Meanwhile, for the second time in as many weeks, the Republican House majority voted last Monday to recess for three days. I oppose these recesses, which are as long as is constitutionally allowed while the Senate is still in session. Although we are not voting, legislators continue receiving per diem compensation during the recess, which amount to paid vacations while taxpayers are still saddled with the $28,500 per day cost of running the Legislature. It is also a shame that the Majority party did not allow any debate on their most recent motion to recess.

Most importantly, I object to these recesses because there is still so much work to be done. On the day the first recess was announced, House Speaker Karen Minnis explained that there was "little to do." Yet, in reality there were 9 bills ready for House consideration the next day, 19 more had been passed by committee and would soon be available to the Speaker to schedule for floor votes, and 57 more had passed the Senate and were on the way to the House for consideration. In the article below, I highlight nine of the most important unfinished initiatives.

Healthcare:

• Senate Bill 1 would require insurance companies to cover mental health problems in the same way they cover other medical conditions. The Senate passed the bill with overwhelming bipartisan support on March 21, by a vote of 23-6. Today, it waits in the House State and Federal Affairs Committee.
• Senate Bill 329 is one of the most important proposals we've seen to help reduce the cost of health care. It would expand the state's drug purchasing pool to allow private businesses and individuals to save money on prescription drugs. On May 20, it passed the Senate with a bipartisan vote of 19-11. Today, it waits in the House Budget Committee.
• Senate Bills 756 and 849 enhance women's access to emergency contraceptives, and require insurance companies to cover the cost of prescription contraceptives. These are important bills that affect women's health, but the Republican leadership has chosen to let them die. The two bills passed the Senate with strong bipartisan support (22-7 and 20-7)-the first in March, the second in May, but today they wait in the House Judiciary Committee.

Education:

• Senate Bill 766 would eliminate unreasonably large severance packages for superintendents of school districts, as well as retirement benefits better than those of other school employees - the so- called "golden parachutes." The bill would save money for schools, and allow stronger investment in the classroom. The Senate passed it on April 20 with strong bipartisan support (19-8), but today the bill waits in the House Education Committee.
• Senate Bill 841 and Senate Joint Resolution 2 address the Education Stability Fund, commonly known as the "Rainy Day" fund. The first would require transfer of the entire General Fund ending balance (up to a limit of two percent of all General Fund expenditures) to the Education Stability Fund. The second would refer a constitutional amendment to the voters, enabling them to increase the Education Stability from five to ten percent of General Fund revenues. These are serious, effective proposals that could provide a real cushion for school funding. They both passed the Senate with overwhelming bipartisan support on May 31 and June 1, but today they wait in the House Budget Committee and the House State and Federal Affairs Committee.
• Senate Bill 467 would enable the Department of Education to reimburse school districts and others who provide summer food services to the children of low-income families. The cost to the state would be only $150,000 per biennium. The Senate passed the bill with strong bipartisan support (25-3) on June 6, but today the bill waits in the House Budget Committee.

Consumer protection:

• Senate Bill 545, the "Payday Loan" bill, would restrict lenders' loan fees to 15 percent of the loan value on a two-week loan, which is still the equivalent of 391 percent interest when figured on an annual basis. Some lenders charge as much as 600 percent interest. The measure also would limit loan amounts to $1,000 or 25 percent of a borrowers' gross monthly income, whichever is less. This badly needed bill passed the Senate on May 31 (17-13), but today it waits in the House State and Federal Affairs Committee.

I believe that it is irresponsible to let this good legislation wither and die in committee just because the majority leadership would rather not deal with them. We were sent here to do the people's business, and we owe them a decent effort. Rest assured that, despite the recesses, I will continue working hard to pass these bills before the Legislature adjourns.

See the articles below on the civil unions and government ethics for two more good bills that have passed the Senate and are awaiting action in the House.

The Governor's plan is also broader in scope that the Speaker's plan and includes the following provisions:

• It caps resident tuition increases at Oregon universities and community colleges at no more than the annual increase in the Oregon Median Family Income (MFI).
• It includes provisions of SB 639-A, which pools insurance for education workers throughout Oregon, and provisions of SB 765-A, which consolidates educational service districts in Oregon.
• It includes a two year "Portland Fix" to allow Portland Public Schools to continue to keep a portion of property tax revenues, as they currently do. The additional $15 million a year provided by this provision is enough to fund three weeks of school, or roughly 200 teachers for Portland Public Schools.

