Tentative framework reached to end longest legislative boycott in Oregon’s history

Although voters overwhelmingly passed a constitutional measure last year to prevent boycotts from grinding legislative work to a halt, that didn’t stop Republicans from staging a walkout that started in early May, which stretched into the longest one in state history. Without enough Republicans to form a quorum, Democrats haven’t been able to pass any bills since May 3. GOP leaders had said they would return at the end of the month to pass only budget bills, just before the session ends June 25.

The walkout started over Democratic proposals to strengthen health care for trans youth, protect abortion access and expand gun safety. But now legislative leaders have reached a tentative framework to bring Republican senators back to the capitol. OPB Politics reporter Lauren Dake joins us to tell us more about the possible deal, and the prospects for the 2023 regular session in its last two weeks.

This transcript was created by a computer and edited by a volunteer.

Dave Miller: This is Think Out Loud on OPB. I’m Dave Miller. We start today with the latest on the Oregon Legislature. Senate Republicans staged a walkout starting on May 3rd because they opposed Democratic efforts to strengthen healthcare for trans youth, codify abortion access and expand gun safety legislation. The walkout has become the longest in state history, imperiling the fate of hundreds of bills including some with bipartisan support. Democratic and Republican lawmakers had been at an impasse for weeks, but it seems that a deal could now be in the works. OPB political reporter Lauren Dake joins us with the details. Lauren, welcome back.

Lauren Dake: Thanks for having me, Dave.

Miller: So you’ve recently learned about some key lawmakers who met all weekend with the possibility of a deal to bring Republicans back to the capitol. What can you share with us?

Dake: We are hearing that this deal or possible framework for a deal is wide ranging, which makes sense because Republicans walked out for a variety of reasons. But the real heart of the walkout was this bill, House Bill 2002, that would expand access to both abortion care and gender affirming care. And the part of this omnibus bill that really bothered Republicans was a piece that said minors younger than the age of 15 could have an abortion without a parent and without parental notification.

And I think it’s important to mention some context here: there are very few minors in Oregon and across the nation, younger than 15 who get an abortion and those that do, about 90% of them do have a parent with them. So the latest tentative agreement would keep the provision that expands the type of gender affirming care that must be covered by insurance. It would also keep another key provision which would ensure abortion providers do not face consequences if they provide an abortion to someone else from an anti-abortion state. But it would amend the parental consent part to say that parental involvement for children under the age of 15 is necessary unless a medical provider thinks a parent’s involvement would not be in the best interest of a patient.

Miller: So a little bit of a loophole added to still allow an abortion to go forward for people under the age of 15, but without parental consent, if a doctor or health provider decides for some reason, that there’s a compelling reason for the parent to not be told.

Republicans also raised issues about a gun bill and just even the process of law making, like writing bill summaries. Does this potential bargain address those issues?

Dake: We think so. I mean, certainly we have heard it addresses the House Bill 2005, which is the major gun control proposal of the session. The version of that bill that passed the house would have done three things. It would have outlawed ghost guns. It would have raised the age to own firearms from 18 to 21, it would have allowed local governments to prohibit concealed weapons on their property. Under the latest deal, we are hearing that the only part of that bill that remains intact is the part of the bill that would prohibit ghost guns. So that’s a significant stripping down of the original measure.

With regards to the process, yes, as you’ve talked about on your show, that has been a real issue for Republicans. They want to make sure these bill summaries are written at an eighth-grade reading level. It’s unclear right now if that is part of this overall tentative agreement.

Miller: And just remind you that the ghost guns - the component that is the only potentially remaining part - those are untraceable guns; for example, guns without serial numbers. And there’s some overlap here…potentially guns that you could make yourself, say, with a 3D printer, or order parts and put them together yourself.

In the big picture here, Democrats, from the very beginning of this walkout, they’ve been very clear that they were not going to give in to Republican demands by killing these bills about abortion and trans healthcare and guns. What changed?

Dake: Yeah, they have been really adamant. And I mean, just to emphasize once more, we don’t know that this deal is totally final, but it does appear that they’re giving into a lot of what Republicans wanted. And I think that they did that in part because everything was going to die anyway. If the Republicans never came back under status quo, they were not going to get any of their priorities. And the bills both do manage to keep a lot of what Democrats have wanted intact. House Bill 2002 still protects providers in Oregon who perform abortions from any legal repercussions. And that was a really big deal for Democrats and for Governor Tina Kotek. And insurance would still be required to pay for a lot of gender affirming care. That was a big deal too. And those two pieces of House Bill 2002, they affect a lot more people than the parental notification piece that Republicans really pushed back on.

