Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Bill Limits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House rules committee hears competing views on bill limits in HB 4,002
Summary
Supporters including House Speaker Julie Fahey argued HB 4,002 would improve transparency and reduce staff strain by capping draft requests; opponents said limits as written risk stifling minority voices and proposed limiting drafting to elected legislators instead. Public testimony closed; no committee vote on the bill was taken today.
House Speaker Julie Fahey urged the House Committee on Rules to approve House Bill 4,002, saying the measure would restore clarity and allow the Legislature to focus on proposals that deserve public scrutiny. "In the 2025 legislative session, a total of 5,475 bills and resolutions were drafted by legislative counsel. And 3,466 were introduced," Fahey told the committee in support of the Dash 4 amendment, adding that only "702 of those bills passed through both chambers." The Dash 4 amendment sets new numerical limits, including allowing individual legislators to request up to 30 measures, setting most deadline-bound committees at 10 requests (with five additional bipartisan requests), exempting Ways and Means, and capping executive-branch requests at 100.
Supporters framed the bill as a response to workload and transparency problems. "One of my goals is to restore the faith of Oregonians in our process," Representative Mark Goins said in support, describing long hours for bipartisan staff and urging the committee to act.
Opponents said the bill, as drafted, would concentrate power and reduce the ability of minority members and constituents to bring ideas forward. "Efficiency… is no equal to liberty," Representative Paul Evans told the committee. He argued the bill would allow a small set of leaders to determine which ideas receive consideration. Representative Werner Reschke said he does not oppose limits in principle but urged that any drafting limit be restricted to elected legislators only, citing the Oregon Constitution's vesting of legislative power in the legislative assembly. Senator David Brock Smith warned that the proposal would disproportionately disadvantage minority or rural representation, presenting numerical scenarios he said would favor the majority party.
Committee members pressed proponents on implementation risks and unintended consequences: could omnibus bills or amendment strategies be used to circumvent limits, and how would enforcement or reporting be handled? Fahey and supporters acknowledged complexities and said some ideas — such as charging drafting to a legislator-specific budget or more detailed tracking by Legislative Counsel — would require structural changes to how drafting work is billed and tracked.
The committee closed public testimony on HB 4,002 at the end of the morning's session and did not take a committee vote on the bill; the chair moved to subsequent work-session items on the agenda.
If the committee considers amendments or takes further action, committee documents and future work sessions will specify next steps.
