of local-government employers. The plans would also need specified oversight, essential benefits, premium and actuarial conditions, and federal approval. The final reviewed version was amended and engrossed; it was not enacted.
The reviewed regular session ended without recorded enactment. Latest legislative entry: SCs named GCCA (2026-03-04). Proposed effective dates do not establish enactment.
Why this record is included
The fact measures residents under 65 without health insurance. Insurance eligibility, enrollment, coverage continuity and premium assistance concern the covered population. Provider payments and covered services alone do not establish a coverage change, and Medicare-only changes mostly concern a different age population. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Oklahoma evidence context: People under 65 without health insurance. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
J. A self- funded or self-insured health care plan shall be eligible to participate in the premium assistance program created under this section if: 1. The self-funded or self-insured health care plan meets at least one of the following conditions: a. the plan is utilized by an employer that was participating in the premium assistance program as of May 1, 2024, or b. the plan is owned and operated by an interlocal self- funded public trust formed under the Oklahoma Statutes and comprised of local government employers; 2. The self-funded or self-insured health care plan is: a. recognized by the Insurance Department under Section 6012 of Title 36 of the Oklahoma Statutes, if the plan meets the conditions of subparagraph a of paragraph 1 of this subsection, or b. under the oversight of the Office of the Attorney General, if the plan meets the conditions of subparagraph b of paragraph 1 of this subsection; 3. The self-funded or self-insured health care plan covers all essential health benefits as required by the Authority and all other health benefits required under applicable federal laws; 4. The self-funded or self-insured health care plan otherwise complies with all applicable federal laws including, but not limited to, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA); 5. The self-funded or self-insured health care plan assesses a monthly premium on members and maintains a rate schedule for employer reimbursement; 6. The self-funded or self-insured health care plan meets actuarial standards for the premium assistance program as determined by the Authority and the employer submits an attestation to the Insurance Department or the Office of the Attorney General, as applicable, that the self-funded or self-insured health care plan meets such actuarial standards; and 7. The Authority receives the necessary federal approval for self-funded or self-insured health care plans to participate in the premium assistance program.
Rep. Denise Crosswhite Hader · Sponsored / Sen. David Bullard · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
HB 1168 creates a felony for knowingly delivering, or possessing with intent to deliver, abortion-inducing drugs for an unlawful abortion. Its definitions and exceptions preserve lawful medical uses, ectopic-pregnancy and miscarriage treatment, and preventive contraception.
Signed by Kevin Stitt on 2026-05-05. Latest legislative entry: Approved by Governor 05/05/2026 (2026-05-06). Historical enactment does not establish implementation or current enforceability.
Why this record is included
The fact counts abortions performed in Oklahoma in 2025, regardless of residence. Access, restrictions and reporting concern this occurrence-based measure. Procedures performed outside Oklahoma are outside its scope. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Oklahoma evidence context: Abortions reported as occurring in Oklahoma. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
SECTION 1. NEW LAW A new section of law to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 1-756.30 of Title 63, unless there is created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows: A. As used in this act: 1. "Abortion" means the use or prescription of any instrument, medicine, drug, or any other substance or device intentionally to terminate the pregnancy of a female known to be pregnant with an intention other than to increase the probability of a live birth, to preserve the life or health of the child after live birth, to remove an ectopic pregnancy, or to remove a dead unborn child who died as the result of a spontaneous miscarriage, accidental trauma, or a criminal assault on the pregnant female or her unborn child; 2. "Abortion-inducing drug" means a medicine, drug, or any other substance prescribed or dispensed with the intent of inducing an abortion. This includes off-label use of drugs known to have abortion-inducing properties, which are prescribed specifically with the intent of causing an abortion, such as misoprostol (Cytotec) and methotrexate. This definition does not apply to drugs that may be known to cause an abortion but which are prescribed for other medical indications, such as chemotherapeutic agents or diagnostic drugs, or for treatment of an ectopic pregnancy or spontaneous miscarriage; 3. "Preventive contraception" means any drug, chemical, biological product, or device used with the intent to prevent pregnancy and that is used in accordance with manufacturer instructions; 4. "Trafficking" means the act of buying, selling, or delivering medicine, drugs, or any substance illegally; and 5. "Unborn child" means the unborn offspring of human beings from the moment of conception, through pregnancy, and until live birth, including the human conceptus, zygote, morula, blastocyst, embryo, and fetus. B. A person who knows or has reason to know that another person intends to use an abortion-inducing drug to cause an unlawful abortion and who knowingly or intentionally: 1. Delivers an abortion-inducing drug to that person; or 2. Possesses an abortion-inducing drug with the intent to deliver the abortion-inducing drug to that person, commits trafficking in an abortion-inducing drug and is guilty of a felony upon conviction. C. A person convicted of trafficking or attempting to traffic abortion-inducing drugs shall be guilty of a felony punishable by a fine not to exceed One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00), or by confinement in the custody of the Department of Corrections for a term not to exceed ten (10) years, or by both such fine and imprisonment. D. This act does not apply to a pharmacist or a manufacturer or distributor of drugs or surgical supplies who lawfully manufactures, possesses, offers, sells, or distributes, in the usual course of that entity's business or profession, any drug, medicine, or instrument intended for any lawful medical purpose. E. Nothing in this act may be construed to prohibit the use, sale, prescription, or administration of a preventive contraceptive measure, drug, chemical, or device if the preventive contraceptive measure, drug, chemical, or device is used, sold, prescribed, or administered in accordance with manufacturer instructions.
