Latest news with #DavidBrockSmith
Yahoo
01-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Should Oregon end its vote-by-mail system? Legislators seek public opinion
SALEM, Ore. (KOIN) – The Oregon Legislature first approved mail-in voting in 1981 and it was adopted by a majority of counties by 1987. But it wasn't until 1998 that Oregon voters approved a measure requiring that all elections be vote-by-mail. The state then became the first to conduct a presidential election by mail in 2000. But Republican State Sen. David Brock Smith of Port Orford introduced a bill that, if passed, would that has been in place in Oregon for decades. Monday's public hearing gave the public their first chance to testify for or against , which proposes scrapping mail-in voting in favor of in-person voting on Election Day. It would still retain mail-in voting for military and overseas voters, as well as those with a mailing address outside Oregon. Oregon state legislators invited the public to submit testimony on SB210 either online, remote, or in-person. More than 150 people signed up to testify Monday, but the committee chair said most of them were opposed to the plan. READ MORE: New bill proposes repealing vote-by-mail in Oregon, public invited to testify Supporters of the measure say after Oregon's DMV was found to have registered more than 1000 non-citizens through the motor voter program it's time to return to the way it was a generation ago. This bill also would require any mail-in ballots to be returned by Election Day. Currently they just need to be postmarked by Election Day. It would also get rid of the state postage-paid return envelopes for ballots. Only seven other states – and Washington, D.C. – even send mail ballots to all registered voters without requiring them to request one first: California, Colorado, Hawaii, Nevada, Utah, Vermont and Washington. Young girl rescued after being dragged out into ocean at Seaside This bill comes at a time when President Trump has issued executive orders requiring proof-of-citizenship when registering to vote and restricting mail-in voting deadlines. If SB 210 makes it through the legislature, it would be a referral measure for voters to decide on. Stay with KOIN 6 News as we continue to update this story. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
01-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Thousands of Oregonians slam Republican senator's attempt to end mail ballots
Sen. David Brock Smith, R-Port Orford, speaks on the Senate floor on Feb. 12, 2024. (Photo by Jordan Gale/Oregon Capital Chronicle) Thousands of Oregonians submitted letters opposing a Republican senator's long-shot attempt to ask voters whether to repeal the state's decades-old mail voting law, swamping the Legislature's website on Monday. The outcry against Sen. David Brock Smith's Senate Bill 210 could serve as a preview of what's to come if his proposal or a separate initiative led by one of Brock Smith's Republican rivals makes it to the 2026 ballot. Oregonians have voted entirely by mail since 2000, after nearly 70% of voters approved switching to mail ballots in 1998. A quarter-century later, and after Republican party leaders including President Donald Trump spent years spreading debunked claims of voter fraud, Brock Smith argued that Oregon voters should get to decide again. 'I think it's time, which is why this is a referral for Oregonians to either reaffirm or deny vote by mail in this state,' the Port Orford Republican said during a Monday hearing of the Senate Rules Committee. The bill, which is unlikely to advance in the Democratic-controlled Senate, would ask voters to approve switching from mail voting to in-person voting on Election Day beginning in 2028. It also would repeal multiple recent laws aimed at making voting easier, including laws that added prepaid ballot-return envelopes and allowed the counting of ballots mailed and postmarked by Election Day that arrive at clerks' offices up to a week later. Brock Smith's proposal would allow people to vote by mail if they're unable to vote in person on Election Day — if they ask for the ballot at least 21 days before an election and submit a valid Oregon driver's license, driver permit, state identification card, U.S. passport or military identification card. Supporters of Oregon's electoral system have long praised the state's vote-by-mail system for its convenience. Oregon turnout in both presidential and midterm elections far exceeds the national average, even after automatic voter registration added hundreds of thousands of eligible but unengaged voters to voter rolls beginning in 2016. But proponents of ending mail voting, including Rep. Court Boice, R-Gold Beach, said convenience shouldn't be the goal of the state's electoral system. 'The folks that I represent, the majority, want voting and Election Day to be about responsibility, not about convenience,' Boice said. Renee Asher lives in rural Coos County, one of the southwest Oregon counties Boice and Brock Smith represent. She attended the hearing virtually to say that she and other neighbors support Oregon's mail voting. 'I live in a rural community with a lot of people that lack accessibility or ability to get to a polling center,' she said. 'We don't have polling centers here. You have people that work multiple jobs, as I do myself, (and we) do face voter intimidation in our area. I think that it would be a big mistake to repeal mail-in voting.' Asher was also one of the more than 11,000 Oregonians who submitted written testimony ahead of Monday's hearing, temporarily breaking the Legislature's website and slowing it to a crawl for most of the day. More than 85% of the letters submitted opposed Brock Smith's bill, while testimony in the hearing was more evenly split. Ayla Hofler said she drove 100 miles from her rural home near Banks to testify for the bill, which she considered the most important of the thousands of bills lawmakers introduced this year. 'We all come out of the hills just fine to vote,' Hofler said. 'We're ready to train our volunteers and get on with the old way. We know what it's like to have somebody stand in front of us, check our signature, know who we are, put a ballot number to our ballot, and it's all tallied on the same day.' Sen. James Manning, a Eugene Democrat who lost the Democratic primary for secretary of state last year, said he spent his campaign traveling the state and talking to voters about how the system could be better. Most of the people he talked to liked voting by mail, especially after the paid postage law he championed a few years ago, he said. 