Oregon Republicans f**k around, and- SURPRISE!!!- find out
"Man, the leopards weren't supposed to eat MY face...."
Smoking kills. If you’re killed, you’ve lost a very important part of your life.
Brooke Shields
My job is a decision-making job, and as a result, I make a lot of decisions.
George W. Bush
In 2003, while I was still living in Texas, Democrats in the state legislature became so fed up with the imperious manner in which Republicans wielded their majority that they walked out, taking both chambers’ quorums to Oklahoma. They wanted to stop Republicans from passing a bill Democrats felt would unfairly redistrict the state in favor of the Texas GOP.
I remember thinking, “Wow, this has to be the first time anyone’s ever escaped TO Oklahoma….”
The most recent time Democrats employed this tactic was in July 2021. At that time, 59 Democrats broke quorum and flew to Washington, DC. They were trying to draw attention to and prevent the passage of a Republican bill that would impose new restrictions on voting rights in the Lone Star State. The bill eventually passed, but Democrats claimed a “moral victory” for at least shining a spotlight on the “corrupt” tactics of Texas Republicans.
Yeah, like Democrats wouldn’t have done precisely the same thing if they’d had a majority in the statehouse….
Turn the clock forward to 2023, and the walkout tactic broke out here in Oregon, where state politics typically possess all the excitement of scraping roadkill off a state highway. Republicans have been a minority in the state legislature since Jesus was a Cub Scout, something they’ve fought to change, but the Beaver State’s demographics don’t favor them. Democrats rule, Republicans drool.
This means their options for fighting back are somewhat limited. Over the past few biennial legislative sessions, Republicans have resorted to walking out and breaking quorum, much as Democrats did in Texas.
In Oregon, things work a bit differently, though, and the Republican walkouts meant nothing would be accomplished during the legislative session. So, after Democrats collected the required number of signatures to get an initiative on the ballot, voters in 2022 passed Measure 113,
a voter-approved 2022 law meant to dissuade lawmakers from walking out and shutting down the legislative process[.]
Long story short, Measure 113 said that any legislator with more than ten unexcused absences (walking out was “unexcused”) would be disqualified from running for re-election. In other words, if you fucked around, you would eventually find out.
This means that 10 Republican Senators who participated in the longest walkout in Oregon history are now ineligible to run for re-election. Of course, they knew the consequences laid out by Measure 113 before embarking upon their walkout. And, of course, they don’t believe the consequences should apply to them.
I NEVER THOUGHT THE LEOPARDS WERE GOING TO EAT MY FACE!!!!
Then, as Republicans are wont to do, they went to court to try to weasel out of the consequences of their action…and they did it in the most weasel-worthy of ways. They claimed the language was unclear.
Cry me a frickin’ river….
Republican senators who participated last year in the longest walkout in state history cannot seek reelection in 2024 or 2026, the Oregon Supreme Court ruled Thursday.
In a unanimous decision, the court rejected arguments from five Republican senators that Measure 113, a voter-approved 2022 law meant to dissuade lawmakers from walking out and shutting down the legislative process, was poorly worded and would give them another term in office. Instead, the court agreed with state attorneys, who urged justices to consider voters’ intent with the 2022 law, which bars any lawmaker with 10 or more unexcused absences from serving another term.
“Because the text is capable of supporting the secretary’s interpretation, and considering the clear import of the ballot title and explanatory statement in this case, we agree with the secretary that voters would have understood the amendment to mean that a legislator with 10 or more unexcused absences during a legislative session would be disqualified from holding legislative office during the immediate next term, rather than the term after that,” the ruling said.
In other words, Republicans fucked around and found out, didn’t want to face the consequences of their actions, and the Oregon Supreme Court said, “Not so fast, my friends….”
Republicans argued that the wording of Measure 113 was ambiguous, which seemed more than a wee bit disingenuous.
The lawsuit depended on how justices would interpret just 13 words of the 2022 law, which stated that lawmakers with 10 or more unexcused absences would be ineligible for office “for the term following the election after the member’s current term is completed.” Legislative terms end the January following a November election, so the Republican senators who sued argued that the six senators who participated in the walkout and were up for election in 2024 would be allowed to run in 2024. Their current terms end in January 2025, so they argued that they would be ineligible to run in 2028.
“The text of the amendment does not unambiguously support either interpretation,” the court’s opinion said. “The text would more clearly support petitioners’ reading – and weaken the secretary’s reading – if it referred to ‘the term following the election [that occurs] after the member’s current term is completed.’”
Republicans were attempting to argue that because of the "ambiguity" of the 13 words in question, voters may not have fully understood the implications of “YES” or “NO” votes.
Yes, they were arguing that Oregon voters were too stupid to read the text of Measure 113 and decide for themselves.
Condescend much?
