|
To no one's surprise, House Bills 2002 and 2005 have passed the House. This process did not pass without a fight, as all Republican Representatives were on the Floor debating for hours.
 |
|
HB 2002 was heard Monday May 1st 2023, in which Floor took over 8 hours to hear, discuss, and vote on this bill which passed 36-23. All but one of the Republican Representatives were a firm ''NO" vote.
HB 2002: By clicking on this link, you will be directed to the recorded video of the debate. (The vote takes place at 9:20:21)
|
I am strongly opposed to House Bill 2002B. It sends an incredibly wrong and damaging message to our society and will make Oregon a pariah not only in the United States but across the world.
Make no mistake, Mr. Speaker: I value human life and I feel empathy and compassion for every single human being – I try and understand how difficult and confusing a life can be for children and young people. I try and understand the difficulties pregnant women are experiencing when questioning whether they are capable of being mothers. I try and understand the difficulties transgender people are going through and experiencing.
However, the path this bill is pursuing is not the right one and it will end up doing more damage than good. HB 2002B divests, dilutes, and undermines the sacrosanct trust that a parent and a child need to have. It weakens the bond between the parents and their children.
Section 8 of the bill states that: “A minor of any age may give consent, without the consent of a parent or guardian of the minor, to receive reproductive health care information and services.”
We are entering unchartered territory here in Oregon. No state or jurisdiction has ever attempted to make abortions so unrestricted as this House is attempting to do right now. This is a radical and extremist bill.
It is so extreme that there is not a single jurisdiction, country or state that allowed minors of any age to receive abortion without parental consent.
I will repeat: There is not a single jurisdiction on this planet Earth that allows for a minor to obtain abortion without the parental consent or knowledge. None.
On top of that, House Bill 2002B explicitly prevents doctors and medical professionals from informing the parents that an abortion took place without a written consent from the child.
I will quote the bill on page 4, line 40 through 41: “A physician may not disclose to the minor’s parent or legal guardian information regarding the information and services provided.”
If we pass this bill, I am dreading the day when a minor is sexually abused, impregnated, and then forced to have an abortion under the guidance of the predator.
Should we prevent medical professionals from disclosing this information to parents or law enforcement – for that matter – we are taking a huge step backwards. We are removing the institute of a mandatory reporter. We are leaving children vulnerable to child abuse and pedophilia.
There is an incredible amount of risk associated with providing a no-questions-asked abortion to minor children. It puts them at risk of predators and other nefarious actors.
HB 2002B invalidates parents and empowers abusers. It is a continuation of further government involvement in the private lives and relationships of parents and their children.
On top of these concerns, the bill also repeals ORS 167.820 – which is a criminal offense prohibiting Concealing the birth of an infant. ORS 167.820 states that “A person commits the crime of concealing the birth of an infant if the person conceals the corpse of a newborn child with intent to conceal the fact of its birth or to prevent a determination of whether it was born dead or alive.”
We should all ask: What purpose does this serve? Why are we removing this criminal act?
We should instead strengthen our laws to prevent crimes against children. Not the opposite. There is no reason to make our youngest children more vulnerable to criminals and predators.
The radical expansion of various medical procedures and treatments is also concerning. HB 2002B allows people under the age of 18 years old to undertake sterilization of their genitals.
That is extremely harmful and dangerous to our children. First, there is not enough research on this topic. We simply do not know the surrounding environment and consequences related to a minor obtaining these kinds of treatments.
In many instances, peer pressure, the impact of internet and the fact that this issue is debated in media and public discussion almost every day play a role.
As an educator and a school official with over 34 years of experience, I know firsthand how frequently children and teenagers make instant decisions without much thought or consideration --- and that’s completely okay because they are, well, children and teenagers.
I worry that the societal pressure and popularization of the topic of transgender issue can and does push many children to pursue sterilization and other medical procedures without the ability to pause and evaluate all options. We, as a society and elected leaders, need to be more mindful of the quiet encouragement of these treatment procedures among various interest groups.
This bill is dangerous, radical, and extreme. It sows divisions and polarization. It pits parents against medical professionals, creates opportunities for abusers and strips parents of their rights.
I strongly urge my Democratic colleagues to reject HB 2002B.
Rep. Boomer Wright
 |
|
HB 2005 was heard on Tuesday May 2nd, 2023. This bill aimed to infringe on our 2nd Amendment Right. The debate about this bill lasted for almost 4 hours. Ultimately the bill passed the House with a 35-24 vote, with all Republican Representatives voting against it.
HB 2005: By clicking on this link, you will be directed to the recorded video of the debate. (The vote takes place at 3:34:55)
|
I stand in opposition to HB 2005. Gun free zones embolden criminals and invite crime, it discriminates against young people and violates their rights and Oregon Law, and it overregulates the longstanding tradition of gun ownership without addressing crime.
What stops an individual from entering a public building or any building with intent to harm others? Is it a sign, a policy, legislation, or is it a police or security officer or those with concealed permits who are willing to protect others and themselves. All we have to do is review past tragedies to answer that question. The majority of mass shootings have occurred in gun free zones.
We have the privilege to be protected by the Oregon State Police, security, and mental detectors. If gun free zones are an impediment to those who might harm members of this body, why do we have metal detectors, security, and police protecting us? We are not more important than the children in our schools in gun free zones? Isn’t government’s first responsibility to protect and serve those we represent? After all, the majority of mass shootings have occurred in gun free zones.
Mr. Speaker, 18–20-year-olds are “people” whose individual rights are protected by the Oregon State Constitution and the United States Constitution. The United State Supreme Court has upheld this, and found young adults have Second Amendment rights, just as they enjoy first and fourth amendment rights. Why have we wasted time, energy, and probably taxpayer money when this bill will be followed by lawsuits challenging the infringement of constitutional rights that prior rulings have overruled. Taxpayer money could be better used to reinforce security in our schools.
18-year-olds can serve in the military and go war to defend our country with firearms they would not be allowed to possess as a civilian in this bill. 18-year-old can get married. At 18 you can enter into a legally binding contract. At 18 years-old you can vote. At 18 years-old can serve on a jury of their peers. 18–20-year-olds are responsible people and should be respected as such, not punished.
The Second Amendment of the US Constitution states, “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
Article 1, Section 27 of the Oregon Constitution states” The people shall have the right to bear arms for the defense of themselves, and the State, but the Military shall be kept in strict subordination to civil power.”
Mr. Speaker, this bill unjustly discriminates against 18–20-year-old people and violates their rights as written in both the US and Oregon Constitution. Where is our equity. I suggest we vote no on discrimination and taking guaranteed rights away from our responsible young adults. Let’s get tough on crime, not young people who have done no wrong except being 18 to 20. This is nothing more than age discrimination and we have laws against that type of discrimination.
Rep. Boomer Wright
Capitol Phone: 503-986-1409
Capitol Address: 900 Court St NE, H-372, Salem, OR 97301
Email: Rep.BoomerWright@oregonlegislature.gov
Website: http://www.oregonlegislature.gov/wright
| 
