Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Case Program
C16-94-1235.0
This case was written by David Eddy Spicer for David King, Assistant Professor of Public Policy at the John F.
Kennedy School of Government, with funding from the Institute of Politics, Harvard University, and the Parker
Gilbert Montgomery Endowment for Public Policy. (0294)
Copyright 1994 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College. To order copies or request permission
to reproduce materials, call 617-495-9523, fax 617-495-8878, email cp_sales@harvard.edu, or write the Case
Program Sales Office, John F. Kennedy School of Government, 79 John F. Kennedy Street, Cambridge,
Mass. 02138. No part of this publication may be reproduced, revised, translated, stored in a retrieval
system, used in a spreadsheet, or transmitted in any form or by any meanselectronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording, or otherwisewithout the written permission of the Case Program Sales Office at
the John F. Kennedy School of Government
8ibid.
9Even before Measure 5, the state's general fund, maintained primarily by the states personal income tax,
devoted nearly a quarter of its budget to supplementing local support for elementary and secondary
education. The remainder paid for higher education and all other state services.
10The state budget ran for two years, mirroring the legislative cycle. The legislature was not full-time, but
convened each odd-numbered year for approximately six months beginning in January.
11Oregon Business, March, 1992, v. 15, no. 3, sec. 1, p. 18.
12Christian Science Monitor, January 22, 1991. p. 7.
27Weeks, et al., p. 2.
28ibid.
29Weeks, et al., p. 35.
10
11
Feedback
Although the governor felt the time had not yet arrived, she came under increasing criticism from
the media, disenchanted voters, and legislators of both parties the longer she waited to release her
proposals. The Conversation, at least in its early stages, had been generally well-received by the
press, particularly the September 1991 overflow rallies which had made headlines across the
state. Press interest was also high during the Ed-Net meetings, with over 300 articles appearing in
local and state-wide papers during the sessions. 39
12
13
14
15
16
High Noon
At 10 a.m. on July 1, the anniversary of the day Measure 5s cuts first went into effect, the Oregon
legislature convened in special session to consider the governors tax package. Throughout the
morning, Roberts had been on the phone with legislators opposed to her bill and had succeeded in
turning some votes around. While the House began its discussion of the plan, McCaig and Roberts
met for an upbeat strategy session. They both knew the vote was close, and they reasoned they
would lose the House vote on the first go-round. But they believed they might have enough votes
to carry the bill in a call for reconsideration, once several members reversed their votes. As many
as eight legislators had insisted on voting against the plan to register their displeasure with certain
parts but then promised they would stand behind their governor on a second pass. In midafternoon, as expected, the House voted against Roberts plan 26-33.
As the day progressed, the date of the public vote took center stage. Roberts and McCaig were
busy shuttling back and forth between the House and Senate leadership, but no compromise was in
view. Fearing that the House version of the bill would specify a November vote, the governor
pressed the Senate leaders to hold firmly to the September date.
While Minority Leader Courtney called his House Democrats together to caucus before the
expected vote for reconsideration, Campbell received word of the governors discussion with the
Senate leaders. Seeking a guarantee that the Senate would go along with the November date, he
strode into Roberts office for a showdown. With Roberts standing a few feet away, Campbell
gave McCaig his terms: either they concede on the date or he would use his partisan clout to defeat
the bill entirely. The Oregonian gave the following account:
November or tube it? he asked [McCaig]. It was a
demand as much as a question. McCaig didnt miss a beat:
Tube it, she said. Campbell made good on his word.56
When Campbell returned to the chambers, he rallied his fellow Republicans. A vote against
reconsideration passed 31-28 along party lines. After months of public meetings, a week of
scrutiny and a day of legislative wrangling, Roberts plan collapsed unexpectedly on the House
floor and could not be resuscitated.
A group of Senate Democrats attempted to revive the plan by bypassing the constitutional
requirement that revenue measures originate in the House, but their attempt soon floundered
17
18
Exhibit 1
19
Exhibit 2
20
Exhibit 3
21