[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_25":26},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_27":28,"_29":30},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[31,75,87,99],{"_32":33,"_34":35,"_36":37,"_38":39,"_40":41,"_42":43,"_44":45,"_46":47,"_48":49,"_50":51,"_52":53,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":59,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":65,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6619806,"mediaKeyId","2827189-8096fbc3a2cd27116ccf85c1440217f4","parentId",2827189,"title","Heated public hearing on SB 2 10: sponsors seek voter referral to require in‑person election day voting and photo ID; hundreds testified","audioSeconds",2804,"startMs",1546000,"endMs",4350000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2827189-8096fbc3a2cd27116ccf85c1440217f4&start=1546&end=4350","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2827189-8096fbc3a2cd27116ccf85c1440217f4/thumbnail_1546000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6619806/Oregon/Heated-public-hearing-on-SB-2-10-sponsors-seek-voter-referral-to-require-inperson-election-day-voting-and-photo-ID-hundreds-testified","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6619806-88511b95c1b3f79f3a1d5904919908a8/orig.mp4?Expires=1769747627&Signature=fuTmbZM4MqYDLyhBhIOJPCFLcKdU53lz44xL4uw0QaQoiiwuIfewhROpKUvZiE2P6x0wWI0oHySzinxwxDMuBoEjAXYsp8FV36Dr9cu96fCQ061gOitvoC5JrNrnoDCkRILOC-eUAsb3xn5AD0DXpv-epmk9xc-WIQv~zRxRByCHbCRwCp6OlRshJ3WBH6hVzl8n3xRwH2QttYp97hzvidHsEMQgmmsQLWYzTLOXUDmWt1lAOwHqBkg~RvGx~RtSLhFw19mNCZwnirSQoU38ei8o9tC54qZhc0OiGiowhNGYbTwTEMPGEIcl3yEzC4PUONBrCY4swaPa9KjRwITDcw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Oregon State Legislature","date","2025-03-31T00:00:00Z","article","Sen. David Brock Smith introduced Senate Bill 2 10 on March 31 as a referral to Oregon voters that would make in‑person voting on election day the standard method for elections and require electors to present government‑issued photo identification for in‑person voting and when requesting a ballot to be returned by mail. The bill summary presented to the Senate Committee on Rules sets an operative date of Jan. 1, 2028 and says the act would be referred to the people for approval or rejection at the next general election.

Key provisions described in the public summary and by the sponsor include: establishing in‑person voting on the date of the election as the standard method; requiring government‑issued photo ID for in‑person voting and for requesting mail ballots; allowing voters to request a mail ballot no later than 21 days before election day if they cannot vote in person; retaining vote‑by‑mail provisions for military and overseas electors; giving the Secretary of State rulemaking authority to set minimum numbers of voting booths and certain operational details; and repealing requirements that the state pay postage for ballots returned by mail.

The committee held an extended public hearing that drew substantial testimony and written input. Committee staff reported more than 9,300 written testimonies submitted as of 9 a.m. the morning of the hearing; the chair told the committee that 81% of written testimony then was in opposition and 19% in favor. More than 160 people registered to speak in person; the chair allotted roughly one minute per speaker and said he would balance supporters and opponents and prioritize in‑person witnesses who traveled more than 100 miles.

Public testimony was deeply divided. Proponents — including many individual rural residents, precinct captains and grassroots organizers — argued for restoring what they described as the “gold standard” of in‑person voting, improving chain of custody and public confidence, and requiring photo ID to prevent fraud. Supporters included speakers referencing military service and long family traditions of in‑person voting and organizations and individuals who said they had experienced registration or ballot delivery problems.

