“The Uphill, The Roadblock, and The Detour”
A session recap from the super minority trenches
Dear Friends,
As the 2025 legislative session comes to a close, I want to thank you for taking the time—despite your busy lives—to stay interested and informed about what’s happening in Salem. Serving in a super minority means the road is steep—but that doesn’t stop us from trying to climb it. This session, I promoted transparency, fiscal responsibility, and policies that support—not punish—Oregon’s families, small businesses, and taxpayers.
In this newsletter, I’ll walk you through what was accomplished, what my political friends and I pushed for, and what we’re up against. Because the truth is, Oregon deserves better—and needs participation from people who don’t vote because they think it doesn’t matter. It does. And we all live with the consequences.
Even in the minority, we introduced and supported legislation that would have made Oregon more affordable, more accountable, and more just for the people who’ve earned it most. Highlights include:
-
SB 385A – Would have created consequences for knowingly filing false child abuse reports, protecting families from weaponized accusations. It passed the Senate Judiciary committee and Senate floor without a single no vote. It died in House Judiciary without explanation.
-
SB 387 – A long-overdue update to Oregon’s property tax exemption for 100% disabled veterans. When first implemented, the exemption nearly covered the full value of a modest home. Today, it barely scratches the surface. This bill would have raised the exemption to $150,000 for fully disabled veterans and created a 90% exemption for those deemed unemployable. It unanimously passed the Senate Veterans, Emergency Management, Federal and World Affairs. However, once again, it stalled—while millions are spent on programs for people who aren’t even here legally.
-
SB 1006 – Would have required that only legislators or committees can introduce bills—not unelected bureaucrats or state agencies. A simple fix to restore legislative accountability.
-
SB 1007 – Streamlined the process for wrongfully incarcerated Oregonians to receive compensation and a formal finding of innocence. Senator Thatcher co-chief sponsored this bill to ensure justice doesn’t stop when the state realizes it made a mistake. Oregon needs to help restore the individual that did the time without committing the crime.
-
SB 1158 – Recognized gold and silver as legal tender in Oregon and exempted their exchange from certain taxes. A bold step toward financial sovereignty and inflation protection. It was granted a hearing but died without further action.
Despite bipartisan support or public demand, several common-sense reforms were blocked or ignored. These include:
-
SB 1006 – Legislative Accountability Reform. Our bill requiring named sponsorship for all introduced legislation received a hearing but was denied a work session—despite bipartisan support. I’ll be bringing it back as a priority bill in 2026.
-
SB 1123 – Permitting Reform. Efforts to streamline Oregon’s permitting process to help small businesses and homeowners was met with resistance, despite widespread support.
-
SB 539 – Tax Relief Proposal. Modest attempts to roll back increases or provide offsets for working Oregonians and small business owners gained no traction in Ways & Means.
-
SB 1007 – Compensation for the wrongfully convicted. This bill would have ensured that Oregonians who were incarcerated and later exonerated receive both financial compensation and a formal declaration of innocence. I co-chief sponsored this bill because justice doesn’t stop at release—it requires restoration. But the Legislature failed to fund it. And if the Legislature won’t fund it, justice isn’t served—it’s just words on paper.
 |
|
Short video SB 1006 Three Branches of Government. Video Link
The Video is educational, entertaining and worth watching.
|
Unfortunately, some policies passed this session will set Oregon further back—especially for our job creators and housing sector.
🔻 SB 916 – Unemployment Benefits for Striking Workers
This bill, which passed both chambers and now awaits the Governor’s signature, allows public and private employees to collect unemployment benefits while on strike—a move that many believe:
- Undermines the very purpose of striking (which carries personal economic risk)
- Adds pressure to Oregon’s $6.4 billion Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund
- Encourages longer and more frequent walkouts
This sets a ridiculous precedent for Oregon’s fiscal sustainability and economic reliability.
