Rep. Richardson's Legislative Update
July 22, 2005

Civil Rights, Civil Unions and Reciprocal Benefits

The big news today is the House amendments to Senate Bill 1000. Many have heard that last week the Oregon Senate passed S.B. 1000, the Civil Unions bill. What most do not know is that the final form of the Senate's Civil Unions bill retained the provisions elevating sexual orientation, appearance and behavior to the same "protected civil right status" as race and religion. This was a political "bait and switch" ploy. After the public outrage against making sexually oriented behaviors a civil right, you might remember the widely publicized Senate decision to eliminate the sexual orientation provisions from the "Civil Unions" bill. But, the Senate Democrat's decision to go back to the Civil-Rights/Civil Unions two-punch provisions was made in almost deafening media silence.

One problem with elevating sexual orientation, appearance and behavior to a protected, civil rights status is the uncertainty of enforcement. Current protected classes of civil rights are based on who people are, not what they do. Martin Luther King Jr.'s niece, Alveta Scott King, expressed the difference when she said, "While I have met many former homosexuals, I have yet to meet a former black." On the other side of the issue, former lesbian, Yvette Schneider, asked the thought provoking question when responding to the issue of special rights based on sexual orientation, "Why should I receive less protection now that I am no longer a lesbian?"

If Senate Bill 1000 were allowed to become law, a devout Christian girl seeking a female roommate to share expenses would be required to rent to a lesbian, regardless of the girl's religious feelings or beliefs about privacy or modesty. I want to make it clear, I am against discrimination, but I am committed to defend our inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I am willing to tolerate another person's sexual preferences, but I am unwilling to use the force of governmental power to elevate that person's sexual preferences above the commercial, educational, residential and personal freedoms of the majority of Oregonians.

Since the House of Representatives is controlled by Republicans who agree with what I have explained above, Senate Bill 1000, with its one-two punch for sexual orientation civil rights and marriage-by-another-name civil unions, will not be considered to become Oregon law, this session. Yesterday, the wording of Senate Bill 1000 was removed from the bill and replaced by wording that would provide for Reciprocal Beneficiary Agreements, which I have described in a previous newsletter (click here).

Reciprocal Beneficiary Agreements are a moderate and fair opportunity for two people who cannot marry to have access to certain rights and privileges, such as hospital visitation, access to hospital records, power to make end-of-life decisions, etc., that have no relationship to sexual orientation or marriage. The Senate Democrats and the gay-lesbian activists say Reciprocal Benefits don't go far enough. If the issue is fairness, such as hospital visitation privileges, then Reciprocal Beneficiary Agreements are a reasonable compromise. If the issue is really a gay-lesbian activist agenda, then nothing will be acceptable short of victory and government-enforced acceptance of homosexual behavior, with severe penalties to silence anyone, any church or any political party with the courage to speak against them. The battle-lines are drawn. If the issue is fairness, Reciprocal Benefits Agreements are available this session; if the issue is a gay-lesbian political agenda, S.B. 1000's provisions are now stripped from that bill.

Methamphetamine--The Plague of the 21st Century

Earlier this week on two talk radio shows, the subject was Oregon's War on Methamphetamine. During my segment of the shows I was asked questions that deserve more thorough answers than I was able to give on the air. So, with the help of Heidi Moawad, our Legislative Judiciary Committee Administrator, I have prepared the following Questions and Answers to help explain why it is important to aggressively fight Oregon's War on Meth--including the inconvenience of requiring prescriptions for pseudoephedrine cold medicines.

(Q.) How much Meth is coming from super labs (Mexico) and how much from local labs? If the locally manufactured Meth is less than 35%, why require prescriptions for pseudoephedrine cold medicines when the potential reduction in Meth trafficking is small?

(A.) The latest numbers put the "super lab" importation at about 65% with our "Mom and Pop" labs producing 35%. However, law enforcement officers will tell you that the small, local labs create over 90% of the problems associated with Methamphetamine.