With ambiguous language, the Supreme Court looked at the materials voters saw when they made their decision in 2022: the ballot title and state-issued voters’ pamphlet.
The attorney general drafts a ballot title, including a 15-word caption and summary of what a “yes” and “no” vote will mean, for each initiative that goes before voters. Ballots have to include that summary, not the actual text of a proposed law or constitutional amendment.
For the walkout measure, the caption read: “Legislators with 10 unexcused absences from floor sessions disqualified from holding next term of office.” And it described the results of a “yes” vote as disqualifying legislators with 10 unexcused absences “from holding office for term following current term of office.”
The voters’ pamphlet similarly described the measure similarly, as did contemporary news coverage. Linthicum, one of the senators involved in the lawsuit, was part of a bipartisan committee that crafted a 500-word explanatory statement for the voters’ pamphlet.
Sure…and what Republicans hoped the justices would somehow overlook was that a bipartisan committee wrote Measure 113’s explanatory statement for the voters’ pamphlet.
Unfortunately for them, the gamble that the Oregon Supreme Court justices are themselves stupid and inattentive to detail flamed out spectacularly.
“Reading the text of the amendment in light of the ballot title and the voters’ pamphlet, voters would have understood the disqualification to apply to the term of office immediately following the term in which a legislator accrued or more unexcused absences,” the justices wrote.
Secretary of State LaVonne Griffin-Valade thanked the court for providing clarity.
“I’ve said from the beginning my intention was to support the will of the voters,” she said in a statement. “It was clear to me that voters intended for legislators with a certain number of absences in a legislative session to be immediately disqualified from seeking reelection.”
In other words, the Republican case was disingenuous at best and profoundly dishonest at worst. They were looking to have their cake and eat it, too. Not only did they fully understand what Measure 113 said and its consequences, but they were also intent on escaping accountability for their actions.
Hmm…does that sound like any other Republican we might know?
Of course, Republicans were quick to criticize the decision and to deride the Supreme Court as dominated by partisan Democrats. Democratic former Governor Kate Brown appointed every justice who participated in the decision.
Republicans expressed deep concerns over the chilling effect of the Supreme Court’s decision, claiming it would “crush dissent”…or something like that.
It will do nothing of the sort, of course. The Supreme Court’s decision was about one thing- the applicability of Measure 113 and the consequences it lays out. When voters approved it, they weren’t looking to punish Republicans, nor did the measure’s language single out Republicans. Measure 113 is not a partisan piece of legislation, and the fact that 10 Republicans are now ineligible to run for re-election isn’t a partisan outcome.
TL;DR: it’s because they’re dumbasses who believed the law didn’t apply to them.
The union leaders who backed Measure 113 praised the ruling. Andrea Kennedy-Smith, the former vice president of Service Employees International Union Local 503, described the lawsuit as a “frivolous legal challenge.
“This ruling upholds the intent of Oregon voters; politicians need to do their jobs or lose their jobs,” she said. “They need to play by the same rules as everyone else. We appreciate the Oregon Supreme Court’s justices for taking up and resolving this frivolous legal challenge.”
Reed Scott-Schwalbach, president of the Oregon Education Association, added that voters across the political spectrum supported Measure 113.
The language of Measure 113 is pretty straightforward, and Republicans know it. They understandably resent having a tool of dissent taken out of their quiver, but they were elected to represent the voters in their districts, not play political games. Suppose they’re not in the Senate chamber when the legislature is in session. In that case, no legislation can be passed, which ultimately hurts all of the people in Oregon, regardless of party affiliation.
This situation is unlikely to be a magic bullet for Democrats. They’ll still have to deal with Republicans, but I suspect they’ll figure something out. Besides, it’s not like Democrats from outside Portland are a bunch of woolly-headed, fire-breathing Libruls. They may be creative sorts prone to thinking outside the box (yeah, their decision to decriminalize hard drug use didn’t work out quite the way they thought it would, eh?), but at least their answer isn’t a reflexive “NO!!”
Thankfully, Trumpism is a dead letter in Oregon. Not that there aren’t dyed-in-the-wool MAGA morons here, of course; they’re small in numbers and influence. Most Oregonians want nothing to do with that sort of unmedicated looniness.
Democrats didn’t walk out. Republicans did. Republicans understood the consequences of their actions and persisted despite that knowledge. Then, they reacted like a group of recalcitrant children whining about being punished for their actions.
It’s time for them to stop whining, accept the consequences of their actions, and find candidates to run in their places- time’s a-wasting, y’all.
(All of my posts are now public. Any reader financial support will be considered pledges- support that’s greatly appreciated but not required to get to all of my work. I’ll trust my readers to determine if my work is worthy of their financial support and at what level. To those who do offer their support, thank you. It means more than you know.)
The language was unclear to all those Republicans who still required adult assistance while struggling through a Dick & Jane story ...