Opponents included statewide civic, labor, and civil‑liberties organizations and many individual voters. The American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon, the League of Women Voters of Oregon, the National Vote at Home Institute, Oregon AFL‑CIO, AFSCME, SEIU 503, Unite Oregon, Family Forward, educators and union representatives all testified in opposition. They argued SB 2 10 would erect barriers for voters with disabilities, caregivers, working families, rural residents, older voters and people with limited transportation; that it would decrease turnout; and that removing prepaid postage would disproportionately burden low‑income voters. Many opponents described vote‑by‑mail as secure, with signature verification and audit processes, and urged the committee to protect the existing system rather than replace it.

Committee members and the sponsor discussed statutory mechanics and policy tradeoffs. Senators and representatives who spoke during the hearing emphasized the volume of submitted testimony and the strong differences in public views. At one point, the committee’s IT staff said a technical problem had left around 30 registrants without confirmation emails for the hearing; the chair acknowledged that some speakers could not join because of the issue and asked staff to follow up.

No formal committee action, amendment, or vote on SB 2 10 is recorded in the March 31 transcript. The public hearing was lengthy and managed to permit dozens of one‑minute testimonies under time constraints; the committee closed the hearing the same day.

Ending: SB 2 10 drew extensive testimony both for and against. The sponsor said the referral would let Oregonians decide whether to affirm vote‑by‑mail or restore in‑person, ID‑based voting. The committee received technical questions, high volumes of written testimony, and a mixture of organizational and individual views; the measure remained at the public‑hearing stage pending any committee action.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Committee On Rules 03/31/2025 1:00 PM","oneSentenceSummary","Sen. David Brock Smith told the Senate Committee on Rules that Senate Bill 2 10 would make in‑person voting on election day the standard in Oregon, require government‑issued photo identification for in‑person voting and to request mail ballots, and refer the change to voters with an operative date of Jan. 1, 2028.","taxTitle","Rules, Senate, Committees, Legislative, Oregon","taxId",17994,"location","Oregon","headline","","shortSummary",{"_32":76,"_34":35,"_36":37,"_38":77,"_40":78,"_42":79,"_44":80,"_46":81,"_48":82,"_50":83,"_52":84,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":85,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":86,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6619810,"Senate Bill 1046 would expand automatic voter registration to hunting and fishing license transactions",151,1169000,1320000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2827189-8096fbc3a2cd27116ccf85c1440217f4&start=1169&end=1320","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2827189-8096fbc3a2cd27116ccf85c1440217f4/thumbnail_1169000.jpg","/articles/6619810/Oregon/Senate-Bill-1046-would-expand-automatic-voter-registration-to-hunting-and-fishing-license-transactions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6619810-60041292ca70ac5398f69454e8efe30d/orig.mp4?Expires=1769747627&Signature=jkVypk5G7yCWq5Lvu~Zo5DiTxNxeoOZEiz2gjPRjAQTC0miFOW4g3CphBRKzVkyx4v4jifvKQEFvtt1CZBMpqzixxCR2cwTZrh8JzrMpY9egUu3zS1tVtAa08HUpMFpX4zRtF8p9uYflUsCt8OJ34eHGM3vV1mRrBZ~gVeoXuBvm5y8ySwdu~zWKUXR4ZXDfjp-FOBzbOnXhGbkvoPhkq-QF40GU7kkjpz3wjOElMDPuS-ttLtdNXcE4DM~t6iP0QmHV0cf1tp4rTZFDzV3egWvaqnuEHyOWafUsrCzheLOPczax7-26MK5MXL~BtjwtFniIqjkbbbVVCln0jn6qTw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Sen. David Brock Smith (R) presented Senate Bill 1046 to the Senate Committee on Rules on March 31, describing the bill as a proposal to extend Oregon’s automatic voter registration system to the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Under the measure, when a person signs up for a hunting or fishing license the Department would transmit information to the Secretary of State’s office to check registration status and, where appropriate, register the person to vote with the county of residence. The bill’s summary presented to the committee sets an operative date of June 1, 2027.

Amy Patrick, policy director for the Oregon Hunters Association, testified in support of the concept and said the association already encourages members to register. Her organization raised implementation questions about ODFW’s e‑license system (mobile app and online purchases) and about the costs of securely maintaining records and data transfers. Patrick emphasized that implementation costs should not be placed on rate‑paying license holders and suggested state funding for technical work.