  • It is the "Mom and Pop" labs that result in apartments and homes becoming public nuisances due to their hazardous toxicity;
  • It is the small lab cook that dumps highly toxic chemicals into our streams and waterways (or sometimes, bury them in the back yard);
  • It is the small lab that explodes or catches fire;
  • It is the small lab that our elderly are exposed to when their addict child takes over their home;
  • It is the small lab that our children are exposed to (an interesting study in California showed that 70% of the children tested within 2 hours of being removed from a home were under the influence of Methamphetamine themselves due to second-hand contact), these children are the children in foster care (if they're lucky) or being killed;
  • It is the small lab that has poisoned first responders (firefighters, police officers, etc) with the extremely dangerous Meth lab toxic waste.

    (Q.) Won't Meth lab operators just cross the border and buy the pseudoephedrine medicines in Washington or Idaho?

    (A.) Some will. Maybe Oregon will get lucky and they'll decide to stay in one of the Border States to save on gas. Remember, Oregon's new Meth laws are also much tougher on criminals. Oregon will soon be known to Meth cooks as the place to go if you want a long jail term. It is expected that Washington and Idaho will soon follow Oregon's lead in the fight against Methamphetamine production and addiction.

    (Q.) How can folks get prescriptions without having to bear the inconvenience and expense of frequent calls or trips to their doctors to get their favorite cold medicines?

    (A.) First, most cold medicines do not contain pseudoephedrine, so don't believe the fear-mongers who rant and rave and would have you believe all cold medicines will soon require a prescription. This is simply not true. To see a list of the many common cold medications that will remain over-the-counter at your local store (click here). If alternative cold medicines won't do, a single pseudoephedrine prescription can enable several refills, and for those who have a regular doctor, the prescription can be obtained with a mere phone call. Finally, most cold medicines will be available with an alternative before the Board of Pharmacy adopts the rule making pseudoephedrine products a Schedule III controlled substance. From the time House Bill 2485 is enacted, it will take the Board several months to actually adopt a permanent rule. (The bill gives them until July 1, 2006).

    (Q.) Just how bad is the Meth problem in Oregon?

    (A.) To state the obvious, Meth and its popularity are rising at an alarming rate. The Richardson newsletter articles are intended to help increase public awareness, since there may be a Meth lab in any neighborhood. In addition to the disastrous effects on children and families, Meth cooks, dealers, and addicts are flooding the justice system with criminal cases--not just drug cases, but also property crimes, identity thefts and violent crimes. With skyrocketing PERS costs and other Oregon budget drainers, the Meth problem looms even bigger; we simply do not have enough jail beds, treatment beds, courtrooms, etc, to deal with it all. Here's sobering statistics on Meth manufacture, use and fatalities in Oregon:

  • Methamphetamine lab statistics for Oregon, beginning in the year 2000: 412, 2001: 591, 2002: 529, 2003: 454, and 2004: 447.
  • Methamphetamine related deaths reported in the Oregon, also beginning in the year 2000: 56; 2001: 50; 2002: 65; 2003: 78
  • Of the 7000 children in foster care, an estimated 70% of them are there because of their parents' Methamphetamine addictions.
  • Since 1992, Oregon has had the highest rate of Methamphetamine-related drug treatment admissions of all 50 states. In 2002, Oregon had 323.6 admissions per 100,000 population. (While Oregon ranks highest in need for treatment, we are 45th in the nation in access to the treatment due to budget restraints).
  • From 2001-2004, there has been a 57% increase in use among teenage girls in the state (there are two primary reasons cited by law enforcement for this statistic: (1.) crystal Meth is ingestible by smoking which is seen as more "glamorous" than snorting or injecting; and (2.) Meth is seen as a way to lose weight).

    (Q.) Ten years ago we were told the crack cocaine epidemic was going to take over Oregon and change society as we know it; since it didn't happen then, why is the Meth scare any different today?

