Dan Rayfield, a Corvallis Democrat and former Oregon House speaker, is running for attorney general in 2024, in this undated handout image.
Courtesy of campaign
Editor’s note: Election Day is Tuesday, Nov. 5. Stay informed with OPB on the presidential race, key congressional battles and other local contests and ballot measures in Oregon and Southwest Washington at opb.org/elections.
OPB asked candidates for Oregon’s attorney general the same questions. Candidates were given a 150-word limit. Anything beyond the 150-word total was not included in these responses. Read our coverage of this race here.
To start, please give us your name and basic biographical details, including your current position or job, any elected offices you have held and any key facts you would like voters to know about you.
Name: Dan Rayfield
Occupational Background: Attorney
Educational Background: JD, Willamette University College of Law; BS, Western Oregon University
Prior Governmental Experience: Speaker of the Oregon House; State Representative; Commissioner, Linn-Benton Housing Authority
What are the job duties of the Attorney General?
The Attorney General of Oregon serves as the chief legal officer and law enforcement official for the state of Oregon and is responsible for protecting seniors and consumers from bad actors and defending Oregon’s laws from national attacks.
Why should you be elected Oregon’s Attorney General?
I am running for attorney general because I believe, with the right leadership, the Attorney General can be an indispensable partner to help fix the challenges Oregon currently faces.
I bring nearly 18 years of experience as a practicing attorney in Oregon, focusing on civil litigation, civil rights, consumer protection, representing people against the insurance industry and large corporations.
During my time as Speaker of the Oregon House, I delivered for Oregonians by expanding access to health care, increasing funding for public schools, protecting our environment, and passing the strongest abortion protections in the country.
As Oregon’s next Attorney General, I will build on this work by partnering with law enforcement to curb drug delivery, make our communities safer, expand our efforts to protect seniors and consumers from predatory lending and fly-by-night scams, and defend Oregon from national attacks on abortion rights, and our voting and environmental laws.
What do you view as an underutilized power of this office? Please be specific.
As an attorney who has worked on a broad range of consumer cases, I have seen how consumer protection issues have become far more urgent, especially with rising economic inequality. As Attorney General, I’ll proactively work to take on predatory lenders, scam artists, identify credit fraud, and abusive practices by insurance companies; and improve and expand the state’s efforts to make sure consumers are treated legally and fairly in the marketplace.
I plan on expanding the work of the office to investigate and prosecute those who violate the Unlawful Trade Practices Act (UTPA) in Oregon. Currently, we do not have the adequate staffing or resources to fully execute this mission. This expansion will allow the Attorney General to better protect Oregonians from those breaking our laws. Every Oregonian should have a place to turn to when they’ve been harmed or taken advantage of by a bad actor.
Related: What you need to know about voting in Oregon and Southwest Washington
What is the most pressing legal challenge facing the state? What is your proposed solution to that problem? Please be specific.
Oregon’s public defense crisis has presented a significant statewide challenge that impacted our state’s ability to provide access to justice for victims and their families. It has made our communities less safe, denies folks access to their constitutional right, and creates significant delays in our court system that have impacts on other cases.
While this has been an issue that the state has been working to address for some time and many policy and budget adjustments have been made, there is still more work to be done. I am hopeful that the recent move of the Oregon Public Defense Commission to the executive branch will create additional efficiency and accountability.
Through the transition, it is critical that the state continue to prioritize workforce retention and recruitment, evaluate and finesse the maximum attorney caseload standards in the changing environment, and monitor outcomes to establish best practices.
Do you support the presidential candidate of your party?
Yes, I enthusiastically support Kamala Harris for President.
Does the Oregon Department of Justice have a culture of defending the state at all costs? Please explain your answer.
As Attorney General, I will focus on building a culture at the Department of Justice that incorporates some of the best practices I’ve relied on in the private sector, like dispute resolution and early resolution pilot programs. Litigation is sometimes necessary, but I believe it should always be a last resort when all other avenues have been exhausted and is necessary to protect the interest of the state.