🔻 SB 426 – General Contractor and Property Owner Liability
Now signed into law, this bill:
- Holds general contractors and even property owners liable if subcontractors fail to pay their workers
- Creates a “rebuttable presumption” that all laborers are employees unless proven otherwise
- Offers no exemption even if the contractor has already paid the subcontractor in full
- This is a shocking shift in responsibility for those who follow the rules—while those who don’t are rewarded with a second check from someone else’s pocket
- The subcontractors who most often fail to pay their workers are labor contractors who are not required to register with the Construction Contractors Board (CCB)
- I introduced SB 1200, which would require labor contractors working on construction projects to register with the CCB—opening up avenues of redress through administrative law when there are complaints of wrongdoing.
Back when Republicans held greater influence in the Legislature—particularly in the early 2000s—Oregon ranked in the top half of states for business climate, with a reputation for innovation, low regulatory burden, and a competitive tax structure.
Today, Oregon ranks a dismal 44th in the nation in Chief Executive’s 2025 Best & Worst States for Business—beating out only Washington, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Illinois, New York, and California. That’s down from 43rd in 2024 and 36th in 2023.
According to the Oregon Business & Industry Competitiveness Index, the state now ranks in the bottom tier for:
- Tax burden
- Regulatory complexity
- Workforce availability
And the consequences are real. A University of Oregon study commissioned by Business Oregon found that Oregon has lost thousands of jobs and billions in private investment over the past five years, with up to $3 billion in capital flowing to other states. Nearly a quarter of surveyed businesses reported being approached by out-of-state recruiters—and 68% of those either moved or expanded elsewhere. The study warns that unless Oregon improves its business climate, the exodus will continue.
Oregon has lost major employers like Precision Castparts, Daimler Trucks, and Dutch Bros, which recently moved its headquarters to Arizona, citing the state’s “toxic environment” for job creators. Here’s a look at just a few of the businesses that have left or scaled back since the early 2000s—and what they took with them:
-
Dutch Bros – Moved HQ to Phoenix; Oregon lost access to over $1.28 billion in annual revenue and countless regional jobs
-
Tektronix – Relocated HQ to North Carolina; once Oregon’s largest private employer
-
Jeld-Wen – Closed its Chiloquin plant (128 jobs lost) and moved HQ out of state
-
Columbia Sportswear – Bypassed Oregon, investing $4 million and 175 new jobs in Kentucky
-
REI, Keen, and Adobe – Downsized or left the Portland metro area entirely (state-level job and revenue loss data is currently unavailable)
-
Vacasa and Radius Recycling – Acquired by out-of-state firms, bringing uncertainty to Oregon operations
-
Portland’s commercial sector – Hit a 35% vacancy rate; major downtown spaces now dubbed “ghost towers”
-
Nike – Announced layoffs of approximately 740 employees at its Beaverton HQ in early 2025
-
Intel – Oregon’s largest private employer, will lay off 15% to 20% of its factory workforce starting mid-July, affecting thousands of working Oregonians
As Senate Republican Leader Daniel Bonham put it: “At some point, this stops being bad luck and starts being a pattern. Oregon is stuck in a doom loop of bloated bureaucracy, endless regulations, one of the highest tax burdens in the nation, and leadership that drives businesses away instead of attracting them.”
Oregon’s economic decline isn’t just about bad policy—it’s about who’s making the policy. And when you look at the backgrounds of those in charge, the disconnect becomes painfully clear.
A review of Oregon’s current legislative leadership—especially committee chairs overseeing business, labor, and economic development—reveals a troubling pattern:
Very few Democratic legislators have owned or operated a private-sector business, particularly in trades, construction, or retail
- Most come from public sector, nonprofit, or legal backgrounds—valuable in some contexts, but often disconnected from the realities of running a business
- For example, the House Committee on Labor and Workplace Standards, which advanced SB 426, is chaired by individuals with no direct experience managing payroll, hiring employees, or navigating Oregon’s permitting maze
- In the Senate, similar disconnects exist on the Committee on Housing and Development, where complex land use and housing policy is often shaped by members with no hands-on background in construction, permitting, or private development
One of the few exceptions? Senator Mark Meek, a Democrat and actual small business owner who ran a real estate firm and served on economic development commissions. He’s the rare voice in his caucus who understands what it means to meet a payroll and survive in Oregon’s regulatory jungle. When he brings practical insight and firsthand experience into policy discussions, instead of engaging with his perspective, leadership too often sidelines him. Most recently, he was removed from the Senate Transportation Committee just days before a hearing on what would become the largest tax increase in Oregon history—a bill he was expected to oppose in committee. Rather than improve the legislation or reckon with real-world consequences, the majority replaced him with a more compliant vote to advance the plan. It’s a telling sign: instead of crafting sound, realistic policy, they choose political convenience over credibility.