    (A.) Although Crack Cocaine remains a problem in some parts of Oregon, primarily urban areas, Meth has taken over the entire state. Meth addiction crosses racial and class lines. Crack cocaine is made by taking equal parts cocaine, baking soda, and water until it "rocks up." Methamphetamine is made using toxic ingredients (such as Drano, battery acid, antifreeze, etc.). Cocaine is dangerous to the addict, Meth poisons homes, first responders, and children. In addition to their toxicity, Meth waste by-products are volatile chemicals that can cause explosions and fires. If made incorrectly, a poisonous fume can kill a Meth cook. Also, Meth is SUBSTANTIALLY MORE ADDICTIVE than any other drug we've seen in our society, including crack. It literally changes the way the brain functions and depending on length of use, it may affect the brain's functions permanently. Finally, for many people and families in Oregon, Meth has already changed their lives and society as they know it.

    (Q.) What are the costs to society that justify the decision of requiring a prescription for folks to buy their favorite pseudoephedrine cold medicine?

    (A.) Consider the facts:

  • ECONorthwest studied the cost of Meth to taxpayers in Multnomah County and found that it directly cost residents of Multnomah County an additional $363 per household per year.
  • A property owner who rents residences will end up paying $7500-$10,000 to clean up a residence after a toxic Meth lab has been discovered in it (most insurance policies no longer cover it, and while the DEA has an illegal drug clean up fund, that fund empties out quickly each biennium and therefore cannot be relied upon to alleviate the costs).
  • Law enforcement estimates that 85% of the property crimes committed are the result of Meth addiction; property crimes cost individual victims as well as all of us in higher insurance premiums.
  • We're pouring money into DHS for foster care. Those children have severe physical and psychological problems after being exposed to toxic Meth labs--these are kids in classes who potentially take up the class' time with behavioral problems. We cannot underestimate the cost these Meth-affected children will have long term--not to mention the cost TO them by having lived their sad lives up until their removal from the home.

    (Q.) So, if requiring prescriptions for pseudoephedrine medicines is such a good idea, what organizations support it?

    (A.) The prescription portion is only a small part of House Bill 2485, and the bill is supported by the Governor, the State Attorney General, the Oregon District Attorneys Association, the Oregon Association of Chiefs of Police, the Oregon State Police, the Oregon Narcotics Association on behalf of Oregon's narcotic task forces, the Oregon State Sheriffs Association, Southern Oregon Drug Awareness, Oregon Meth Watch, Crime Victims United, to name a few. Additionally, the bill passed the Oregon House of Representatives with an overwhelming vote of 55 in favor and only 4 opposed.

    (Q.) If law enforcement supports making pseudoephedrine a controlled substance, why have we not heard more from them?

    (A.) The legislature has heard from them-loud and clear. Law enforcement agencies are prime supporters of the Legislative Meth Package. We had testimony in favor of this legislation in judiciary committee hearings as well as multiple letters of support that have been disseminated to at least some (if not all) members of the legislature.

    Final Thoughts: A billion dollar pharmaceutical corporation is now running radio ads against the Meth bill (HB 2485). What a surprise. Since more than 70% of Oregon's pseudoephedrine medicines sold in convenience stores are used for Meth production, cutting off these products from such illicit uses by making pseudoephedrine a controlled substance is definitely going to have a negative affect on the sales income for such corporations. You all know I am a free-enterprise-kind-of-guy, but, if more than 70% of one's product is going to manufacture Methamphetamine, I think it would be a little embarrassing to openly try and kill legislation aimed at protecting our families and children from this 21st century plague. Unfortunately, some will do anything in this world for money.

    Sincerely,

    Dennis Richardson
    State Representative
    Speaker Pro Tempore

    House Increases Prison Sentences For Gang Members

    This week the House approved legislation authored by Speaker Karen Minnis (R-Wood Village) that increases prison sentences for gang members, making communities safer. House Bill 2313-A is the result of the 2003 Joint Interim Judiciary Committee’s research into gang activities in Multnomah County.