'I'm trying to figure out if this is an issue looking for a problem, because I don't see it here in our state,' Manning said. 'I think that this is a national movement to try to make something of nothing.' Registered Oregon voters automatically receive ballots at their homes, and they can choose to return them by mail, dropping them in a ballot box or turning them in at their county elections office. They can also opt to vote in person — each county elections office must have at least three private voting booths for voters who want the experience of filling out a ballot in a polling place. Erin Otey, a night shift nurse at a skilled rehab facility in Oregon City, said she came to testify against the bill on behalf of her patients who are able to exercise their right to vote because they receive ballots by mail. 'These people are bedbound,' she said. 'And even people that are housebound wouldn't have the opportunity to get to an in-person place, and it would put their health further at risk by exposing them to germs and viruses that could actually end their life.' Catherine Stearns, a retired state worker from Corvallis, said she brags to her out-of-state friends about Oregon's higher voter participation rates and the state's innovative approach to elections, including being the first state to adopt mail ballots and automatic voter registration. 'In my opinion, Senate Bill 210 takes a giant leap backwards to a time when things worked only for some of the people,' Stearns said. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
25-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Lawmakers introduce dozens of proposed constitutional amendments
Republican Sen. David Brock Smith is behind a proposal that would not not allow people over 72 to run for state office in Oregon. (Photo by Jordan Gale/Oregon Capital Chronicle) Two years ago, Oregon lawmakers faced several dozen proposed constitutional amendments that reflected a range of frustrations with the state's governing document. Even more of that is back in this year's session. Lawmakers and committees have introduced 50 proposed constitutional amendments, with about twice as many in the Senate than the House. Any that pass — and the odds are few will — would be referred to the ballot November ballot in 2026 for a final decision. Some of these proposals are new this session, but others have been tried and failed before. Many would involve a reduction or expansion of one side's governing leverage. Some of the proposals are from Democrats, who hold a supermajority in both chambers, giving them the authority to raise taxes without Republican support. But most are from Republicans The new Senate Republican leader, Daniel Bonham of The Dalles, is one of the most prolific amendment sponsors, fielding a dozen. As in past sessions, one of the most overtly political of topics — redistricting — is proposed for constitutional amendment. Two Senate Joint Resolutions, 8 and 21, address legislative reapportionment by proposing a redistricting commission, an idea that has failed in the Legislature before. SJR 14 has another twist: It would increase Senate membership from 30 to 36, with each county electing a senator. You might expect that Republicans, long in the minority, would look for ways to impede the majority's ability to act, and you would be right. At least a half-dozen constitutional proposals seek to do just that by changing the rules for passing a measure. Under current rules, bills pass with a simple majority except revenue raising bills, which require a three-fifths supermajority in favor. Senate Joint Resolution 7, sponsored by Republican Sens. Bonham and Kim Thatcher of Keizer and Rep. E. Werner Reschke of Malin, would require a two-thirds majority in favor in each chamber to pass bills with an emergency clause to enact them sooner than normal. Now, such bills pass with a simple majority. SJR 12 would mandate a two-thirds majority to pass bills in even-numbered sessions. SJR 26 would end even-year regular sessions completely. Another amendment that could have unpredictable effects if passed, SJR 9 by Republican Sen. Fred Girod of Stayton, would 'prohibit members of the legislative assembly from voting on legislative measures when faced with a conflict of interest. Permits a vote to occur if the legislative entity is otherwise unable to muster sufficient votes to pass or defeat the measure.' Three more Republican-backed proposed amendments (SJRs 10, 11 and 23) would constrain legislative budget-writing. Others with Republican backing would limit the Democratic-controlled executive branch. SJR 18 would limit the time spans of emergency declarations by the governor, and SJR 31 would block a governor or agency from mandating use of a vaccine. Under other SJRs, legislative approval would be needed for some pardons and other actions (19 and 20), or for new or increased fees assessed by agencies (HJR 1). Approaching the question of control differently, a group of four Democrats — Sens. Khanh Pham of Portland and Jeff Golden of Ashland and Reps. David Gomberg of Otis and Nathan Sosa of Hillsboro — propose reducing the quorum needed to conduct business from two-thirds to one-half plus one. Republicans in recent years occasionally have used the high quorum requirement to block legislation. Still others would affect voters, or ballot status for ballot issues, directly. Three — SJR 30 and HJRs 3 and 11 — would change the rules for petitions for initiatives, raising the bar for petitioners. Another, HJR 5 by Sen. David Brock Smith, would add a new qualification for running for state office: a maximum age of 72 as of election day. (That would mean that current Republican President Donald Trump would be disqualified from running for Oregon office.) Apart from the relatively partisan amendments, a number of substantive topics — generally with clear partisan appeal on their own — also have been proposed. Many were framed as 'constitutional rights,' including: A right to fish and hunt (SJR 13) An end to the death penalty in Oregon (SJR 16) A parental right to choose a school for their children (SJR 24) A right to carry a concealed firearm (SJR 27) A right to a 'clean, safe and healthy environment' (SJR 28) Few of all these measures are likely to pass the Legislature and reach the ballot. Voters, of course, can choose to gather enough signature to get them on the ballot themselves by petition. That could transform some of these ideas into political battles ranging far outside the statehouse. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
