Please help by selecting a portion of thse steps and writing out the effective areas you specialize in and submitting them to me for further postings into this thread.

Please post the areas of this bill you will handle, then I can edit this post which is currently locked and I will add to it where applicable to show the progress of the Bills writing from all of us.

Drafting a Bill & the necessary steps involved:

CHAPTER TWO
STEPS IN DRAFTING A BILL
1. TAKING A DRAFTING REQUEST
2. CONFIDENTIALITY
3. THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST
4. IS IT CONSTITUTIONAL?
5. WHAT IS EXISTING LAW?
6. USING OTHER LEGISLATION AS A BASIS
7. USE OF LIBRARY FACILITIES AND COMPUTER RESOURCES
8. CONSULTATION WITH EXPERTS
9. REVIEWED FOR FORM AND STYLE ONLY
10. ANALYZING PROVISIONS TO BE IN BILL
11. OUTLINING A BILL
12. WRITING A BILL
13. TIPS THAT SAVE TIME
14. COMPILATION IN ORS
15. NUMBERS-REFERRED-TO SEARCH
16. SECTIONS AMENDED, REPEALED OR ADDED TO
17. SPECIAL ATTENTION NOTES
18. RETRIEVAL NOTES
19. REVISER’S BILL
20. CHECKING FINAL DRAFT
21. THE REQUEST FOLDER
22. TRANSMITTAL
23. SUMMARY
24. REVIEW

This chapter gives a bird’s eye view of the entire drafting process. Some of the subjects mentioned only briefly are dealt with in detail in subsequent chapters.

1. TAKING A DRAFTING REQUEST.

The Legislative Counsel’s office furnishes bill drafting services at the request of
legislators, legislative committees and, as time permits, state agencies (referred to
categorically in this manual as “the requester”). Requests are submitted in various forms and with widely varying degrees of specificity. If the request is taken during an interview with the requester, the person taking the request, who may not ultimately have anything to dowith the actual drafting, has an opportunity to elicit more details. This office uses a form to assist in obtaining suitable information, including the name of any person or agency that the requester desires to have consulted. Processing of these forms is described in Appendix H on office procedures.


2. CONFIDENTIALITY.
a. Member Requests.
A drafting request from a member of the Legislative Assembly received by the Office of the Legislative Counsel will be treated as confidential and the name of the requester and nature of the request will not be revealed to any person except as follows:

1. Without revealing the identity of the requester, a drafter may consult with others to gain necessary background information for drafting.
2. A drafter may inform subsequent requesters who request an identical or almost
identical draft that the earlier request has been made, but may not inform the second requester of the name of the first requester without the authorization of the first requester.
3. A drafter may discuss the draft with any person the requester authorizes the drafter to consult in preparing the draft.
Each member of the staff who takes requests will make an effort to determine the names of other persons who may be contacted with respect to the draft. The draft request form will be marked to reflect the names of those persons. A drafter may presume that legislative aides and other persons on the member’s staff have authority to discuss a draft requested by the member.
b. Committee Requests.
A committee request is a publicly made request based on the authorization of a majority of the members of the committee. As a publicly made request, a committee request is not confidential. Committee requests are treated as follows:
1. A drafter may acknowledge receipt of a committee request and may reveal the nature of the request and the name of the committee. All inquiries as to the specifics of committee requests other than inquiries from members of the committee should be referred to committee staff.
2. The office will not supply a list of committee requests except to members of the
committee. Persons seeking general information of this nature will be directed to committee staff. Persons other than members of the committee seeking copies of drafts prepared for committees will be directed to committee staff.
3. A drafter may inform subsequent requesters who request an identical or almost
identical draft that the earlier request has been made and may inform the second requester of the name of the committee that made the request without the further authorization from the committee.
4. A drafter may discuss the specifics of a committee request with others to gain
information needed to prepare the draft.

c. Agency Requests.
An agency drafting request received by the Office of the Legislative Counsel will be
treated as confidential and the name of the requester and nature of the request will not be revealed to any other person except as follows:
1. Without revealing the identity of the requester, a drafter may consult with others to gain necessary background information for drafting.
2. A drafter may inform subsequent requesters who request an identical or almost
identical draft that the earlier request has been made, but may not inform the second requester of the name of the first requester without the authorization of the first requester.
3. A drafter may discuss the draft with any officer or employee of the Oregon
Department of Administrative Services or the office of the Governor if the draft requires the approval of the Governor under ORS 171.133.
4. A drafter may discuss the draft with any person the requester authorizes the drafter to consult in preparing the draft.
It is presumed that all officers and employees of an agency have authority to discuss an agency draft.

3. THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST.
Before beginning to prepare a bill, the drafter must determine what the requester wants to accomplish. A drafter’s function is to devise appropriate statutory language to carry out requested objectives, and not to supply substance or policy. Obviously, a drafter is unlikely to achieve the objective of the requester in a satisfactory manner if the drafter has an imprecise idea of what the requester wants. This is why it is so important that the person taking the request ask the right questions.