    "Criminal gangs are a scourge on Oregon communities and their members deserve additional prison time for the violence they inflict on innocent people," said Speaker Karen Minnis (R-Wood Village). "Last year, I invited lawmakers to tour gang-affected neighborhoods in Portland and East Multnomah County with me. It was shocking to see bullet holes in homes and hear from police officers how many shootings they had responded to because of gang activity. This bill will help keep gang members off the streets and keep Oregonians safe."

    House Bill 2313-A would add 24 months to the prison sentence of criminal street gang members convicted of person felony, unlawful use of a weapon and felon in possession of firearm. In cases where the presumptive sentence would be probation, 24 months jail time would be added. The measure would apply to offenses committed on or after January 1, 2006.

    State Rep. Jeff Barker (D-Aloha), who carried the bill and is a retired Portland Police Lieutenant, said, "In the late ‘80s and early ‘90s, California enacted gang statutes and it was not a coincidence that their gang members moved here to Oregon and brought their violent criminal activities with them. By enacting statutes based on California’s success, we are giving law enforcement a valuable tool to say to the gang members that this behavior is not welcome here, either. Read the papers: gang violence is once again on the rise in our state, and this response is long overdue."

    House Profile: Rep. Mac Sumner
    Rep. Mac Sumner is serving his first term in the House of Representatives. He is Vice Chair of the House General Government Committee. He is also a member of the House Land Use Committee and House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee.

    Rep. Sumner has lived in the Molalla area for 45 years. Prior to entering the Legislature, he was Molalla's Mayor and City Councilor. Rep. Sumner was a warehouseman for Safeway for 33 years, and served America as a jet engine mechanic in the Air Force.

    For more on Rep. Sumner, visit his legislative Web site: http://www.leg.state.or.us/sumner/

    From the Senate Republican Office:
    Republicans Call for Budget Deal

    As the temperature goes up outside the state Capitol it appears Senate Democrats aren’t ready to break a sweat to get a state budget finalized. Monday they began the process of allowing legislators to stay until the end of August haggling over what amounts to less than 0.5% of the state budget. The state has operated since July 1st without an overall agreement on state spending for the current budget year.

    "Time on the clock has run out," stated Senate Republican Leader Ted Ferrioli (R-John Day). "At some point Democrats are going to have to show they are willing to break a sweat and quit punting the ball into next month. A continuing resolution is being drafted that will allow Democrats to continue twiddling their thumbs and play down the clock until the next revenue forecast is ready."

    Members of the Senate Budget committee expressed to the panel’s chairman their concern over giving up on a budget deal this month. Senator Frank Morse (R-Albany/Corvallis) reminded committee members that the state is operating without a budget. "It is the responsibility of the Senate to reach an agreement on a budget," stated Morse. "The deadline has passed."

    Morse and other Republicans say the budget needs to be finalized before August. Morse agreed to support the resolution out of committee as a courtesy since some Democrats who support the plan were missing from the hearing. He will likely vote against the proposal when it reaches the full Senate. "It is unacceptable to sit here waiting until the end of August to do what should have been done months ago," Morse stated.

    Senator David Nelson (R-Pendleton) put it more bluntly. "We have a job to do and we are not doing it," Nelson stated.

    The Senate Budget Committee extended until Labor Day weekend the ability of state agencies to keep spending money. It marks the second time Democrats have sought to extend spending authority. The full Senate should vote on the Democrat’s request by the end of the week.

    Missed a Newsletter?
    Download all past newsletters for the 2005 Session at http://www.leg.state.or.us/richardson/news.htm

    Capitol Office
    900 Court Street NE
    H-285
    Salem OR 97301
    Tel: (503) 986-1404
    Fax: (503) 986-1590
    E-Mail: rep.dennisrichardson@state.or.us

    Please tell a friend about House District 4 Legislative Update.

    Click here to subscribe.

    To unsubscribe to this newsletter, send an e-mail to nick@dennisrichardson.org with "unsubscribe" in the Subject line.

     

    		•