We won.
This is what winning a policy fight looks like. There's so much more to do.
When the Oregon legislature voted overwhelmingly to recriminalize hard drugs, we won, “big time,” to quote a former vice presidential candidate. You’ll be excused if you missed the win - it is, after all, a foreign concept for many of us.
Pause. Reflect. We. Won.
“We” are a ragtag coalition of liberals, moderates, conservatives and, most importantly, normal people who aren’t terribly concerned with defining their political leanings. We are the Oregonians who have anguished at the fentanyl-stooped state of our state and understood something must change. We acknowledged reality, spoke our minds, organized and leaned on our elected officials until they couldn’t say no.
We “won” because hard drug decriminalization, the most obviously failed policy experiment in Oregon’s modern history, is no longer the law of our land. Because we have taken the first big step toward restoring order in our state. The recriminalization bill the Governor is now expected to sign is far from perfect, but it is a step toward restoring order in our state. It is, finally, this:
What is needed is for government actors in Oregon to promote policies that directionally, consistently and loudly encourage Oregonians to act responsibly. Those policies should include making it more difficult for people to sleep, and often to die, on city streets; more difficult for people to possess hard drugs that render them incapable of personal responsibility and ultimately kill them; more beneficial to work, less comfortable not to.
Back in January 2023, this here Oregon Roundup pivoted to original news coverage and opinion focused on fixing Oregon’s “blind spot.” My hypothesis was that Oregon voters would change the state if they had a more complete understanding of the facts. In the last 14 months, the Roundup has broken lots and lots of stories that otherwise would have remained unknown to Oregon voters. I’m especially proud of our extensive coverage of Measure 110. By rough count, we’ve published 93 stories or podcasts at least in part about the measure.
“We,” here, means you and me. I do the research and writing. You read or listen. You share with your friends. Most importantly, you think. And hopefully, you choose to kick in a little financial support to keep this thing going.
Doing what I do with the Roundup takes a lot of time. Original news coverage is hard. Listening to hours of committee meetings to understand the extent to which paid Measure 110 advocates co-opted state functions is both unpleasant and metaphysically painful. Digging through academic studies and the conflict of interest policies of preeminent medical journals to show the co-opting was not confined to Oregon’s borders takes time. But there is no replacement in political discourse for uncovering and telling people relevant stuff they did not know before. We’ve done that. I believe we’ve done that more than any other publication when it comes to Measure 110.
If you’re already a paid subscriber, thank you! If you’re not yet, please take a moment to consider whether you’d like to be one. What we are doing together at the Oregon Roundup is really cool. No one’s ever tried to provide original news coverage - real, honest, researched and sourced news coverage - from a center-right perspective in Oregon.
That’s what we’re doing. It’s having an effect. We won, for once.
Thank you!
Jeff
I hope you are right.
After 44 years of attending the "benighted building" I saw something else.
While it does feel very good to kick sand in the face of the Drug Policy Alliance and the incessant caterwauling of all those entitled "non profits" who flooded the few public hearings and submitted testimony made it clear THEY hated HB 4002, other than it backing six inches off Measure 110 it has little to say for it.
Drug Court, when it worked, did so because it had the ability to THREATEN the loss of gun rights, hunting rights, even the right to serve on a jury (not that many covet such a right). But in their zeal to package up ANYTHING in response to overwhelming public revulsion at the scam they had been sold just 4 years ago with Measure 110, HB 4002 does VERY little.
No fines, or any kind of financial penalties allowed...ever. Not that the state made much money, but the whole idea of peeling someone off addiction is to force them to make better decisions, not to make NO decisions. It's an "unclassified misdemeanor" which is the way the state signals judges, DAs, cops, everyone just how serious the charge is...not very. At most a minor shoplifting charge.
What follows is dull but critical. It is the missive the Association of Oregon Counties sent to all 36 elected Sheriffs, DAs, and County Commissioners, keeping in mind that for all their strum and drang it is actually the COUNTIES that finance and fund non-felony criminal enforcement (the counties pay for the sheriffs, jails, and all the DA's costs EXCEPT the salary of the elected DA)
There are THREE levels of inaction built into HB 4002 to avoid inconveniencing fentanyl addicts; a whole new made up one that doesn't involve cops they have called "deflection," then two existing "off ramps" (new buzzwords of the way) diversion, and conditional discharge. The last two were used for decades as a way to avoid ever finalizing a conviction as part of drug court, but always lurking was the possibility that if the addict kept using, kept failing to show, that the court could eventually pull the trigger and create some REAL consequences (not state prison or even jail longer than 30 days) but some seriously disruptive intervention.
But while the language is bureaucratese at its worst, the intent of what follows is clear to cops and DAs; "back off and don't do anything."
We will apply for funding, if needed, to the ‘Improving People’s Access to Community-based Treatment, Supports and Services’ (IMPACTS) Grant Review Committee. We also agree to participate in the IMPACTS data collection and review process. If barriers other than funding prevent programs from being stood up, we will work in partnership with the legislature and the IMPACTS Grant Review Committee to identify solutions by September 1, 2024. As soon as funding is received, we will work to immediately stand-up programs in our communities. Once developed, funded, and stood up, our law enforcement partners commit to divert individuals whom are facing a PCS-U charge based off objective evidence-based national standards. Additionally, our District Attorney will divert all successful participants away from the criminal justice system and not pursue the PCS-U charge.
(note - a PCS-U means a charge of Possession of Controlled Substance, unclassified misdemeanor).
Thank you Mr. Eager for your relentless pursuing of investigative journalism, a lost art today and not popular in many social circles.
I can't share in your enthusiasm for the passage of 4002 however. I see it as far too little and implementation as too far down the road. When implemented I don't expect to see any change in hospitalizations or deaths.
Through my rose colored glasses I was hoping for a complete reversal of 110. Hard stop. I guess there's too many pols taking Soros money to expect that to have happened.