Usually there is no one from the Office of Legislative Counsel involved in taking a
drafting request from a state agency. Therefore, prior to beginning work on an agency draft, the drafter should check with the person named as the agency contact to be sure that the drafter and the agency agree on what the agency is requesting.
Because of the complexity of some requests, it often happens that the requester cannot give explicit instructions at first, nor can the person taking the request anticipate every question that will arise in the course of drafting. When the instructions are not precise, the requester’s objective and the various means by which that objective can be accomplished must be analyzed. Then the drafter can check with the requester so that the requester can consider and answer these questions.

As drafting proceeds, the drafter may encounter additional questions that require subsequent contacts with the requester. However, these contacts should be kept to a minimum. Requesters, particularly legislators, generally are busy and are relying on the expertise of the drafter to isolate policy issues. It is sometimes better for the drafter to fill in the interstices and advise the requester in writing of the options used in the draft than to seek additional details from the requester during initial
drafting.


4. IS IT CONSTITUTIONAL?

Legislation must conform to state and federal Constitutions. If the drafter fails to observe constitutional requirements prescribed for legislative Acts or constitutional restrictions imposed thereon, the bill will be invalid in whole or part.

The drafter must consider state constitutional requirements as to form. For example, does the proposed bill embrace more than one subject? (section 20, Article IV, Oregon Constitution) Constitutional requirements as to substance also exist. For example, does the proposed bill violate the requirement for uniformity of taxation? (section 1, Article IX, Oregon Constitution) A drafter ordinarily need not render a formal opinion on each constitutional issue. However, the requester has a right to expect that the drafter will point out any such issue and, if possible, indicate an alternative, constitutional means of accomplishing the objective. The drafter is wise to record in the file, however briefly, the nature of the problem and the fact that the requester has been notified of its existence.

Specific constitutional provisions are discussed at appropriate places in this manual.
There is a brief discussion of constitutional limitations on legislation in Appendix C.


5. WHAT IS EXISTING LAW?
A drafter must become an expert on constitutional provisions, court decisions and
statutes relating to the subject matter of each bill the drafter is requested to prepare. If the bill passes, it will take its place in the body of existing law. The drafter must be sure that the bill will not create conflicts or produce unintended results. It may appear to be saving time to neglect to search for conflicting provisions of existing law that should be amended or repealed. However, sooner or later individuals, agencies and the courts may have to spend much more time and money trying to resolve such conflicts.

To determine the application and meaning of existing statutes, the drafter may begin by using the ORS classification outline, index and annotations. Annotations that have been written but not yet published in the cumulative supplement to the ORS annotations are stored in a file in the computer and may be obtained by consulting the annotations staff.

Many statutory provisions are of general application. See, for example, ORS chapter 174. The drafter ought to be familiar with them so that the bill will not duplicate material already covered by general provisions.

Federal laws establishing standards for state programs in certain areas such as
welfare, health, education and highways may limit state activities in these areas. A
requester probably will not want to cause the state to lose federal funds through
noncompliance with these standards. Other areas may be preempted by federal action. If there is suspicion that a bill may conflict with federal programs, the federal laws and regulations should be checked. This can be done most easily by a call to the appropriate federal or state agency. The call is subject to the rule on confidentiality.

6. USING OTHER LEGISLATION AS A BASIS.
A drafter should avoid the temptation to re-invent the wheel. A drafter can avoid
writing a bill “from scratch” if a law or a previously prepared bill that is similar or
analogous to the one requested can be found. It may be possible to revise the previous bill or adapt the law in much less time than would be required to write a new bill. Also, the benefit of someone else’s thinking, perhaps even the drafter’s own on some occasion then more time was available, may be desirable. Problems and solutions that otherwise would be overlooked may be found. Some of the different types of material that may be helpful are explained below.

a. Other Oregon Statutes.
The bill can be patterned on an existing Oregon statute, even though that statute is not precisely on the same subject. For example, if requested to draft a bill creating a board to license a certain profession, by examining ORS chapters 670 to 704, occupational and professional licensing laws, the drafter will probably find many provisions that suggest appropriate substance and language.

The procedure prescribed by an existing law usually can be assumed to be workable. The language used in an existing law often has been construed administratively or judicially. Consequently, it may be preferable to use the “tried and tested” procedure and language rather than take chances on something new. However, existing laws are not always perfect in form, style or substance, and must be adjusted in all cases to fit the needs of the present bill. The drafter should check the workability of an existing statute with the appropriate state agency before using it as the basis for a new bill.

The drafter should also review the annotations for court cases and Attorney General opinions that may suggest problems with the proposed model.

b. Bills of Past Sessions.

Use the checklist in Appendix F, Re-drafts of Bills from Previous Sessions, to prepare re-drafts. A bill introduced but not passed, or a draft prepared by the Legislative Counsel office but never introduced, may help in preparing a new bill. However, the drafter should never use a bill drafted for an earlier session without checking for amendments or other changes in existing statutes after it was prepared.
The drafter should also consider any amendments proposed to the bill itself. Dates appearing in the draft may need to be revised. Usually the style and substance of a previous draft can be improved. The drafter cannot assume, merely because the bill was introduced at a prior session, that it is satisfactory for present purposes. It may have failed to pass because of its inadequacies.

