With the end of the legislative session just days away, I'll be spending the majority of my time here on the floor of the Oregon House, where the full body will debate the dozens of bills that have piled up and await our final approval.

We'll spend most of our time powering through a stack of thoroughly vetted, relatively non-controversial bills that will receive a near-consensus vote - so I'm taking a couple of minutes here on the floor to write you this update on some of the big decisions we'll be making in the next few days.

School Budget and the Governor's Veto

By now you've probably heard that Governor Kulongoski just vetoed the budget bill for Oregon's public schools.

Why? Well, a few days ago, we legislators passed a $6 billion public school budget - $200 million of which comes from state reserves and is put aside in a special purpose public school account. The Governor feels that the $200 million uses up too much of the state reserve budget, given uncertainty about our state's economy.

With all due respect to the Governor, who is very sincere in his desire to sustainably fund public education, I disagree. It's more prudent, in my view, to give schools the confidence to budget at a higher level for the next two years, and avoid devastating cuts.

To override the Governor's veto, we'll need a 2/3 majority vote in each chamber. Fortunately, we passed the budget bill earlier this week with a greater than 2/3 majority; if all goes well, we should be able to override the veto and pass the budget for good. The session will not conclude before we reach resolution on the education budget, which is by far the biggest-ticket item in the state's budget. Stay tuned.

Public Safety Budget and Delayed Implementation of Measure 57

Our community supported Measure 57 last November - but can we afford it during this budget crisis?

Last November, Oregon voters came out in strong support of Measure 57, a ballot initiative that provided much needed funding for drug treatment, increased penalties for certain types of drug and property crimes, and, most importantly, headed off the draconian and unaffordable mandatory minimum sentences contained in 2008's Measure 61.

Our community was clear about our priorities: House District 46 came out in favor of Measure 57 by 68%, and voted against Measure 61 by 71%. However, we voted for Measure 57 under drastically different circumstances than we find ourselves today - namely, a massive budget shortfall and severe cuts to our public safety system. Since Measure 57 was voted into the Oregon constitution, we have to fund it first - at the expense of other public safety services, like state troopers, youth correctional facilities, and police detectives.

We have a bill up for consideration that will delay the implementation of most of Measure 57's provisions until January 2012. Doing so will save us about $60 million dollars over the next few years, and ensure that Measure 57 does not come into effect at the expense of basic public safety services.

We'll need a 2/3 majority to delay Measure 57, and we're not quite there yet. This is sure to be one of the most controversial topics at the close of the legislative session.

Reducing Greenhouse Gases and Developing Local Fuels

Back in early May, I carried HB 2186 to narrow passage after a vigorous debate on the House floor. After being significantly amended by Senate committees, the bill is currently pending a floor vote.

HB 2186 would establish a low-carbon fuel standard for Oregon, reducing the carbon emissions associated with vehicle fuels by 10% by 2020. Senate amendments narrowed the bill by eliminating provisions related to truck retrofits, tire efficiency, and idling standards.

The transportation sector is responsible for 40% of the state's greenhouse gas emissions. Reducing those emissions requires a three-pronged strategy: driving fewer miles, driving more efficient vehicles, and using less carbon-intensive fuels. A low-carbon fuel standard addresses the last prong by creating new incentives for electric vehicles, cellulosic ethanol, and other "next generation" fuels.

The low carbon fuel standard in HB 2186 would take into account the carbon emissions associated with the lifecycle of the fuel, from production all the way through transportation and combustion. This would help give a leg up to local fuel producers, including producers of biodiesel and cellulosic ethanol.

The vote in the Senate will be close. You can expect to hear from me about the outcome some time next week!

I'll be back in touch with you soon after the session ends, with a recap of some legislation I've worked on during this session and an opportunity for you to share your thoughts about the legislative session.