Firearms; extending authority to carry firearms to retired municipal judges; effective date.
Apr 30, 2026 · Enacted
Rep. Derrick Hildebrant · Sponsored / Sen. Christi Gillespie · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Effective November 1, 2026, HB 3062 allows qualifying retired municipal judges with at least 20 cumulative years of service to carry for personal protection after the required certification, training and qualification. District-court carry remains excluded. A separate provision permits written authorization for a serving municipal judge to carry in municipal court.
Signed by Kevin Stitt on 2026-04-30. Latest legislative entry: Approved by Governor 04/30/2026 (2026-05-04). Historical enactment does not establish implementation or current enforceability.
Why this record is included
Firearm mortality includes suicide, homicide, and other intents. The provision concerns firearm access, safety, or prevention of firearm injury and may address only part of the death count. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Oklahoma evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Section 129. A. A judge of the district court, municipal judge, or retired judge of the district court who receives a statement from the appropriate retirement system verifying the status of the person as a retired judge of the district court may carry a firearm on his or her person throughout the state to use only for personal protection if the person has successfully completed a handgun qualification course for court officials developed by the Council on Law Enforcement Education and Training. The Council on Law Enforcement Education and Training may provide for an identification card to be issued to the judge of the district court, retired judge of the district court, or municipal judge and may provide application forms. If the person issued an identification card is no longer eligible, that person shall immediately return the identification card to the Council on Law Enforcement Education and Training. B. In addition to the requirements provided for in subsection A of this section, a retired municipal judge, having served as a municipal judge for twenty (20) cumulative years, as certified by the Oklahoma Municipal Judges Association, and who is qualified to serve as a municipal judge, may carry a firearm on his or her person throughout the state to use only for personal protection; provided, however, the retired municipal judge shall not be authorized to carry the firearm into any district court of this state. Retired district judges, district attorneys or assistant district attorneys who are currently authorized to carry firearms throughout the state pursuant to state law shall be exempt from the provisions of this subsection. C. The chief judge of the district court may issue a written order allowing a municipal judge to carry a firearm within the district court during the time period in which he or she serves as the chief judge. SECTION 2. This act shall become effective November 1, 2026.
Firearms; creating the Municipal Carry Act; modifying scope of lawful carry for certain individuals; authorizing certain carry by judges, elected official and designated employees under certain circumstances; effective date.
May 21, 2025 · Enacted
Rep. Derrick Hildebrant · Sponsored / Sen. Christi Gillespie · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
HB 1095 allows a city or town to authorize concealed handguns in its public-business buildings and offices, while retaining specified courthouse and detention-facility exceptions. It concerns where firearms may be carried.
Signed by Kevin Stitt on 2025-05-21. Latest legislative entry: Approved by Governor 05/21/2025 (2025-05-21). Historical enactment does not establish implementation or current enforceability.
Why this record is included
Firearm mortality includes suicide, homicide, and other intents. The provision concerns firearm access, safety, or prevention of firearm injury and may address only part of the death count. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Oklahoma evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
A. It shall be unlawful for any person, including a person in possession of a valid handgun license issued pursuant to the provisions of the Oklahoma Self-Defense Act, to carry any concealed or unconcealed firearm into any of the following places: 1. Any building or office space which is owned or leased by a city, town, county, or state governmental authority for the purpose of conducting business with the public. However, the governing body of a city or town may authorize the concealed carry of handguns into any building or office space that is owned or leased by a city or town, except those places listed in paragraph 2 of this subsection; 2. Any courthouse, courtroom, prison, jail, detention facility, or any facility used to process, hold, or house arrested persons, prisoners, or persons alleged delinquent or adjudicated delinquent, except as provided in Section 21 of Title 57 of the Oklahoma Statutes;
Oklahoma House of Representatives, District 43 · R–OK
2 proposalsView proposals from Rep. Jay SteagallOklahoma Legislature · SB 372
Firearms; modifying scope of lawful carry. Effective date.