Miller:  What else do you know about the potential deal struck over the weekend?

Dake: It sounds like Democrats might kill Senate Joint Resolution 33. And that was an effort to ask voters to amend the constitution to enshrine the protections for abortion, same sex marriage and gender affirming care in the constitution. And it was a kind of a surprise to Republicans when Democrats introduced this concept. So getting rid of that is a big win for them.

There’s also these one-off issues. They’re considering an amendment on a bill restricting canola farming that Republicans were really opposed to. There’s little pots of money that they’re moving around. There’s money toward a courthouse in Columbia County. There’s a part of this deal, apparently, that would make it easier to expand the urban growth boundary to build more housing, which also apparently has the support of Governor Tina Kotek and is a pretty big deal.

From what we understand right now, there’s those big changes to the really controversial bills that we talked about and then just sort of a hodgepodge of other stuff in there as well.

Miller: We’ve heard a lot about the not great relationship between Senate President Rob Wagner and Republican leader Tim Knopp over the last few weeks. Did something change on that front that helped pave the way for this framework for a deal?

Dake: Yeah, you’re right. I mean, right from the start of this session, Senator Tim Knopp released a press release calling Senate President Rob Wagner, ‘untrustworthy.’ And that has just continued all session, which has made negotiating very hard.

So we heard over the weekend, another Democrat, Senator Kathleen Taylor of Portland, sort of stepped in and took over. Taylor and Knopp, the Republican leader, they’ve worked on a lot of big bills in the past together. They were on the redistricting committee and they worked on Paid Family Leave. I talked to a Senator last week when it started to seem like the caucuses were making headway on a possible deal, and I asked him that very question: ‘What has changed here?’ And he simply said, ‘The players.’

Miller: Can you remind us how many bills have been on hold for more than a month?

Dake: Yeah, this walkout has stretched on a long time and hundreds of bills have been in limbo. There’s bills that would address the public defender crisis in this state. There are people sitting in jails right now that are languishing there that do not have an attorney to represent them because there are so few public defenders. I mean, that’s just such a huge crisis. There are so many budget bills, bills that would set the rates for what the state pays behavioral health providers, the people who provide care for the most vulnerable kids and adults in our society. There are bills to address climate change. There’s bills to address the drought the state is facing, there’s a bill to establish minimum staffing ratios for hospitals. There are too many to list that are in jeopardy if lawmakers cannot figure out how to work together.

Miller: Let’s say that they do. Let’s say that the rank and file actually say ‘yes’ to this deal in the coming days. There’s a really short period of time, just a couple of weeks, for them to theoretically pass a lot of bills and then do the only thing they have to do, which is pass a two-year budget. Is there time?

Dake: There is, there’s time. One could certainly argue that it’s not the best or most transparent way to go about it. So they’ve done this in years past when walkouts have nearly derailed previous sessions, they come back in the final few days and they just pass dozens of bills off the floor in one day, sometimes with very little discussion. It’s hard for the public. It’s hard for reporters and I think it’s even hard for lawmakers to always know everything in the bills. So yes, they can do it.

It sounds like they might do it, but it doesn’t really feel like the most democratic process.

Miller: How much have Republicans said about their plans to challenge the ham-handed voter-passed Initiative meant to prevent walkouts?

Dake: Right. Republicans have made it really clear that they plan to challenge that measure you’re talking about - Measure 113 - which voters did approve overwhelmingly, in an effort to end walkouts. But the measure was not written well. And because of that, there is a lot of ambiguity in it and what it can actually do. So Republicans have made it clear they’ve obtained legal counsel, they are going to fight the measure.

Miller: And what about Democrats? I mean, what have you heard maybe behind the scenes about this voter passed initiative that has been an abject failure?

Dake: Yeah, publicly, Democrats continue to repeat that walkouts are unpopular with voters, that voters tried to make it clear that they wanted them to stop. I think that some Democrats genuinely believe that the nine Republicans and the one Independent Senator who have walked out for nearly six weeks will no longer be eligible to run for reelection. So they think that they’re going to pay a high price for this walk out.

Miller: And that is one of the questions that maybe the Secretary of State or courts will have to figure out…if it’s constitutional and what the timing is if it is found that they cannot run again; if it’s the next term or the term after that.

Lauren, thanks very much.

Dake: Thank you, Dave.

Miller: Lauren Dake is a member of OPB’s political reporting team.

Contact “Think Out Loud®”

If you’d like to comment on any of the topics in this show, or suggest a topic of your own, please get in touch with us on Facebook, send an email to thinkoutloud@opb.org, or you can leave a voicemail for us at 503-293-1983. The call-in phone number during the noon hour is 888-665-5865.