An analysis by the Department of Education shows that the Governor's plan would provide slightly more money for K-12 education than the current version of the Speaker's plan. Nevertheless, many believe that the plan has been introduced too late in the legislative session to be implemented. The Oregonian called it "bold, but belated," and the overall reaction to it has remained muted. The plan does not yet have a bill number, so on July 14, the Senate Revenue Committee held a hearing on plan's concepts. Much of the testimony seemed to agree with The Oregonian, that it is an interesting idea, but that it is probably too late in the legislative session for such a far-reaching plan to gain traction. The co- chairs of the Portland School Board issued a mildly worded statement later that day in which they expressed support for a thorough discussion of the plan and agreed that it improves upon the Speaker's plan, but did not claim that it is yet a complete solution to their funding woes. It will likely take some time for the Governor's plan to work its way through the public discourse and for education advocates to fully form their opinions of it.

For more information:

• For more information on the Governor's Education Enterprise Plan see his press release, the statement of the Portland School Board co-chairs, or the editorials in the The Oregonian and Statesman Journal. You may also listen to the Senate Rules Committee hearing on the plan (requires RealPlayer).
• To learn why I oppose the Speaker's "Stable Schools" Plan see my June 27 newsletter.
• For more information on the House Democrat's Strong Schools Plan, for which I am advocating, see my February 4 newsletter.

I believe that it would be undemocratic for Senate Bill 1000 to fail without a House floor vote. This is an important moment in Oregon's history when the House has the opportunity to address a critical question of equality under the law. It's important for us to do the job we were elected to do, to have a dialogue on the House floor and to vote to either pass or reject this bill. I urge you to write to Speaker Minnis and request a hearing and a vote on SB 1000. All across Oregon, proponents of the democratic process are mounting vigorous grassroots lobbying efforts to pressure her allow a vote. Basic Rights Oregon is organizing a rally at the Capitol on Wednesday, July 20 at 6 PM, and I encourage you to attend. For more information on the rally, click here.

Unfortunately, the GSPC has been starved for funding in recent years. In 1991 the Legislature allocated funding for 7.0 Full Time Equivalent employees (FTE) at the Commission, but subsequent Legislatures have continually reduced its funding. In 2003, the GSPC was allocated just 2.8 FTE for a full time executive director, an administrative assistant and a part time investigator who is responsible for monitoring the entirety of Oregon state government. With such a small staff, the Commission is unable to investigate many of the complaints filed with it. Both the House and Senate GSPC funding bills would allocate just 3.0 FTE, far short of what is needed for the GSPC to do its job effectively. In fact, I voted against both of these bills because I believe they are inadequate and I am reserving my "aye" vote for a budget that will provide adequate funding.

A new bill, Senate Bill 420-B, would take action to provide sufficient government oversight and counter the belief shared by many Oregonians that there is a lack of accountability in our state government. This bill calls on an established panel of legal experts, the Oregon Law Commission, to evaluate and make suggestions for improving our ethics laws and the structure and funding of the organization that enforces them. Consensus opinions by an expert panel on these matters are sure to diffuse the arguments of those who oppose Oregon's ethics laws or the organizational structure of the GSPC and will help clear the way for the Legislature to take action next session. The bill requires the Law Commission to report its recommendations by October 1, 2006 so that the 2007 Legislature pass legislation to implement them. I believe that SB 420-B is a positive step the Legislature can take this session towards ensuring open and honest state government.

SB 420-B passed the Senate with bipartisan support on July 11 and is now awaiting a hearing in the House Budget Committee. If you support this bill, I urge you to write House Budget Committee Chair Wayne Scott and urge him to take action on this bill.

Unfortunately, the House Environment Committee stopped work on the biofuels package and instead put many of its elements into a new bill, HB 3481, which passed the House last month. HB 3481 dismisses many of the elements of the balancing act and contains several major flaws. In particular, this bill excludes the renewable fuel standard, a minimum required blend of biodiesel in each gallon of diesel and ethanol in each gallon of gasoline sold in the state. Under pressure from industrial lobbyists, the committee also included a major expansion of the Pollution Control Tax Credit (PCTC), an unrelated, and widely-criticized tax credit that diverts state funds to do little more than pay polluters for complying with environmental laws.

My hope for biofuels lies in the Senate, where a committee amended HB 3481 to eliminate the PCTC expansion and restore nearly all of the original package's key elements. The committee also added several provisions not included in the original package but that were requested by the Governor and designed to boost the Oregon's use of solar and other renewable power sources. I am very satisfied with this new form of the bill and expect it to pass the Senate early this week. Once that happens, a conference committee will be established to work out the differences between the House and Senate versions. It is difficult to predict the outcome of those negotiations, but rest assured that I will work hard to convince the committee that the Senate's version is the only one likely to fulfill the goal of fostering a biofuels industry in Oregon.

• Time: Sunday, July 31, 9 AM to 1 PM.
• Location: Meet at the Multnomah County Drainage District office at 1880 NE Elrod Drive in Portland. Click here for a map.
• For More Information: Call 503-823- 2831, email debbiec@bes.ci.portland.or.us, or visit www.columbiaslough.org.

• Search for a Specific Measure Number
• Search Bills by Text

• Today's Audio
• Today's Video
• 2005 Session Audio Archives