[PLUG-TALK] Do NOT extend the workplace smoking law

[Rich Shepard]

On Tue, 8 Mar 2005, glen e. p. ropella wrote:

> It's interesting to note that the house bill was sent to one committee on
> 2/7 and the senate bill was sent to a different committee on 2/11. Perhaps
> it shows my ignorance of the legislative process; but, it seems a bit like
> one hand not knowing what the other is doing. Perhaps it's just good
> political tactic? If it falters in one committee, then it still has a
> chance in the other? If it falters in the house, maybe it still has a
> chance in the senate?

   The bills were sponsored by committees, not individual legislators. The
Senate has a Commerce Committee, the House doesn't. So the House bill was
sponsored by the Health and Human Services Committee. Some bills are Joint
Resolutions which means that both the House and Senate are proposing the same
bill.

   Regardless of where a bill originates it must pass both the House and
Senate and be signed by the Governor before becoming law. I didn't read both
bills, but if each passes in its respective chamber then they are sent to a
joint committee to work out differences. The revised (called Embossed) bill
is then returned to each chamber for approval by both the Senate and the
House.

> Anyone with political savvy want to enlighten me on why what looks like the
> same bill is under two different names, in two different legislative
> bodies, going to two different committees?

   If you look on the legislature's web site you'll see that there are
different committees in each chamber. The House, for example, has a Water
Committee separate from the Natural Resources Committee. The Senate has a
Land and Environment Committee that covers the same types of issues.

   There are also 60 representatives and 30 senators. Both chambers have
multiple differences, not the least of which (this session) is the Ds control
the senate and the Rs control the house.

   It can be a lot of fun to watch what goes on from a front-row seat. Go
attend a hearing sometime. Hang around the halls (or have coffee in Cafe
Today down in the basement) and listen to the political process at work. I
ended up there today because the person with whom I had an appointment forgot
that he had to testify at a hearing. So we met in the cafeteria when he had
the time and I also sat in on the hearing for a while.

   One thing to keep in mind about all this: _everyone_ is a "special
interest", and _everyone_ has lobbyists pushing their agenda. It ain't just
the big, ugly, capitalist corporations down there, it's also the
NGO/environmental community, cities (yes, Portland hires its own lobbyist to
push its agenda), school districts, the state employees union, you name it.
Go find the list of registered lobbyists on the state's web site and you'll
learn that there are industries and special interest groups you never knew
existed. :-)

   Years ago I learned politics from Molly Ivins. She wrote, "politics can
make you laugh, cry or throw up. The latter two are uncomfortable so you
might as well do the former." She's absolutely right. When you understand
that it's a game (with a very well-defined set of rules) it can be a lot of
fun to play. Sometimes you win and sometimes you lose. Then you try again.
Two years ago I came up with a legislative concept, found sponsors (both Ds
and Rs, senators and representatives), lobbied for it, testified at the
public hearing and had it signed into law. This year I proposed two concepts
but neither seems to have made it to the starting line. The important one --
to me -- was removing the restriction that a business have at least two
employees before they can join a group health plan. Oh, well. I'll start
working on that once this session is over and hope to have it locked up by
next session.

Rich

-- 
Dr. Richard B. Shepard, President
Applied Ecosystem Services, Inc. (TM)
<http://www.appl-ecosys.com>   Voice: 503-667-4517   Fax: 503-667-8863