Bills introduced at a previous session can be found by using the subject matter
approach, employing the indexes in the final Legislative Calendar, or the sections amended or repealed-by-bills approach using tables in the final Legislative Calendar.

If a bill of a past session was prepared by the Legislative Counsel office, the bill
request file may contain helpful information. For bills introduced in 1953 and at
subsequent sessions, the LC file numbers are entered on the printed bills or in conversion tables located in the LC library.

To find bills prepared in the office, the drafter may use the subject matter approach by using the bill request index file or the requester approach by using the requester index file, both in the office.

Time can often be saved if the bill contains many new sections of law by obtaining an office printout from Publication Services for the immediate preceding session or copies of last session’s printed bills from Publication Services or the Distribution Center or by photocopying old bills from the LC library or by obtaining copies from the Oregon State Library (earlier sessions). Copy can then be prepared by marking the required changes.

Amended material should be engrossed on the latest ORS copy. It is helpful to
Publication Services if the source of the material is given. For example, the bill number and session year or ORS citation should be retained.

c. Bills of Current Session.

As a legislative session progresses and the number of bill introductions increases, it
becomes more important for the drafter to check the weekly cumulative bill index or various computer sources of similar information. The drafter may find bills similar to the one requested by using the topical index, the table of sections amended, repealed and “added to,” the STAIRS search program for bills or possibly the Legislative Counsel docket.

If a similar bill already has been introduced, the drafter must call that fact to the
attention of the requester. Sometimes the requester’s objective can be more easily
accomplished by amendment of a bill already introduced. However, a drafter should not undertake to draft amendments instead of a bill without first consulting the requester. If a similar bill already has passed both houses, it may be necessary to adjust the bill being drafted to make it consistent with the earlier bill. The weekly cumulative legislative calendars and their daily supplements contain detailed information on the progress of all bills. The information is also available on the computer.

Drafters should consult Publication Services personnel for instructions on how to access current bill information.

d. Laws and Bills of Other States.

If legislation similar to the bill being drafted has been presented in another state, that bill (or law, if it was enacted) often is helpful. Sometimes a similar law can be found by checking the codes of other states in the Supreme Court Library or on the Internet.

However, unless the drafter is prepared to check 49 codes, some ingenuity must be
exercised in selecting those states more likely to have confronted the same problem.
For example, if the drafter is drafting a bill relating to commercial fishing, it is unlikely that anything useful will be found among the Utah statutes.
In adapting a measure from another state for purposes of legislation in Oregon, the
drafter must be sure that necessary changes are made to conform to terminology and procedure used in other Oregon statutes. A drafter must remember, too, that a bill may be perfectly constitutional in another state but unconstitutional in Oregon.
Therefore, bills from other states should usually be used only as general guidelines to regulatory approaches and direction, and not as copy to be followed in detail.
Copies of bills from other states usually are furnished promptly by the legislative
service agencies of those states. The text of statutes of other states may be obtained in the same manner but often statutes can be found more quickly by consulting the codes and session laws in the Supreme Court Library.

Since many experiences are common to the states and the various Canadian provinces, a drafter should not overlook provincial legislation for assistance.

e. Constitutional Provisions of Other States.

The Constitutions of all the states are printed in full in Constitutions of the United
States, National and State (1962), published by the Legislative Drafting Research Fund, Columbia University.

The various constitutional provisions are summarized in the Index Digest volume of the same publication. However, the index has not been maintained up to date. A copy of this reference work is in the LC library.

f. Uniform and Model Acts.

A drafter may find that a bill similar to the one being drafted has been prepared by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. The conference prepares uniform Acts that are intended, for the most part, to be followed exactly.
The text of any such uniform Act can be found in Uniform Laws Annotated at the Supreme Court Library.

Model Acts, intended merely as guides for legislation in areas where uniformity is not necessary, come from a variety of sources, including trade groups, occupational associations, etc.

A drafter should be familiar with an annual publication of the Council of State
Governments titled Suggested State Legislation. Another annual publication of value is the State Legislative Program of the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. Copies of most of these works are in the LC library.

g. Interim Committee Bills.

Legislative interim committees and task forces usually recommend legislation, drafts of which sometimes are printed in their reports. Copies of all interim committee reports submitted in recent years are in the LC library; earlier reports are available from the State Library.

h. Oregon State Bar Bills.

Committees of the Oregon State Bar frequently propose legislation. The reports of
these committees, including in most cases the full text of their proposals, are published each year for consideration by the annual meeting of the Bar. Copies of these publications from 1953 to date are in the LC library; copies for earlier years are in the Supreme Court Library.

i. Other Sources.

Federal legislation often suggests approaches to be taken in drafting but a drafter
should take careful note that the mere existence of federal legislation on a subject
suggests either preemption or supremacy. Further, federal legislation rarely provides a desirable drafting model.