Legislators creating economic policy without business experience is like a chef designing a menu without ever having cooked a meal—they may dream up delicious ideas but lack the practical know-how to make them a reality.
So why are we continually choosing people with no business experience to write the rules for Oregon’s economy? Does this sound like a smart or practical way in which to govern our society? Do you call a plumber when you need your car fixed? Well, that’s just stupid and poor leadership if you really think about doing things right and what’s best for Oregon. This certainly isn’t the Oregon way I know.
As Senate Republican Leader Daniel Bonham put it:
“Oregon’s anti-business climate, high taxes, and housing restrictions... are strangling opportunity. It’s not a lack of money. It’s a lack of leadership.”
And Rep. Dwayne Yunker didn’t mince words either:
“Democrats have taxed, regulated, and micromanaged this state into decline—and now they want to point the finger at Washington. Give me a break.”
This isn’t about partisanship—it’s about competence. When lawmakers with no business background pass laws that punish responsible contractors or reward striking workers with unemployment benefits, it’s not just misguided—it’s reckless
Most Oregonians agree on the need to relieve traffic congestion, improve road safety, and make our transportation system more efficient. But the proposal Democrats brought forward did little to address those core priorities. Instead, it funneled billions into costly partisan projects that had little to do with fixing roads or reducing commute times—and everything to do with advancing a political agenda.
Following the collapse of Oregon’s business climate, the failure of House Bill 2025—the largest proposed tax increase in state history—was a clear signal that Oregonians have had enough. The $11.7 billion proposal would have imposed crushing new taxes and fees on working families, small businesses, and the trucking industry, all while rewarding the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) with a bloated budget despite its dismal track record.
Let’s be clear: ODOT has not earned a raise. A recent independent review revealed the agency is plagued by high staff turnover, decades-old financial software, cost overruns, and chronic delays. In one glaring example, the cost of the I-205 Abernethy Bridge project ballooned from $248 million to $815 million. And in 2025, ODOT admitted to a billion-dollar budget forecasting error—a mistake that would have bankrupted any private business.
Yet HB 2025 would have doubled down on failure:
-
$11.7 billion in new taxes over ten years—more than double the last transportation package and nearly as much as the controversial CAT tax.
-
A 350% increase in the car sales tax, a tripling of payroll taxes for transit, and accelerated gas tax hikes—all while Oregon families face record inflation and economic uncertainty.
-
A 37% increase in trucking costs, raising the average cost per truck in Oregon to $51,288, more than double the national average.
-
An estimated 16,392 fewer jobs, $2.5 billion drop in GDP, and $4.2 billion in lost business sales by 2030.
And what would Oregonians get in return? Not safer roads. Not better accountability. Just more bureaucracy and more money funneled into a transit system that fewer and fewer people are using.
-
Bike sales have stagnated, with Oregon’s regressive $15 bike tax raising just $833,000 annually—barely a rounding error in the state’s transportation budget.
Despite a legislatively funded audit recommending sweeping reforms, HB 2025 included only one of those changes. It failed to create an independent major projects committee, ignored project planning reforms, and did nothing to address ODOT’s toxic internal culture.
Despite these realities, HB 2025 ignored the most important recommendations from the legislatively funded audit, including:
Meanwhile, Democrats—who hold a supermajority in both chambers—continue to prioritize state agencies and political allies over the people they were elected to serve. Committee chairs with little to no business experience are steering Oregon’s economy off a cliff, and HB 2025 was just the latest example of that misguided leadership.
Thankfully, Republicans stood united. HB 3982, the Republican alternative, would have stabilized ODOT’s budget without raising taxes, redirected over $134 million from non-essential programs to core maintenance, and implemented real accountability measures.
This wasn’t just a policy win—it was a victory for every Oregonian who said “enough is enough.” But the story doesn’t end there.