May 11, 2026 · Enacted
Sen. Kelly Hines · Sponsored / Rep. Jay Steagall · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
SB 372 adds state-owned hotels, cabins, and lodges to places where carrying a concealed or unconcealed firearm is lawful under the amended statute. This is a firearm-carry rule, not evidence of a change in mortality.
Signed by Kevin Stitt on 2026-05-11. Latest legislative entry: Approved by Governor 05/11/2026 (2026-05-12). Historical enactment does not establish implementation or current enforceability.
Why this record is included
Firearm mortality includes suicide, homicide, and other intents. The provision concerns firearm access, safety, or prevention of firearm injury and may address only part of the death count. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Oklahoma evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
B. It shall be lawful for a person to carry a concealed or unconcealed firearm on the following properties: […] and 7. Any state-owned hotel, cabin, or lodge. Nothing contained in any provision of this subsection or subsection C of this section shall be construed to authorize or allow any person in control of any place described in subsection A of this section to establish any policy or rule that has the effect of prohibiting any person in lawful possession of a handgun license or otherwise in lawful possession of a firearm from carrying or possessing the firearm on the property described in this subsection.
Firearms; clarifying scope of and exception to certain unlawful act; emergency.
May 14, 2025 · Enacted
Rep. Jay Steagall · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
HB 2818 revises the exceptions to unlawful firearm pointing and the justification for defensive display. Defensive display requires a reasonable belief that physical force is immediately necessary to protect against unlawful force, with exclusions for intentional provocation and firearm use during a violent unlawful act. The law also addresses occupied premises and self-defense presumptions. These are limits on firearm use and justification, not a finding that firearm deaths fell.
Signed by Kevin Stitt on 2025-05-14. Latest legislative entry: Approved by Governor 05/14/2025 (2025-05-15). Historical enactment does not establish implementation or current enforceability.
Why this record is included
Firearm mortality includes suicide, homicide, and other intents. The provision concerns firearm access, safety, or prevention of firearm injury and may address only part of the death count. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Oklahoma evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
SECTION 3. AMENDATORY 21 O.S. 2021, Section 1289.16, is amended to read as follows: Section 1289.16. FELONY POINTING FIREARMS A. It shall be lawful to point a firearm, knife, or any other deadly weapon at another person or persons by : 1. A person who can legally own or possess a weapon pursuant to the provisions of Section 1272 of this title: a. during an act of self-defense, or b. in defense of real or private property, whether owned, leased, or occupied by permission of the property owner and whether or not the person possesses a valid handgun license issued pursuant to the Oklahoma Self- Defense Act; 2. A person in the defensive display of a firearm or other deadly weapon, as provided for in Section 1289.25 of this title; 3. Law enforcement authorities in the performance of their duties ; 4. Armed security guards licensed by the Council on Law Enforcement Education and Training pursuant to the Oklahoma Security Guard and Private Investigator Act in the performance of their duties ; 5. Members of the state military forces in the performance of their duties ; 6. Members of the federal military reserve and active military components in the performance of their duties ; 7. Any federal government law enforcement officer in the performance of any duty ; or 8. Any person during the performance of a play on stage, while participating in a rodeo, or when participating in a television program or film project. B. It shall be unlawful for any person to willfully and without lawful cause point a firearm, knife, or any other deadly weapon, whether loaded or not, at any person or persons for the purpose of threatening or with the intention of discharging the firearm or with any malice or for any purpose of injuring, either through physical injury or mental or emotional intimidation, or for purposes of whimsy, humor, or prank, or in anger or otherwise. C. Any person convicted of a violation of the provisions of this section shall be punished as provided in Section 1289.17 of this title. […] K. 1. The defensive display of a firearm or other deadly weapon by a person is justified when and to the extent a reasonable person believes that physical force is immediately necessary to protect himself, herself, or another person against the use or attempted use of unlawful physical or deadly force by a person, premises owner or controller in self-defense, or in defense of real or private property, located on any premises, owned, rented, leased, or occupied by permission of the premises owner or controller, whether or not a person is in possession of a valid handgun license issued pursuant to the provisions of the Oklahoma Self-Defense Act, and shall not be deemed a criminal act. 2. The provisions of this subsection shall not apply to a person who: a. intentionally provokes another person to use or attempt to use unlawful physical or deadly force, or b. uses a firearm during the commission of an unlawful act involving force or violence. 3. The provisions of this subsection do not require the defensive display of a firearm or any other deadly weapon before the use of defensive force or the threat of defensive force by a person who is justified in the use or threatened use of defensive force. 4. For purposes of this subsection, "defensive display of a firearm" includes, but is not limited to: a. verbally informing another person that the person possesses or has available a firearm or any other deadly weapon, b. exposing or displaying a firearm or any other deadly weapon in a manner that a reasonable person would understand was meant to protect the person against the use or attempted use by another of unlawful physical or deadly force, or c. placing the hand of the person on a firearm or any other deadly weapon while the firearm is contained in a pocket, purse, holster, sling scabbard, case or other means of containment or transport.
