2023 OR Legislative Scorecard

HB3625 withdraws all applications for “an amendment convention” under Article V of the U.S. Constitution that were previously made by the Legislative Assembly and declares them “null and void.

The Senate passed HB3635 on June 24, 2023, by a vote of 25 to 0. We have assigned pluses to the ayes because efforts to call an Article V convention should be resisted. Instead of failing to uphold their oath of office and risking a constitutional convention, legislators in Oregon and the rest of the several States should “support and defend the Constitution,” as required under Article VI, Clauses 2 and 3, by acting to immediately nullify all unconstitutional federal laws. Whenever the federal government assumes undelegated powers, in blatant violation of the 10th Amendment, nullification of such acts is the proper remedy. Article V of the Constitution was designed to correct potential errors or defects in the Constitution, not to misconstrue or abuse its powers. The States can and must use Article VI to enforce the Constitution, rather than use Article V to change it.

HB2002 proclaims that “every individual has a fundamental right” to “pregnancy termination services,” “sterilization services,” and “contraception,” while mandating health benefit plans to cover “gender-affirming treatment.”

The Senate passed HB2022 on June 15, 2023, by a vote of 17 to 3. We have assigned pluses to the nays because the care of human life—not its destruction—is the greatest responsibility of government. Oregon ought to forbid all methods of abortion and prohibit the practice of sex mutilation. No person has the right to kill or dismember a child using the pretext of “reproductive health services” or LGBTQ+ ideology. Both the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution affirm the fundamental, God-given, and unalienable right to life and limb of every person. Therefore, each of the several States has a duty to defend the basic humanity of all its citizens, especially the preborn and minors

SB93 alters the definition of “child abuse” to mean “any mental injury to a child," including “statements made,” that results in "severe harm" to the child’s “psychological, cognitive, emotional or social well-being and functioning.”

The Senate passed SB93 on June 15, 2023, by a vote of 21 to 1. We have assigned pluses to the nays because the legitimate powers of government extend only to acts of “child abuse” that are injurious (e.g., physical or sexual assault), which can be substantiated based on an objective standard using verifiable evidence. Not “any mental injury,” consisting of “statements made,” regardless of how “cruel or unconscionable” they may seem, is or can be considered criminal. It is not the duty of, nor would it be possible for, the government to right every “psychological, cognitive, emotional, or social” wrong. Nevertheless, many allegations of “child abuse” are either unfounded or false, and no parent or guardian should ever be reported, arrested, or lose custody of their child in the name of Social-Emotional Learning (SEL)—a misnomer for social engineering. This bill is just another example of the serious threat to families from SEL and those who advocate for “best interest of the child” legislation modeled after the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. If it is not opposed in Oregon and elsewhere, it will have severe far-reaching consequences for parental rights and “due process of law” in America. Parental rights are among our “unalienable Rights” protected by the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment.

SB614 would permit a law enforcement agency to collect and maintain information about any person’s “political, religious or social views, associations or activities” for “lawful purpose,” according to policy on officer-worn video cameras.

The Senate passed SB614 on April 18, 2023, by a vote of 18 to 10. We have assigned pluses to the nays because without reasonable suspicion or probable cause of criminal conduct, police bodycam surveillance serves no “lawful purpose.” The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution explicitly asserts the right of the people to be secure against “unreasonable searches.” There is not an exception for police bodycams, let alone facial recognition or other biometric technology. Blanket approval for their widespread use would be tantamount to a mass and warrantless form of ‘secret search'—dangerously and continually infringing on the personal privacy provisions of the Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment.

SB893 directs the Oregon Housing and Community Services Department (OHCS) to implement a "culturally responsive" policy framework "designed to provide support to specific populations" experiencing "homelessness or housing instability." 

The Senate passed SB893 on April 11, 2023, by a vote of 25 to 4. We have assigned pluses to the nays because government is instituted to secure our individual rights, not to “prevent and end homelessness” in society or be “focused on reducing disparities” of property ownership between citizens on account of race or economic status. The U.S. Constitution, which was written to “promote the general Welfare” of all Americans, already protects each person’s “unalienable Rights” to “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” affording everyone with the opportunity and dignity to feed, clothe, and house themselves and their family as expected—by meeting their own needs, through their own efforts, and using their own resources. Oregon has absolutely no business discriminatorily and unjustly providing "housing services" to any of its residents, particularly those who have little or no tax liability, at the expense of other hard-working people. It is not only immoral, but unconstitutional. The Bill of Rights and the 14th Amendment make it clear that “No State” shall “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”