Rebecca Gladstone of the League of Women Voters followed with supportive comments and asked the committee to ensure that secure protocols, staff training and adequate resources accompany any expansion of automatic registration; she referenced ORS 247.018 and earlier statutory changes that extended automatic registration to the Oregon Health Authority.

No committee action or vote was recorded on the bill at the March 31 hearing.

Ending: The public hearing closed with requests for additional information about interface mechanics, data security, and funding to avoid imposing costs on license purchasers.","Senate Bill 1046 would extend Oregon’s automatic voter registration to people who register for hunting or fishing licenses through the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, with an operative date of June 1, 2027, according to the bill summary presented to the Senate Committee on Rules.",{"_32":88,"_34":35,"_36":37,"_38":89,"_40":90,"_42":91,"_44":92,"_46":93,"_48":94,"_50":95,"_52":96,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":97,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":98,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6619813,"Senate Bill 1014 would let political parties submit translated party statements to state voters pamphlet",224,693000,917000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2827189-8096fbc3a2cd27116ccf85c1440217f4&start=693&end=917","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2827189-8096fbc3a2cd27116ccf85c1440217f4/thumbnail_693000.jpg","/articles/6619813/Oregon/Senate-Bill-1014-would-let-political-parties-submit-translated-party-statements-to-state-voters-pamphlet","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6619813-edda079318a92f2b3ab808817c25d836/orig.mp4?Expires=1769747627&Signature=fXT~afBcGYRPNn67UF9~DHNtDcOekPZHJyKF4N9lI7Xu3MVe0nxg-j4AFoTsII7ACoxf6j1U1sk0u3onlY6DO0qjUuEmz~fJ0mjzWbcSjOITuxKnCyva9YPRIlokA5dddatSRFMp3oFcyfd~K~dYVnTCj~pjqX9u9gP7jxd-fxJtl5o2-TqM3oXkk6fH-1lJPHVjpY9zOdVF79oUU9JfL9DA4bbfBiTV4g8yqT6w88LMDxDTsQqGxW4i8cBqyZejEh~veFGRB0hjsfvQZvHmkJyIAr51wcmOieDDGuIfilRVyxU~0XW4gdVs~Kajg4JIk-wEZYdKXW4g3wROuX0toA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate Bill 1014, discussed March 31 before the Senate Committee on Rules, would require the Secretary of State to allow political party statements to be translated into any of the five most commonly spoken non-English languages in Oregon as listed by the Secretary of State. The bill’s summary presented to the committee sets an applicability date for translated state voters' pamphlets distributed on or after Jan. 31, 2026.

Proponents from multiple organizations testified in favor. Candy Emmons, deputy director of the Democratic Party of Oregon, told the committee parties were “thrilled” at prior expansion of pamphlet translation and urged the committee to permit parties the option to provide translated statements. Lamar Wise of Oregon AFSCME and Jessica Madavia of ACELE of Oregon (a civil-rights organization) supported the measure as increasing accessibility and civic participation for voters who prefer languages other than English. Rebecca Gladstone of the League of Women Voters of Oregon supported the concept but asked for clearer statutory language about the Secretary of State’s role and the bill’s prescription that the Secretary “must include” translations while also “allowing” them to be included.

A committee question clarified cost responsibility: witnesses said translations of party statements would be at the parties’ expense and not mandated. No committee vote or amendment was recorded during the public hearing.

Ending: The bill advanced to a public hearing and closed testimony the same day; committee members raised drafting clarity and statutory language that the League asked the drafters to clarify in later work.