Local ordinances may be used as samples. There are two caveats:

(1) If the matter can properly be subject to local ordinance, is the matter within the authority of the Legislative Assembly or is the matter a subject of home rule; and
(2) Ordinances are usually not good drafting models.

Quasi-public associations such as those at the Local Government Clearing House in
Chicago may be good sources for suggested legislation. The League of Oregon Cities, the Association of Oregon Counties and the Oregon School Boards Association are examples of local contacts for these types of associations.

Trade associations are also sources for draft legislation on the subjects affecting their interests. The State Library can usually provide addresses if there are no local affiliates.

7. USE OF LIBRARY FACILITIES AND COMPUTER RESOURCES.

The drafter should become thoroughly familiar with the research and reference tools available on the computer and in the Legislative Library, Supreme Court Library and Oregon State Library. A visit to each of the libraries is the best way to find out what is available. The Legislative Librarian and the Documents Librarian at the Oregon State Library have information on types of materials of special interest to the drafters.

The research and reference tools available on the computer include STAIRS, Oregon LegisLaw, West Premise, Shepards and the Internet.
Sometimes another state, or a private group in Oregon or in another state, has made a comprehensive study of the problem being worked on and has collected comparative legislation and expert opinion in a published report. A drafter may find a report on the effectiveness and background of a law that is being used as a model in preparing a bill for introduction in Oregon.

If there is reason to believe some other state or group may have made such a study, the Research Librarian at the State Library or the Legislative Librarian for the Legislative Administration Committee can make a search.

The drafter should periodically examine the materials in the LC office library so that
its contents are familiar. A variety of resources are available on the computer. STAIRS may be used to research ORS, session laws, Attorney General opinions and other databases. Westlaw.com also may be used to research ORS, as well as Oregon case law, United States Supreme Court case law and other databases. Shepards may be used to shepardize a particular case.

The Internet is useful for researching the laws of other states, federal laws and policies, Oregon Administrative Rules and other topic areas. The computer resources available in the office for research frequently change. The
drafter should periodically review them.

The State Archivist has the records and files of standing committees and interim
committees of recent legislative sessions. A check of the State Archives may provide background on an existing Oregon statute. The Chief Clerk of the House and the Secretary of the Senate retain all tapes of the floor debates. The Legislative Library has committee minutes for the preceding session.

The State Library, Supreme Court Library and the Willamette Law School Library
have facilities to photocopy pages of books and other library materials. For the drafter’s convenience, the Legislative Counsel office has “charge cards” available for copying purposes at these libraries (fees charged to this office). A charge card can be checked out at the Legislative Counsel front desk and must be returned by the end of that day.

8. CONSULTATION WITH EXPERTS.

Sometimes a drafter will not be sufficiently familiar with a given area to determine
the practical effect of a new procedure or change in the law. In these cases, if the
requester consents and if time permits, the drafter may consult experts in the area to be affected. For example, if the bill being drafted would impose new duties and powers on a state agency, it would be proper to confer with appropriate personnel of that agency.

Problems of a practical nature may occur to them that would not occur to others.
However, the drafter must protect the requester from possible agency lobbying attempts by protecting the requester’s identity unless specific permission has been given to reveal that identity.

Usually it is easy to find the appropriate official for consultation if a state agency is
involved. More difficulty will be experienced with respect to city or county officials.
However, the League of Oregon Cities or the Association of Oregon Counties can
provide useful information concerning procedures and operations of the local
governments represented by each.

The Legislative Fiscal Officer and the Legislative Revenue Officer may be able to
assist in problems concerning state revenues, expenditures and fiscal matters generally.

9. REVIEWED FOR FORM AND STYLE ONLY.

There are two situations in which it is appropriate to caption a draft “Reviewed for
Form and Style Only.” In one case, a bill draft is submitted to a drafter with instructions that no changes are to be made. In the other case, a bill draft is submitted to a drafter and there is not sufficient time before the draft is due for the drafter to examine the draft, much less rewrite it. In either situation, the draft must be put into proper form and style and will be captioned “Reviewed for Form and Style Only.” If a legal problem is discovered in the course of a form and style review, whether by a drafter or by a copy editor, the drafter must bring the problem to the attention of the requester.

However, drafters and requesters alike should be aware that the caption itself does not indicate anything about legal sufficiency or insufficiency of the draft.
Any legal problem uncovered during the course of a form and style review should be noted in writing for the file. If the bill is later amended, there might be an opportunity for problems to be addressed.
A form and style review consists of the following:

(1) Measure summary.
The measure summary is a brief, accurate description of the contents of the measure and must appear on the final draft.

(2) Relating clause. (Title)
The relating clause is checked to ensure that everything in the relating clause is
actually in the bill and that everything in the bill that has to be mentioned in the title is listed in the relating clause.

(3) Sequence of sections.
The sequence of sections, subsections and paragraphs must be correct.