Despite months of negotiations, HB 2025 ultimately failed to pass before the Legislature adjourned. Lawmakers left Salem without approving any transportation package, leaving the Oregon Department of Transportation with a projected $350 million budget shortfall and no clear path forward.
Governor Tina Kotek has since hinted at calling a special session to revisit the issue, stating that “unfinished business” remains and that she has “tools at [her] disposal” to bring lawmakers back to the Capitol.
Oregonians should stay alert. A special session could be called at any time—and with it, another attempt to push through a tax-heavy transportation plan. We’ll be watching closely and will continue to advocate for real reform, fiscal responsibility, and a transportation strategy that actually serves the people who keep Oregon moving.
As your State Senator, I take seriously my oath to uphold both the Constitution and the safety of Oregonians. That’s why I voted no on Senate Bill 243, the so-called Community Safety Firearms Act.
While its stated goal was to make communities safe from individuals with firearms, the bill misses the mark and completely fails to address the real causes of death in our state. Instead, it targets law-abiding citizens. Passing this bill means absolutely nothing to criminals except that it gives them greater knowledge of where there will be little resistance to their deadly intentions.
As Vice Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, I voted no on SB 243 in committee and testified publicly against it. Though I was not present for the final floor vote, my position was clear from the start: this bill is misguided, ineffective, and dangerous.
Besides banning bump stocks, etc. for law-abiding citizens – in other words, those who actually care about the law - SB 243 The bill also allows local governments to ban concealed carry in public buildings, despite the fact that concealed handgun license (CHL) holders are among the most law respecting members of society and can respond to a crisis quicker than the time it takes law enforcement to arrive on the scene.
Would you rather be rescued by someone who may be present at the time of an attack who is trained and carrying a weapon, or would you rather waste precious minutes waiting for law enforcement to maybe come to the rescue in time?
When it comes to stopping violence, CHL holders have been shown to stop active shooters more often than police in non–gun-free zones—and with fewer mistakes, including lower rates of accidentally shooting bystanders or being disarmed. Gun-free zones are a criminal’s ideal target.
According to a 2024 national report, CHL holders are convicted of any crime at rates as low as 2 to 12 per 100,000—compared to over 3,800 per 100,000 in the general population. In fact, in states like Florida and Texas, CHL holders are convicted at one-twelfth the rate of police officers.
A 2024 study found that CHL holders accounted for just 0.7% of all firearm-related homicides over a 15-year period. That means over 99% of gun homicides were committed by individuals without a concealed carry permit.
So why would we ban these responsible, concealed carry citizens from public buildings?
The answer is: we shouldn’t. It’s not just bad policy—it’s dangerous. Banning CHL holders from more and more public spaces creates soft targets, where law-abiding citizens are disarmed and criminals know they won’t face much resistance. As the Department of Homeland Security defines it, soft targets are “easily accessible, attract large numbers of people, and have limited security or protective measures in place.” That’s exactly the path SB 243 continues to take us down.
Disarming trained, vetted citizens in public buildings doesn’t make us safer. It makes us vulnerable. It’s wishful thinking to believe that criminals will obey a sign on a door. They won’t. But law-abiding CHL holders will—and that’s who this bill punishes.
Meanwhile, Oregon’s real public health crises remain unaddressed:
-
In 2023, Oregon recorded 1,833 overdose deaths—12 times the number of firearm homicides – from drugs being smuggled into our country by cartels and victims of cartels.
-
Suicide accounts for over 70% of firearm deaths in Oregon, with 656 total firearm-related deaths in 2022—most of them suicides, not homicides. Oregon continues to lag way behind other states on mental health care.
If this bill were truly about saving lives, we’d be focusing on mental health, drug addiction, and DUI enforcement—not criminalizing responsible gun owners.
 |
|
Have a great, safe, and responsible Independence Day this 4th of July! |
 Senator Kim Thatcher
Senate District 11
email: Sen.KimThatcher@oregonlegislature.gov I phone: 503-986-1711
address: 900 Court St NE, S-307, Salem, OR, 97301
website: http://www.oregonlegislature.gov/thatcher
Replies to this message are sent to an unmonitored mailbox.
To contact me, please click here: Sen.KimThatcher@oregonlegislature.gov
|
