Endorsement Decisions: Election Reform Bills introduced by Julie Parish (R)

[Dan Meek]

Rep. Julie Parish (R Tualatin) has introduced some bills that are interesting in that she is a Republican.  Here are my initial comments.

HB 2786 I like ($25 to be in online Voters' Pamphlet instead of like $3,000 to be in printed Voters' Pamphlet).

HB 2787 I like (task force for inactive voter issue).

HB 2788 increases damages that can be obtained in lawsuit against a person knowingly making a material false statement about a candidate or measure.  This would be considered unconstitutional by our current U.S. Supreme Court, which believes that false speech re public issues is protected by the First Amendment.  I am not against the concept of punishing demonstrably and knowingly false political speech.  $10,000 minimum damages per violation in damages seems high.  How about instead $1,000 minimum plus the reasonable attorney fees and costs?

HB 2789 provides that knowingly making a false statement in the Voters' Pamphlet is a Class C felony (5 years prison, $125,000 fine), in addition to the existing liability for a $10,000 fine.  The felony part seems excessive.  How about just the civil penalty and allow any citizen to bring the cause of action.  Today, only the Secretary of State or AG can bring the suit for the civil penalty, so the decision to enforce is a political one.

HB 2792 I like.  It would "activate" any inactive registered voter who signs a petition.  It would not have much effect.  When does the Secretary of State or county clerk look at each signature on a statewide petition and determine if the address is different from the voter's registration address?  That happens only for the 1% or 5% of signatures that are actually verified on each petition.  So this would not reach very many voters who sign statewide petitions.  It would affect more voters who sign local petitions, because some of those have every signature verified.

I recommend that Oregon Progressive Party endorse HB 2786, HB 2787, and HB 2792.

Dan Meek

503-293-9021

d...@meek.net

866-926-9646 fax

[Dan Meek]

Here are 5 more bills and my recommendations.  David Delk should weigh in on the last 2 in particular.

SB 75: not support	An ineffective campaign contribution limits statute.  Allows contributions by any individual or entity of $2,600 per year to any number of candidates and political committees.  Allows any political committee to contribute $5,000 per year to every candidate and every other political committee.  As there is no limit on the number of political committees, the contribution limits are illusory.  Also, does not apply to "district" offices. Note that it uses the ORS 260.005 definition of "person": “Person” means an individual, corporation, limited liability company, labor organization, association, firm, partnership, joint stock company, club, organization or other combination of individuals having collective capacity. So "person" actually means any entity. Also, this bill repeals our Measure 47 (2006).
SJR 5: not support	A very narrow constitutional amendment re limits on contributions.  Even if enacted, it would leave Oregon with a Citizens United regime of unlimited independent expenditures.
HB 2060: oppose	Applies horrendous statewide initiative regime of circulator registration to local petitions, including huge but unnecessary monthly submission of signatures and massive fines for innocuous conduct.
HJM 2: support	U.S. Constitution Article V call for convention to amend U.S. Constitution.
HJM 4: support	Better U.S. Constitution Article V call for convention to amend U.S. Constitution.

[Jason Kafoury]

I Agree Dan with your analysis on these bills

Sent from my iPhone

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Oregon Progressive Party - Legislation Committee" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to oregon-progressive-party-legi...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to oregon-progressive-part...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/oregon-progressive-party-legislation-committee.

[David Delk]

I agree as well.  

We also need to be supportive of the two Health Care for All ORegon bills - S

HB 2828 - This bill would extend the Study Bill enacted during the 2013 legislative session for two more years, provide for reporting on the study's progress, and provide funding for the study.  The original Study Bill did not provide funding, instead calling for that study's advocates to generate the funding.  Included in the study is comparison of four possible mechanisms for providing financing of health care in the state of Oregon. 

SB631 - This bill would establish a universal affordable health care system in the state of Oregon   If enacted, the bill would provide comprehensive health care coverage to all individuals residing or working in Oregon.

 

---

David e. Delk | 503.232.5495 | Alliance for Democracy | Move to Amend Portland | Populist Dialogues |

---