(4) Repealed and renumbered sections.
When an ORS section is repealed, other ORS sections that contain references to the
repealed ORS section may need to be adjusted.

(5) Form and style.
Spelling, forms for references, numbers, figures, dates, times, etc. must conform to the Legislative Form and Style Manual.

(6) Official titles.
Official titles of state administrative agencies and officers must be as cited in ORS. A list of official titles, including funds and accounts, appears in Appendix E.

(7) Internal references.
Internal references to sections of the measure must be appropriate.

(8) ORS, Constitution, session law citations.
References to ORS sections, the Constitution or session laws must be accurate.

(9) Amendments must read into section being amended.

(10) Amended sections should be read for sense.
Amended ORS sections must be read for sense, correct grammar, consistency, etc.

(11) Paragraph endings, conjunctions, etc.
Each paragraph must end with the proper punctuation. An “and” or an “or” must
connect the last two paragraphs when semicolons are used. Material following a colon must read in correctly.

(12) Consistency of terms, use of definitions, etc.

(13) Authorized changes.

(14) If definitions are used, the terms defined must appear in the appropriate
sections.

10. ANALYZING PROVISIONS TO BE IN BILL.
After completing the necessary background research, the drafter must begin to
visualize the elements of the bill to be drafted. While the bill may embrace only one
general subject, it will do so by doing one or more of the following:

1. Creating new law.
2. Amending existing law.
3. Repealing existing law.
If an existing statute is not found that can be amended to accomplish what is desired, the bill must create new law (new sections) imposing duties, conferring powers, granting privileges, decreeing prohibitions, prescribing penalties, making appropriations, etc., as necessary to accomplish its purpose.

Research may indicate that there are existing statutes dealing with the subject covered by the request and that a change in or an addition of language to one or more of these existing statutes will accomplish the requester’s purpose. If so, the bill will need to amend existing sections. Language may be taken from other statutes to express the changes in or additions to the section amended.

It is important to harmonize the language added with that already used in the section amended, and to avoid creating inconsistencies and conflicts with unamended portions of the law. Because it is more important to maintain consistency of language between the new material and the unamended existing law than to create a “pearl,” the drafter may need to exercise particular self-restraint.

Often a bill must repeal existing law (removing sections). It is important to check a
statute carefully prior to its repeal, to be certain that nothing in the statute should be in force after the bill being drafted becomes law. Further, internal references to the repealed law may exist in sections not otherwise being amended. These references must be reconciled. STAIRS (Storage and Information Retrieval System) is available on the computer for checking on repealed sections and renumbered subsections.

See the STAIRS training and reference manuals for information on how to use STAIRS.

11. OUTLINING A BILL.

For many bills, a mental or written outline of a bill, prepared before writing the bill
itself, is a necessity. The outline should express the results of the analysis of provisions to be included in the bill, following the suggestion in Chapter Six of this manual with respect to arrangement. For a simple bill, an outline may be unnecessary.

Probably there will be less need for a detailed written outline for an experienced drafter, but some advance planning for drafting a bill will always be required.
A carefully structured outline, based on a sound analysis of the required provisions, is a good basis for dividing a lengthy or complex bill dealing with many aspects of the subject into smaller, manageable units.

12. WRITING A BILL.

After completing an outline, a drafter must begin to write. Writing should never be
delayed until all research is completed. Research is never completed. Judgment is
necessary to recognize the research effort necessary to produce a draft and research for its own sake or as a tactic to delay drafting.

The outline is useful in preparing the first draft. Form and style can be imposed later, but on a first draft the drafter should concentrate on getting the substance of the bill down on paper. After completing the first draft and letting a day or two elapse, if time permits, for a fresh look at it, the drafter can rewrite the bill as many times as necessary to:

♦ Attain clarity, giving careful attention to style and grammar and the use of
specific words.

♦ Arrange the provisions in the most useful order. The organization initially should
have followed the outline. When a rough draft is completed, the drafter is able to
reconsider arrangement.

♦ Ensure constitutionality or, if not ensured, review and comment upon it.

♦ Take into account statutory and common law rules for interpreting statutes.

♦ Comply with mechanical, formal and substantive requirements.

♦ Ensure that there is no conflict with or duplication of constitutional or statutory
provisions of general application.

♦ Resolve “birds in flight,” i.e., actions and proceedings already under way or to be
initiated that may be affected by the bill.


Finally, when the body of the bill is complete, the drafter drafts an appropriate title. If the draft is “final,” the drafter should also prepare a measure summary.

13. TIPS THAT SAVE TIME.

In drafting a lengthy bill, the drafter may be wise not to number sections or insert
section numbers in internal references until the final arrangement of sections is
determined. If the bill is exceptionally long, it may be helpful to make a cross-reference card file to help keep track of internal references.

In drafting an amendment to an existing ORS section, time can be saved if the drafter requests a printout of the ORS section from Publication Services or prints the section using PUBS. Then the drafter has copy on which to indicate the material to be added and deleted.