Are there state laws you would not defend?
I believe it is critically important that Oregonians have an Attorney General whose values they can trust and align with their own, because that person is going to be faced with questions about which laws to defend while they’re in office. I will always stand up for the rule of law and the people of Oregon and will do my best to adhere to Oregon’s values when conflicts present themselves.
An example would be if congress enacts a nationwide ban on abortion. Oregon’s values are clear on abortion and as Attorney General I would defend Oregon under those circumstances. Another example is Oregon’s Constitution still has language that defines marriages as between one man and one woman. This is another issue where Oregon’s values are clear and as Attorney General I would not seek to challenge existing case law to enforce this provision.
Related: Issues important to Oregon voters
The state is currently deep in litigation to implement Ballot Measure 114, a ballot measure passed by voters that would add regulations for firearms in the state. Would you continue to pursue this litigation and implement the law? Are there changes you would make to the state’s legal strategy? If yes, how?
Yes. I would continue to move the process forward. Oregon voters passed Measure 114 to protect our communities and kids from acts of gun violence that are all too common in this country, while respecting the rights of law-abiding gun owners. Oregon’s current Attorney General has a long history of fighting to protect our state from gun violence and that is a legacy I look forward to carrying on.
As Attorney General you could be tasked with defending state laws or positions you personally disagree with or could be in a position where you’re asked to defend the state on matters where you believe it’s liable for wrongdoing. How would you balance defending state laws that do not match up with your personal ethics, beliefs or political philosophy?
Like I have done in my private practice and my time serving in the legislature, I will exercise and follow sound legal judgment at the Department of Justice and ensure each decision is made in the best interest of Oregonian.
As Attorney General you have the power to introduce legislation. If elected, what would be the first two or three bills you would introduce during your first legislative session? Please give some context and explanation for what the bills would accomplish and why they’re necessary.
I am currently working on legislation in partnership with law enforcement that would create a grant to modernize policing practices. The concept is based on a federal program that currently funds the stolen vehicle program the Portland Police Bureau has implemented.
I am also working on a concept that would establish a voluntary and self-imposed 21-day wait period to complete a firearm sale modeled off of programs in states like Mississippi. This suicide prevention notification system allows people with suicidal ideation or who struggle with mental health to opt in and they can remove themselves from the list at any time. When they are removed from the hold list, a designee of their choosing is notified. This creates a structure with a built-in call for help and gives law enforcement time to intervene if necessary.
I am also considering legislation that would increase protections for whistleblowers calling out corporate wrongdoing.
Related: Listen to 'OPB Politics Now'
Oregon has had the same Attorney General since 2012. As an outsider, what would you do differently?
I’m excited about the opportunity to expand the work the Department of Justice does to stand up for working Oregonians, like many other states have done.
As Attorney General, I will protect workers from wage theft, misclassification, and child labor violations, stop harmful practices like on-call scheduling, defend workers from union-busting and workplace violations, protect workers from unfair non-compete agreements and tip-stealing by their employers, and protect everyone from sexual harassment at their place of work.
Oregon’s Attorney General investigates violations of labor law and holds violators accountable. Oregon has the opportunity to learn from other states’ successes, so as your next Attorney General, I will build a new labor enforcement team within the DOJ to ensure all Oregonians’ rights are protected in the workplace.
In 2022, Oregon lawmakers passed SB 1584, which allows people who are wrongfully convicted to seek compensation. But few found innocent have received compensation. Publicly, the Oregon Department of Justice has made a distinction between people being “exonerated” saying it’s not the same as “innocent.” Is this how the law should work? Are there any changes you would make?
If people have been wrongfully convicted, they deserve to be compensated under the law, that’s why I supported the legislation in 2022. I would need to learn more about the distinction of the current Department of Justice position before recommending any changes that may, or may not need to be made.