My next two Town Hall meetings (with Senator Brad Avakian) will take place on

April 10, 7pm at St. Vincent Medical Center, Souther Auditorium (East Wing) and

April 19, 7pm at Friendly House, 1737 NW 26th (between Savier and Thurman).

Things got a bit unruly in the Oregon House these past two weeks. But we managed to pass some major (and a lot of minor) legislation. It really has begun to look as if the session will end near July 1 and that is putting a great deal of pressure on the process and on the members. The period began with a spirited debate on HJM 9, a non-binding resolution urging the President to begin withdrawing US forces from Iraq as soon as possible, but not later than December, 2007. As you can imagine, the debate became very heated. A key debater, speaking in favor of the resolution, was Rep. Brian Boquist, a Republican who has served several tours of duty in Iraq.

I found myself joining the debate. I try hard to limit the number of floor speeches I give. During my first session I noticed some members feel the need to comment on everything. And when they get up to speak, the members turn off. Consequently, I restrict my floor speeches to measures where I believe I have something unique to say. Rep. Gene Whisnant, also a Republican veteran military officer, attacked the resolution by reading off the names of the Oregonians who had died in Iraq. I then decided I needed to speak in favor of the resolution as a matter of conscience. After a long debate, the resolution passed – largely, but not entirely, along party lines.

Good manners broke down later in the week when we prepared to debate SB 400, a bill that would allow public safety officers (police officers and firefighters particularly) to discuss safety issues as a part of their collective bargaining. This bill has been a major objective of all the public safety unions for several years and hasn’t even been debated under Republican leadership. About 400 firefighters bused in to watch the debate. Because it is a senate bill it was scheduled at the very end of the agenda, but common practice under these circumstances is to request consent to move the item up in the agenda. The Republican leadership refused to grant their consent. We worked through lunch to get through the agenda so we could debate SB 400 while the firefighters were still in the gallery. They sat through four hours of debate on other bills before watching the bill go down to defeat. (It was eventually sent back to committee and a version will emerge that will pass.)

We had a similar dust-up this week over HB 2372A, a bill that requires employers to provide unpaid rest periods to employees to express breast milk if it does not cause undue hardship to business operations. This is a bill that seems completely reasonable, but the Association of Oregon Industries has fought it forever. Consequently we never debated it before. Similar to the SB 400 debate many advocates for nursing mothers came to the Capitol to watch the debate. And similar to the earlier situation, the Republican leadership refused to allow a suspension of the rules to move the bill up the agenda. The bill was debated well after lunch, with the pro side of the debate led by a Republican woman, Rep. Vicki Berger. HB 2372A passed easily, but long after most of the advocates had left because of other commitments.

One of the interesting things about this session is that bills are being allowed to come to the floor without a clear-cut determination that they have the votes necessary to pass. SB 400 was one example of that. In another debate last week a bill to require helmets while driving an all-terrain vehicle (ATV) came to the floor and after a spirited debate was soundly defeated. There seems to be a willingness to actually listen to the debate and decide how to vote. I think this is a very good sign.

It is very different serving in the majority, than serving in the minority. Being in the majority clearly entails more work and much more responsibility. But it is also much more rewarding. When I was in the minority I had the time to focus on my own legislative agenda. Now two things are different. My vote on the floor counts in a different way. And being a committee chair brings a whole different level of activity. Everybody needs to talk to me about any number of different bills. And there is less time to meet with lobbyists and other interested parties. My typical day includes floor session from 10:45 to about 12:30, followed by a caucus meeting until at least 1pm. On most days I have an education sub-committee or full committee meeting from 1:00 to 3:pm and on all days I have a health care sub-committee or full committee meeting that runs from 3:00 to 5:00. On two days a week I have a health reform committee meeting that lasts from 5:00 to 6:30.

In addition, I need to meet daily with my committee administrator and frequently with my two vice-chairs Rep. Richardson (Rep.) and Rep. Kotek (Dem.). And I meet daily with my legislative aide (Tom Powers) who monitors my legislative agenda. I have also been testifying about three times a week in hearings on the bills of which I’m the sponsor. That leaves Harriet frantically filling up every other 15-minute slot on my calendar with someone from the long line of people in my outer office looking to urgently meet with me because they have a bill coming up in my committee. Then Harriet also is certain to pop in after 15 minutes to remind me that my next appointment is waiting and I’m already 20 minutes behind because I talk too much.

Being a committee chair has brought me much closer to how the legislative process works. It turns out that the committee chair has nearly absolute power to decide which bills are heard in committee and which bills are moved along in the process. (I try to hear most of the bills assigned to my committee.) The committee chair also has the power to create a working group to improve a bill to the point that it achieves consensus, which is usually the objective. An interesting example of the process was in the flow of HB 2213 through the House of Representatives. This bill was suggested by the Department of Consumer and Business Services. DCBS is the agency that regulates health insurance. The bill requires insurers to provide a reasonable estimate to their enrollees of the cost of procedures and services for which enrollees will be responsible. The bill was supported by consumer advocates and fit into the Democratic Caucus Roadmap agenda promising more transparency in the health care field.

But the insurance industry said the bill, as written, would be impossible to implement. I asked Rep. Ben Cannon, the vice-chair of the Health Care Access sub-committee to lead a work group to produce a version of the bill to which all parties could agree. I also asked Rep. Dennis Richardson, the Republican vice-chair of the sub-committee, to join the group. I asked a small number of representatives of insurance companies, DCBS, and the consumer advocacy movement to form the work group. The committee administrator volunteered to staff the group. And I gave them three weeks to come in with a perfected bill. Under Rep. Cannon’s leadership they did their job ahead of schedule, bringing back a bill that all parties supported. It wasn’t a perfect bill in the eyes of any of the parties, but they all agreed it made an important beginning and was achievable. The bill passed easily out of the sub-committee, the full committee and passed the House of Representatives without a single no vote. It’s now on to the Senate, where the process will begin anew.

If the Senate passes the bill without change it would be on to the Governor’s desk for his signature. If the Senate amends the bill it will be up to me to decide whether to recommend the House concur with the Senate amendments. If the House agrees to concur, the concurrence vote moves the bill to the Governor’s desk. If the House refuses to concur a conference committee will be named to try to reach agreement on one version of the bill. If they reach agreement it might be on the House version, on the Senate version, or on some new version created by the conference committee. Then both the House and the Senate need to approve the conference committee report before it goes to the Governor.

Not all bills work out so easily. We received a bill in committee that I sponsored with Rep. Carolyn Tomei to require hospitals to report on hospital-acquired infections (HB 2524). The hospitals objected to the original form, but agreed to work on an amendment. Tom Powers worked with them and with the state agency with the responsibility to report on the data provided by the hospitals. After a couple of weeks they produced an amendment that all could agree upon that would really begin the process in a great way. But when we heard the bill in committee and accepted the new amendment, the agency reported there would be a $300,000 fiscal statement, signifying it would cost $300,000 per biennium to do the reporting more than was in the Governor’s budget. If that turns out to be true we can’t send the bill directly to the House floor for a vote, but need to refer it to the Ways and Means Committee to look for the money in an already over-committed budget. It’s not too likely to escape from Ways and Means unless we can get some substantial power to push for it.

I continue to hear from my constituents and on most days that is very welcome, even when I get 50 of the same messages triggered by one organization or another. I did receive many messages urging a yes vote on HJM 9. I’m also getting a great deal of anti-fluoridation e-mail, but most of it is not from constituents. And the mail is beginning to arrive on the anti-discrimination measures. Keep in touch.

Mitch