14. COMPILATION IN ORS.

The bill should be drafted in such a way that it will fit into Oregon Revised Statutes.
To anticipate codification, the drafter must understand the system of classification and arrangement of ORS.

During the drafting of a bill, the drafter should examine ORS to discover whether
there is an affirmative reason to direct that new provisions of the draft be placed in a particular place in ORS. If there is an adequate reason to do so, the direction is
accomplished by saying that the new section is “added to and made a part of . . . ” an existing series or chapter or code in ORS.

There are two basic requirements for adding something to and making it a part of:
There must be an affirmative reason to do so; and the series, chapter or code added to must exist as something more than an editorial convenience.

For a more detailed discussion of adding a new section to an existing ORS series, chapter or code, see “DRAFTING NEW SECTIONS,” Chapter 13.

15. NUMBERS-REFERRED-TO SEARCH.

When amending or repealing an existing ORS section, the drafter must ALWAYS do
a computer search (STAIRS) of ORS for all references to the amended or repealed
section. See “Editorial Substitutions” under “ALTERNATIVES TO AMENDMENTS,” Chapter 13, for discussion of editorial substitutions that may be effected in lieu of
extensive “housekeeping” amendments and of situations that may require the drafter to scrutinize more carefully those sections in which reference is made to the amended or repealed section in the bill. See also “NUMBERS-REFERRED-TO PROCEDURES,” Chapter 13.

16. SECTIONS AMENDED, REPEALED OR ADDED TO.

Legislative Counsel’s office maintains information on sections amended, repealed or added to for each current legislative session. This information is available in the tables printed weekly and on the tables display screen which is updated daily during session.

These tables contain an entry for each ORS section, ORCP section, uncodified Act
section or Oregon Constitution section for which an amendment or repeal has been
proposed, and for each series of sections or chapter of ORS or Article of the Constitution to which one or more sections has been proposed to be added by a measure introduced at the session. See “CONFLICTING AMENDMENTS,” Chapter 13, for further discussion of “A and R” tables.

17. SPECIAL ATTENTION NOTES.

Since 1949, Legislative Counsel’s staff has accumulated a large number of notes
concerning ambiguities, conflicts and defects in the statutes. These notes, commonly referred to as “special attention notes,” are kept in loose-leaf binders in the office and are noted on the computer printout of the appropriate section as follows: “NOTE: This section has an S.A. note.” The drafter may note the special attention in reviewing the printout but if the printout is produced after the drafter has finished, the copy editor will draw the special attention note to the drafter’s attention.

Unfortunately, not all defects in the statutes have been noted in the special attention file. Part of the job of a drafter is to discover and record additional ambiguities, conflicts and defects. Special forms have been provided to record these.
The notes should be prepared even though the draft cures the problem, in case the draft does not become law.

18. RETRIEVAL NOTES.

Retrieval notes appear on the computer printouts of ORS sections affected by phased in amendments, repeals of amendments, delayed repeals and similar anomalies that require a drafter’s attention. The note sets forth the timelines affecting the section and may suggest ways to deal with its various versions.

In the example that follows, ORS 326.111 was amended by section 1, chapter 757, Oregon Laws 1991, to provide authority to the Office of Community College services to negotiate for federal funds.

That amendment is repealed in 1993. ORS 326.111 also was amended by section 2, chapter 886, Oregon Laws 1991, to delete reference to the State Textbook Commission.
That amendment is repealed in 1996. The note suggests that in the meantime the drafter should amend both “temporary” versions, as well as the version of ORS 326.111 as it appears when the repeals have taken effect.

The disclaimer sections indicate that the amendments presently added by the drafter are not intended to affect the repeals of the previous amendments.

SECTION ___. ORS 326.111 is amended to read:
NOTE: Amendments repealed 6/30/93 and 1/1/96. Safest to amend all three versions and use two disclaimers.

326.111.
(1) The Department of Education shall function under the direction . . . .

(2) The Department of Education . . . :

(a) The State Board of Education . . . ;

(b) The State Textbook . . . ;

© The Office of Community . . . ;

(d) Such other agencies and officers . . . ; and

(e) The administrative organizations and staffs . . . .

(3) All administrative functions of the State Board . . . .

SECTION XX. ORS 326.111, as amended by section 1, chapter 757, Oregon Laws
1991, is amended to read: 326.111.

(1) The Department of Education shall function under the direction . . . .
(2) The Department of Education shall consist . . . :
(a) The State Board of Education . . . ;
(b) The Office of Community College Services which shall . . . ;
© Such other agencies and officers . . . ; and
(d) The administrative organizations and staffs . . . .
(3) All administrative functions of the State Board of Education shall . . . .
SECTION XXX. Nothing in the amendments to ORS 326.111 by section XX of this
Act affects the provisions of section 14, chapter 474, Oregon Laws 1987, as amended by section 8, chapter 757, Oregon Laws 1991.

SECTION YY. ORS 326.111, as amended by section 2, chapter 886, Oregon Laws
1991, is amended to read: 326.111.

