Oregon Process for Legislative Review of Administrative Rules, Ballot Measure 2 (2000)
This measure failed at the November 2000 General Election.
Amends Constitution: Creates Process For Requiring Legislature To Review Administrative Rules
Larry George, David Hunnicutt, and Jason Williams
 Supporters of the measure don't approve of voters being locked out of the process of the state legislature. They argued that if citizens may propose changes to state statutes or the constitution through the initiative process, then they should be able to do the same with the administrative rules.
Chief petitioner Larry George of Citizens for Accountability in Administrative Rules urged people to vote yes on the measure, stating:
"Measure 2 creates an open, fair process that allows the citizens to require the legislature to review and vote on administrative rules. Measure 2 is fair, open, and citizen driven. The special interests will hate it, but Oregonians should demand it."
Some supporters pointed out how the administrative rules contradict certain laws in Oregon. Dennis R. Tuuri of the Parents Education Association wanted voters to be aware of these contradictions: "Go to the Oregon Revised Statutes (Section 657.072) and you'll find the law says nonprofit organizations don't have to pay unemployment taxes. But go to the Administrative Rules of this section, and you'll find that these groups DO have to pay unemployment taxes! Observe the law and you're in violation of the rules, which have the force of law!"
The Oregon Education Coalition argued that Oregon needs a fair process by which citizens can get the legislature to review administrative rules that aren't productive, saying, "What most people don't know is that a major obstacle to improving our schools is the Byzantine maze of administrative rules written by un-elected bureaucrats. These rules have tied the hands of Oregon's school administrators and Oregon's thousands of talented and competent classroom teachers. These rules have the force of law, yet were never voted upon by the legislature".
 Some opposition, such as the League of Women Voters, considered the measure to be unecessary clutter in the Oregon Constitution, also citing the measure as "dangerous" because it would only require 10,000 signatures to petition the legislature for a review of the administrative rules. They also maintained that "Administrative rules are written to prevent agencies from arbitrarily or capriciously interpreting statute." and that "Current law provides both legislative and legal remedies to citizens believing an agency has exceeded its authority".
The ACLU of Oregon defended the current open process of rule making with public hearings in Oregon, where citizens work with public agencies to come up with "responsible" rules. They argued that Measure 2 would allow rules created in an open process to be nullified behind closed doors. They also defended the separation of powers within the government and said the measure wrongly gave the legislature the power to override executive branch decisions without requiring a vote of both houses of the legislature.
Most opposition agreed that the measure was unecessary, as there were already ways to review rules and plenty of "checks and balances" to the administrative process. They also argued that the measure could mean hundreds of rules that protect the public and the environment are repealed without any kind of vote from citizens or the Legislature. Many environmental groups and businesses urged voters to defeat the measure.
Some others who opposed the measure are:
- Governor (in 2000) John Kitzhaber, M.D.
- Oregon Environmental Council
- Oregon Community Protection PAC
- Oregon Shores Conservation Coalition
- Oregon Parks Association
- Oregon 2000 ballot measures
- List of Oregon ballot measures
- 2000 ballot measures
- Procedures for qualifying an initiative in Oregon
- Laws governing the initiative process in Oregon
- Oregon signature requirements
|state ballot measure article is a stub. You can help people learn by expanding it.|