Coalition strips House Speaker of power
By TOM JACKSON
Of the Emerald
SALEM — The battle for power
in the House apparently came to
an end Thursday as members of
the House voted 32-28 to reject a
proposal which would have re
turned most of the House
Speaker’s substantive powers to
Rep. Phil Lang, D-Portland, the
Speaker of the House.
The compromise proposal was
made by Rep. Hardy Myers,
D-Portland, who called the prop
osal “moderate, yet it workably
addresses the concern of the use
and abuse of the Speaker’s pow
ers.” Myers’ proposal would have
returned the powers of the
Speaker to Lang, but with the pro
vision that any two representa
tives could call for an appeal of a
decision made by the Speaker, br
inging the matter before the full
assembly for a vote.
The movement to remove
Lang’s power was called a "re
volution” by some, a "coup” by
others, and one legislator referred
to the Rules Committee as a
“junta.” But with the failure of
Thursday’s “counterrevolution”,
Speaker Lang has been reduced
to a figurehead, with the new
Rules Committee assuming virtu
ally all of his significant powers.
Among those powers are the
assignments of committee mem
bers — including members of the
legislative interim emergency
board — and the referral of bills to
committees. The powers were
granted the new Rules Commit
tee, which oonsist of most of the
leaders in the move to unseat
Lang, in a historically unpre
cedented move Tuesday.
Lang has been criticized by
many Republicans and some
Democrats for his committee as
signments and bill referrals.
In an appeal to the House be
fore the debate on the motion had
begun, Lang told the chamber, “I
do recognize that I have made
some mistakes. I think one thing
that I have been most guilty of is
the failure to communicate with
others in the assembly.”
Lang urged the House to accept
Myers’ proposal and to “do what is
in the best interest of the state of
Oregon in order that the remain
der of the session can be con
cluded ir> an orderly fashion.
“I come before you today not
with a gavel, but with an olive
branch,” said Lang. “If it is your
desire to permit me to continue to
preside, you will have my full
cooperation, understanding and
assistance in achieving the
priorities we need.”
Myers called his proposed rules
change "one of the best balances
possible, and consistent with the
existing structure of the House.
We should recognized that we
have a special responsibility to
move cautiously when regarding
questions of our own proceed
ings,” said Myers. “What we did
Tuesday was not faithful to our re
sponsibility to the people and the
future assemblies,” he added. He
said his proposal would work to
wards “getting the business done
without turning the whole House
on its head.”
Rep. James Chrest,
D-Portland, told the Representa
tives, "If your intent is to democ
ratize the process, this addresses
those concerns. If, however, there
are those interested in only one
thing — power — then they must
vote against this proposal.”
Chrest later called the failure of
Myers’ motion the "most under
handed, devious thing to occur in
the House, with the exception of
Tuesday's action.”
After the failure of Myers' mo
tion, Chrest introduced a motion to
expand the Rules Committee to
nine persons, which would
achieve a better urban-rural bal
ance on the committee, but that
motion also failed. Chrest said the
House's action was "a pure power
grab, and I'm convinced of that
with the failure of my motion.”
Rep. Bill Grannel, D-North
Bend, who brought the proposal to
strip Lang of his power to the floor,
called Myers’ proposal "a reaction
to the reform made on Tuesday.
That reform is a radical thing, and
sometimes, to make reforms, you
have to be willing to take that
step."
Grannel later said that "I’m re
(Continued on Page 20A)
Legislative
Issues
Senate education committee
considers incidental fee bill
SALEM — A bill that would
allow the State Board of Higher
Education to determine how much
to fund inadental fee programs
they deem “essential” was heard
by the Senate Education Commit
tee Thursday.
But judging from the bill's recep
tion, it may not go very far.
The intent of SB 1026 is to give
Cuts may fund financial aid
SALEM — Sen. Ed Fadeley, D-Eugene, chairer of
the Joint Ways and Means Education Subcommit
tee, says he may be able to provide funding for the
$2.6 million appropriations bill for financial aid to
middle-income students by cutting a portion of Gov.
Straub’s basic school support budget.
Fadeley’s comments came Thursday during a
Subcommittee overview of the Department of Higher
Education’s budget. Rep. Sam Johnson,
R-Redmond, asked if there was enough general fund
money to fund both the proposed tuition freeze for
resident undergraduates and the financial aid bill.
Fadeley replied that he was trying to figure out how
to secure money for both proposals.
He said after the hearing that a projected increase
for 78-79 in Straub’s basic school support budget
may be too high, and that cutting it back slightly may
provide the necessary funds for middle income stu
dents.
Thursday's hearing also saw discussion on a pro
posed Labor Studies Center, to be located at the Uni
versity. State System Chancellor Roy Lieuallen told
committee members the center wouldn’t require
construction of a new building, but that the proposed
$250,000 appropriation would be used primarily to
hire coordinators for the program.
Lieuallen said the location of the center was open,
but Johnson said the University would probably by
the best location, because the program could rely on
the resources of the law and business school.