U.S. House of Representatives, Oklahoma District 2 · R–OK
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Josh BrecheenU.S. Congress · Oklahoma delegation · HR 719
No Abortion Coverage for Medicaid Act
Jan 24, 2025 · In Congress
Rep. Josh Brecheen · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
H.R. 719 proposes barring Medicaid and CHIP demonstrations that finance abortions, abortion-inclusive coverage, or related travel and lodging, with specified rape, incest, life-endangerment, miscarriage, and ectopic-pregnancy exceptions. Josh Brecheen is the primary sponsor. This concerns abortion financing, not insurance enrollment; the bill is not enacted.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. No enactment of this bill is recorded at the review cutoff.
Why this record is included
The fact counts abortions performed in Oklahoma in 2025, regardless of residence. Access, restrictions and reporting concern this occurrence-based measure. Procedures performed outside Oklahoma are outside its scope. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Oklahoma evidence context: Abortions reported as occurring in Oklahoma. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
3.Limiting demonstration projects related to abortion under Medicaid and CHIPSection 1115 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1315) is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:(g)Limitation on demonstration projects related to abortion(1)In generalSubject to paragraph (2), beginning on enactment, the Secretary may not approve an application (or extension) for any experimental, pilot, or demonstration project undertaken under subsection (a) to promote the objectives of title XIX or title XXI that provides Federal financial assistance for abortion, or health benefits coverage that includes abortion, including expenses for travel or lodging for the purpose of obtaining an abortion. (2)ExceptionsThe limitations on paragraph (1) shall not apply to—(A)an abortion with respect to a pregnancy resulting from of an act of rape or incest;(B)treatment to address a physical disorder, physical injury, or physical illness, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself, that would, as certified by a physician, place the individual in danger of death unless such abortion is performed; or(C)treatment for miscarriage or ectopic pregnancy..
Only current Oklahoma officeholders retained in the reviewed collection qualify. Bills require a recorded primary sponsorship; cosponsors and signing officials are excluded from sponsorship counts. An official introducer recorded as acting by request is labeled “Introduced by request”; that procedural role does not establish personal policy endorsement. Governor and agency records qualify when recorded as proposed. A separately verified governor transmittal can also establish an original proposal whose latest status reflects its later outcome. Signing an enacted law alone does not establish a proposal. A record appearing under several facts is counted once per officeholder. A bill with multiple primary sponsors appears under each recorded sponsor.
Enacted bills, adopted resolutions and unsuccessful measures remain visible as proposal history. Passing one chamber is not enactment. These counts do not measure effectiveness or prove that an action changed a Oklahoma statistic. Collection reviewed Sep 16, 2026.
Sources & methods
Every section retains its primary sources, units, reporting periods and comparison limits. Maps, graphs and tables use the same observation and cohort. All 50 states are listed; D.C. and territories are excluded. Missing and suppressed values remain unavailable and never become zero.
#1 is the highest measured value. Equal source values share a rank and leave gaps (1, 2, 2, 4). Ranks use source precision and are descriptive, not a score of the state. Survey uncertainty and reporting coverage can limit comparisons. Published U.S. benchmarks are used where available; a state average is not substituted.
Oklahoma snapshots and fiscal sources keep their own dates and accounting scope. National events and federal distribution explainers describe national context. Actions and statements are filtered to Oklahoma, retain their reviewed evidence, and do not establish that a policy caused a measured change.
Retained state source collections assembled October 5, 2026. Original review and source dates remain visible. Refreshing this page does not refresh an official data release.