(1) The Department of Education shall function under the direction . . . .
(2) The Department of Education . . . :
(a) The State Board of Education . . . ;
(b) The Office of Community College . . . ;
© Such other agencies and officers . . . ; and
(d) The administrative functions of the State Board of Education shall be exercised . . . .

SECTION YYY. Nothing in the amendments to ORS 326.111 by section YY of this
Act affects the provisions of section 16, chapter 886, Oregon Laws 1991.
Note that as of the 1999 legislative session the Legislative Counsel’s office no longer
routinely uses these disclaimers.

19. REVISER’S BILL.

The Reviser’s Bill amends ORS sections to correct errors in syntax, internal
references, gender references, etc. ORS retrieval printouts bear notation to the Reviser’s Bill after the amending clause and before the text as follows: “NOTE: This section is amended in Reviser’s Bill.”
When encountering such a note in retrieval, if there is an actual conflict, a drafter has, in order of preference, two options:

(1) Check the Reviser’s Bill change and do not make the Reviser’s Bill change to the ORS section in the current draft.

(2) Make the same change in the current draft as that made in the Reviser’s Bill.
In cases of conflict between the Reviser’s Bill and the current draft, it is desirable to
repeal the section of the Reviser’s Bill. See the Reviser’s Bill senior editor.

If the drafter disagrees with the Reviser’s Bill change, the drafter should express that concern to the senior editor designated to handle the Reviser’s Bill, so the Reviser’s Bill and the other bill can be reconciled as required by the circumstances.

20. CHECKING FINAL DRAFT.

When a draft is finished, the drafter should check it carefully. No matter how
experienced in drafting bills, a drafter will never cease to be amazed at how often errors that escape repeated checks will be ridiculously obvious when the draft is reviewed.

Several separate readings are advisable to check arrangement, style, grammar, use of specific words, definitions, incorporations by reference, internal references to other sections, etc. As a final check, there often is a Checklist for Drafters inside the request folder.

The drafter should consider each point in this checklist and not mechanically
check items in the list if the item has not been separately considered.

21. THE REQUEST FOLDER.

The bill request folders should be maintained in good order at all times. The
Legislative Counsel or some other drafter may need to refer to one of them instantly, and under severe limitations of time, when the drafter is not available.
Ordinarily a drafter should arrange the material in each folder in chronological order, latest material on top, but in a way that associates each draft with the notes and correspondence relating thereto. The drafter or some other person may have to refer to the file several years after the session is over.

22. TRANSMITTAL.

Often a drafter will want to point out important features of a bill, or problems not
dealt with therein, in a letter of transmittal or a note accompanying the draft. If a
handwritten note is used, a copy should be retained in the file. A drafter should preserve for the record any constitutional or other legal objections that might be raised against the bill, even though the requester has been advised of them orally.
Having been advised of serious difficulties, the requester may still choose to adhere
to original instructions.
A drafter must accept that decision with good grace. Because of staff limitations during sessions, a drafter need not and should not send a formal, nonsubstantive letter of transmittal with each draft.

23. SUMMARY.

In performing the duties of a bill drafter, a drafter must:
1. Ascertain the exact purpose the requester has in mind, and the means by which
that purpose can be accomplished.

2. Explore in detail alternative approaches and, by pointing out the policy questions
involved, help the requester think the problem through and decide the issues.

3. Find out which constitutional provisions and existing statutes relate to the subject
of the proposed bill, and what adjustments, if any, must be made in existing law.

4. Develop a plan for the organization and arrangement of the bill.

5. Prepare a draft in a form meeting legal and technical requirements.

6. Check doubtful substantive matters with experts (unless the requester directs
otherwise) or by independent research.

7. Check with the requester on further questions of policy.

8. Revise the draft as many times as necessary to produce a satisfactory result.

9. Recheck the draft for arrangement, consistency, coherence and clarity.

10. Re-recheck the draft, using the Checklist for Drafters inside the request folder.


24. REVIEW

(Taken from: Applied Imagination by Alex F. Osborn; published by Charles
Scribner’s Sons, p. 125, 1953 ed.)
1. Phases of Creative Procedure.
a. Orientation: Pointing up the problem.
b. Preparation: Gathering pertinent data.
c. Analysis: Breaking down the relevant material.
d. Hypotheses: Piling up alternatives by way of ideas.
e. Incubation: Letting up, to invite illumination.
f. Synthesis: Putting the pieces together.
g. Verification: Judging the resultant ideas.
2. Devices Designed to Help Activate Imagination.
a. Make a start.
b. Make notes and use checklists.
c. Set deadlines and quotas.
d. Set time and place (for thinking).

I am more than willing to tackle sections 3, 5 & 6 for starters, you may decide to assist or take any of these from myself or others and/or work in conjunction with these people who have taken on a task already.

The Goals of what is to be written into Law is found in the thread: MRT Leadership

Please review what we are after and if you see additional bargaining chips we can go after then ADD IT and make a provisional note to catch our attention to it.

Redpaw of the MRT.

Excelent work Redpaw!!

