Oregon committee hears bipartisan push for limits on bills to curb backlog and staff strain

House Committee on Rules members heard more than two hours of testimony May 29 on House Bill 2,006, a measure that would cap how many measures members, committees and some state offices can request in an odd-year long session.

Proponents said the current volume of introduced measures makes it harder for the public and lawmakers to follow and for staff to provide timely analyses. "This is not merely a procedural change, it is necessary step to protect the integrity and effectiveness of our legislative process," State Senator Janine Salmon told the committee in support of the bill.

The bill as filed would limit individual legislators to 25 measures in a long session and cap committee bills at 15; it also would place a 400-measure limit on the governor and state agencies. Supporters framed the proposal as an effort to improve transparency, focus committee time on higher‑priority items and reduce costs for legislative counsel and fiscal and policy offices.

Former Senator Tim Canope and others briefed committee members on comparative rules in other states and a prior Oregon experiment with similar limits. Testimony cited an all‑time high of more than 3,400 introduced measures this session and said the bill is modeled on bipartisan legislation considered in 2001. Supporters pointed to other states that limit bill introductions and noted those regimes vary widely.

Opponents focused on fairness and minority‑party access. Senator David Brock Smith and several House members argued the proposed structure—and associated exceptions for committee chairs and presiding officers—could give the majority disproportionate control over which concepts advance. "This is an attack on the minority party," Senator Brock Smith said, arguing that drafting limits and the current committee process already leave minority members with little control over hearings.

Several members asked for refinements. Representative Elmer and others pressed sponsors on how the proposal would treat committee bills, executive‑branch requests and the threshold of 400 measures for state agencies; sponsors acknowledged the 400 number was copied from a prior bill and said the working group could revise numerical limits.

No formal committee action was recorded on HB 2,006 during the meeting. Committee members agreed the topic will require further negotiation on exceptions, thresholds and guardrails to preserve minority participation and to avoid unintended shifts of drafting power to presiding officers.