","Senate Bill 1014 would let political parties submit translated versions of their party statements to appear in the state voters' pamphlet in any of the five most commonly spoken non‑English languages, with implementation targeted to pamphlets distributed on or after Jan. 31, 2026.",{"_32":100,"_34":35,"_36":37,"_38":101,"_40":102,"_42":103,"_44":104,"_46":105,"_48":106,"_50":107,"_52":108,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":109,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":110,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6619818,"Senate Bill 578 would align county voters' pamphlet deadlines with state dates to prevent uneven candidate exclusion",222,58000,280000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2827189-8096fbc3a2cd27116ccf85c1440217f4&start=58&end=280","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2827189-8096fbc3a2cd27116ccf85c1440217f4/thumbnail_58000.jpg","/articles/6619818/Oregon/Senate-Bill-578-would-align-county-voters-pamphlet-deadlines-with-state-dates-to-prevent-uneven-candidate-exclusion","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6619818-ea36877029c42d83e369a77ce26da712/orig.mp4?Expires=1769747627&Signature=U4ztKn2n8D-wtkJ0dqwq5Uu9EFWwcZjDuHV5bD-DkjabQgsvERSJGOzbs7O6cNksJkle92DX2VE~1CcVO~oR6gtImP1M3p9-Efm6t-V2JdE7T5Q2QVRM~gzp290Eqe2npuCfxP8K97o~x-AjAgtE9rsd2cgvIpoEW7tK~pd0Q2-e4M~PPsjzXnsER7kSqiVj0EtGAMPvYeTMG2NMco12vJXuRkK~u6KjjxsexRDVh7lGtqqXdM6qLh-zoo3WkPkX-OVXpbe9BWmp7Iw4cfbRSDpjJeBJOMlv4-s6duI~41qQZF3hX1~VEGkWKUvIDpoaI7-oweTDfwndaga7d14CZg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Sen. Lou Frederick (D-District 22) introduced Senate Bill 578 on March 31, saying the measure would set a uniform filing date for candidate portraits and statement submissions to county voters' pamphlets by adopting the state's filing date and removing county-level discretion. The measure also directs the Secretary of State to set, by rule, deadlines for special elections or elections other than the primary and general election and includes an effective date provision tied to legislative adjournment.

Supporters told the Senate Committee on Rules that the current patchwork of deadlines creates a real barrier to candidates, particularly first-time and rural candidates. Kim Smith of Jefferson County said she and several other local candidates missed county deadlines despite relying on the Secretary of State’s candidate handbook; she and others testified that the handbook does not make the county exceptions easy to find. Darren Ash of La Pine and Tom Powers of Multnomah County elections also testified, arguing the change would improve consistency for voters and give elections staff more time to process statements.

Frederick told the committee the problem affects some cities split across two counties and other rural communities, where a candidate can appear in the voters' pamphlet in one county but be omitted in the other because of the earlier local deadline. He said the bill is a “simple fix” to align county deadlines with the statewide date published by the Secretary of State.

Tom Powers, speaking for Multnomah County elections, described the operational benefit: consistent deadlines would allow county elections offices to better manage high volumes of filings and meet statutory mailing and printing deadlines. Amy and other testifiers raised that special elections and the state’s e-filing and processing timelines should be considered in rulemaking.

No formal committee action or vote was taken at this public hearing; the committee received testimony and closed the public hearing on SB 578 the same day.

Ending: The measure remained at the public hearing stage; committee members did not move to a vote during the March 31 hearing and no amendments or votes were recorded on the transcript.","Sen. Lou Frederick (D-District 22) introduced Senate Bill 578 to require county voters' pamphlet portrait and statement filing deadlines to match the statewide filing date, after witnesses from rural counties told the Senate Committee on Rules that inconsistent local deadlines have caused candidates to be omitted from county pamphlets.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Heated public hearing on SB 2 10: sponsors seek voter referral to require in‑person election day voting and photo ID; hundreds testified

Senate Bill 1046 would expand automatic voter registration to hunting and fishing license transactions

Senate Bill 1014 would let political parties submit translated party statements to state voters pamphlet

Senate Bill 578 would align county voters' pamphlet deadlines with state dates to prevent uneven candidate exclusion