Fadeley also said the Subcommittee would hold a
hearing at the Capitol May 12 at 7 p.m. to allow
faculty members an opportunity to express their con
cerns with the state system and other education re
lated issues.
students direct control over the
level and use of incidental fees,
said Ted Walker, a University stu
dent interning for Sen. Wally Car
son, R-Salem.
The bill would prohibit the Board
of Higher Education from charging
an incidental fee larger than the
fee level set by a vote of the stu
dents at each institution.
Currently, the level and distribu
tion of incidental fees are decided
by students at each institution,
through mechanisms such as the
the University’s Incidental Fee
Committee. But the students are
subject to change by the Board of
Higher Education. However, the
Board seldom exercises its pre
rogative.
A provision of the bill that raised
questions among committee
members would allow the Board
to decide which incidental fee
programs are “essential" or
“non-essential.” The Board would
also decide hew much to fund the
"essential” programs.
Committee chairer Sen. Cliff
Trow, D-CorvaHis, pointed out that
the provision could give the Board
complete control over the funding
of all incidental fee programs.
"The Board could say all the
programs were ‘essential’,” said
Trow. “It seems that you’re taking
the Board's power away (by allow
ing students to set fee levels), and
then giving it back to them."
Committee members also
commented that the categories of
“essential and non-essential”
would provide the Board with very
vague guidelines.
Walker responded that “essen
tial” programs would be those that
the Board considered directly re
lated to the educational process.
He cited the Oregon Student Pub
lic Interest Research Group (OS
PIRG) and "environmental
groups" as examples of non
essential incidental fee programs.
SB 1026 was opposed by Mark
Cog an, representing the Oregon
Student Lobby and the ASUO,
who said incidental fee decisions
should continue to be made by
students.
Also supporting the current in
cidental fee system was John
Richardson, Vice-Chancellor for
the State System of Higher Edu
cation Richardson said the pres
ent s, stem gives elected students
representatives “a significant
voice in determining fee levels
and uses."
Land use planning laws may face massive overhaul
By TOM JACKSON
Of the Emerald
SALEM—A massive reworking
of Oregon’s landuse planning
laws may result from a bill now
being considered by the Senate
Environment and Energy Commit
tee. The committee began hear
ings Thursday on SB 507, which
would amend the existing statutes
relating to land use planning.
The bill is a package compiled
from a 113-page book of pro
posed amendments which were
SPECIAL
SUNDAY
NIGHT
5:30 TO CLOSING
BOWLING 3 games/$1.00
BILLIARDS $ 1.20/hoar
EMU
RECREATION CENTER
hammered into a single bill during
the last two weeks by a land use
sub-committee. Sub-committee
members Ted Haliock,
D-Portland, Victor Atiyeh,
R-Beaverton, and Charles Han
lon, D-Cornelius, presented the
package to the fuH committee in a
meeting Wednesday night.
Some of the amendments are a
reaction to state ballot measure
10, which failed in last
November s election. The meas
ure called for the repeal of 1975’s
SB 100, which created the Land
Conservation and Development
Commission (LCDC) and called
for state-wide planning goals.
The biH contains a wide variety
of amendments, which all the
sub-committee members agreed
upon. But two controversial
amendments emerged in the
hearing Thursday.
One of these would require that
any further goals adopted by
LCDC in addition to the existing 19
goals, be approved by the Legisla
ture. The amendments may be
further amended to include a pro
vision requiring the Legislature to
approve the existing goals.
The move to require legislative
approval of state-wide goals is
apparently an attempt to inject
more public accountability into the
planning system.
Atiyeh argued that the issue of
land use “is a strong and perva
sive one, upon which we should
have the approval of an elective
body.” He said the amendment
would help solve the problem of
“abrasiveness” in the planning
process.
“We would be doing a great
service to landuse planning if we
do this," he said. “I am not op
posed to planning, but it would be
best to plan in a less abrasive
way.”
Hallock pointed to another
proposed amendment which calls
for a two-year moratorium on the
development of further LCDC
goals, saying, that he would ap
prove either the moratorium or the
legislative approval but not both.
He added that if the committee
stipulates that the Legislature
should approve all goals, the gov
ernor will probably veto the bill.
A representative of Straub’s of
fice said the governor is ‘‘strongly
opposed" to legislative approval
of LCDC goais, but has not made
up Ns mind whether he would veto
the bill if it requires approval of
future goals. He added that the
governor will probably approve
the Nil as it now stands.
Another controversial amend
ment required action in local areas
to comply with state-wide goals.
Some people, including Atiyeh,
believe that local governments
should adopt plans, which are ap
proved by LCDC and that plans
should be approved by local gov
ernments. Hallock argued that
local action should be approved
according to the state-wide goals
to insure that all local action com
plies with LCDC's goals.
Other amendments in the bil
include a requirement that cities
and counties zone annexed terri
tory according to the goals.
Further hearings will be held but
none are scheduled yet.