Bipartisanship has moment in most self-serving of ways

When newsroom e-mail boxes begin filling up with our-side congratulatory and their-side condemnatory press releases from Ashley Kuenzi, Jill Bakken, Mack Smith and Elizabeth Cronen, we never fail to offer a hearty thanks. It means another Oregon legislative session is grinding to a merciful end.

No, we don’t know these people either.

But they are paid to press the views of their legislative overseers on the press and public as things finally begin to wind down in Salem. And they are always quite sure where the credit and blame belongs, despite finding themselves inevitably pointing fingers in different directions.

Being in the driver’s seat, Democrats tend to celebrate launching bold new initiatives, while Republicans often celebrate digging in to hold the line or slow the train wherever possible.

This session, though, members of the opposing parties found themselves in broad agreement on one Salem perennial — campaign finance reform. You’ll never hear them admit it in public, but they’re against it. Totally, thoroughly, and ardently against it.

Asked why he was so smitten with robbing banks, prolific heist-master Willie Sutton smugly replied, “Because that’s where the money is.”

Big Labor fills that bill for Democrats and Big Business for Republicans. And neither party can seem to find a court-proof way to cut the other off unilaterally.

Oregon is one of only five states placing no limits on corporate contributions to political candidates one of only 12 placing no limits on individual contributions. As a result, it is a constant national leader in political contributions per capita.

You can’t blame Oregon voters.

They tried to curb campaign spending with Measure 6 in 1994, only to see it struck down by the Oregon Supreme Court and Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

They tried again with Measure 47 in 2006, but the Oregon Supreme Court struck it down as well. And when the court reversed that decision more than a decade later, the attorney general ruled the reversal insufficient to belatedly revive the measure.

The voters responded with thundering 78% percent approval of a new campaign finance reform initiative, Measure 107, in 2020. It did not actually impose limits, but set the stage by making imposition by cities, counties and the state itself constitutional.

With that canon shot echoing in their ears, and the threat of a new statewide ballot measure looming if they didn’t take immediate action, legislators adopted a package during the 2024 election-year session to close troublesome loopholes in previous efforts and establish some truly meaningful new limits. They gave it a 2027 effective date to allow plenty of time for full and fair implementation.

All well and good, right? No, not exactly.

Campaign finance developed into such a daunting fiscal and technical challenge for our political leaders that they proposed a measure in this year’s short session, House Bill 4018, delaying implementation for another four years.

And they didn’t stop there. They managed to rally bipartisan support for an array of new loopholes, stuffed into HB 4018 before it was sent to the governor for signing, destined to render the new limits meaningless.

The Oregonian, the state’s largest and most influential newspaper, captured the essence when it thundered editorially, “But the real message behind legislators’ passing of HB 4018 is this: Keep the money coming.”

Public advocacy groups have spent decades championing the cause, but were excluded from the work group producing HB 4018. That should tell you all you need to know about the underhanded intent.

By all rights, Gov. Tina Kotek should veto this sellout, but we have no confidence she can muster the courage. None at all, sad to say.