I have copied and pasted it here.


From Redpaw...


The time is now to be heard.

I’m sure that others will say its asking to much and it would never pass but I think if you never try you’ll never get any were. At the very least they will see we will not stand by and let the government take away our right to mine.
You Got My Vote!!!!
Gat.

I am supporting Dave on this bill and have posted a direct action request:

http://golddredger.com/dcforum/DCForumID2/1745.html

If anyone can post a similar thing here, I appreciate it (my I-net connect unplugs every 2 minutes -- driving me nuts)

Of course, I also expect the naysayers to be out in full force -- but like Gat -- we won't know until we try.

We have taken direct action in the following states with great success: Alabama, Florida, Virginia, Washington, Colorado, and Oregon (many times). I don't see the reason it can't work again.

Good luck to you all!

Matt

(Dan -- log me out please -- I've had to connect twice just to post this)

Thanks Matt,
I didn't have the list for senators here yet.
Didn't see you logged in so you must have gotten yourself logged out. :)



We all need to participate in this!

I posted this also in the MRT Leadership thread awhile back but thought it should be here as well.


CP

i think this is important to all. not just in oregon, but all states! we all need to continue supporting these issues and those that are supporting us! get your comments in.

Amen!. I'll do all I can to help.
geno,
NLRL-FL

All need to respond to this. We get this in our favor and it will a whole lot easier everywhere elese <_< Joe

Just keeping that pressure on . . . Hopefully you guys will do the same!

From: flagold@gate.net
Subject: ORS - 517 - Request For Attendance
Date: March 16, 2005 9:00:41 PM EST
To: sen.garygeorge@state.or.us, sen.tedferrioli@state.or.us, sen.jeffkruse@state.or.us, sen.rogerbeyer@state.or.us, sen.davidnelson@state.or.us, sen.frankmorse@state.or.us, and 3 more...
Cc: dredger@golddredger.com, and 12 more...

Dear Representative Anderson and Senators Atkinson, Beyer, Ferrioli, George, Kruse, Morse, Nelson, Starr, Westlund, Whitset, and Winters:

Please take the time to download and review the following 3 minute video on gold dredging and small scale prospecting in your state. Additionally, there is a workshop held annually for regulators of small scale prospectors and the public on the Similkimeen River in Oroville, Washington State each year, and I would urge you or members of your staff to attend. Regulations, and explanations and demonstrations of all the various kinds of equipment and methods small scale miners use are discussed, demonstrated, and de-mystified.

We used to hold these workshops and rallies in Roseburg, Oregon (DEF 2001-2003), with thousands attending and hundreds of thousands (if not more) dollars brought in to the state, but one to many visits by Oregon State Wildlife Officers with a green agenda has ended them for the time being and we simply have shifted to other states (Colorado, Montana, Washington). Please contact Bruce Beatty (Resources Coalition), or Cindi Creegan (DEF), for a schedule of regulatory events at the Washington Rally in August of this year: Bruce's email: fadingpast@qwest.net , Cindi's email: jccreegan@hotmail.com .

Should you wish to have our free to the public educational rallies again come to your state or discuss past problems, please contact Bruce Lamell: bigbruce53@hotmail.com or Jim Williams: creagh@highstream.net .

This email has been posted on the public message board at:

http://golddredger.com/dcforum/DCForumID2/1745.html

The video links are below, the top is the high resolution download recommended for DSL and the lower is the low resolution download for dial-up.

Thank you,

Matt Mattson

www.golddredgervideo.com/agencyworkshop2004.wmv High Resolution 35 meg
www.golddredgervideo.com/agencyworkshop2004lo.wmv

Thanks Matt,

Good letter and warm invite for officials.

We'll be talking about the Oregon DEQ proposal again next Monday which will again bring up discussions about the MRT mandate as it did at the last meeting on this topic.

Hope to see everyone there, 7pm MST 3/21/05
Get the word out to everyone.

CP

If this makes it any were it will have a price on it just like SB 343 1998 which cost us every thing we lost to this point in committee. Beware of what you wish for, look at the DEQ 700-J permit and how a group of weak people have convinced a lot of you that you need the 700-J permit and its snitch rules and the industrial laws. Then look at the Zabasearch web sight that will take you to the front door of the homes of the greens who are hurting us. And always remember that the links in a giant chain that are being forged that will one day bind us all by the necks as slave is real. Randytwo

Dan,

I wish I could participate in the CP discussions, but my connection is so slow it just doesn't work out down here in the swamp. Glad theres places miners can go that believe in free and open debate. Keep up the good work!

Good luck!
Matt

Come on Matt, try harder, and Redpaw isnt it time that you came and said hello.You are missed, we wonder where you are and what you are doing.
Good luck what ever you are up to but do come and say hi.

.

the Eastern oregon Miners Association(EOMA) and Tom Kitchner has assumed this fight . hes also from the Waldo mining district and i think the addy is www.waldomining district.org if you want to keep up to date with the events. we at the show me gold prospectors of Missouri (GPAA)(Joe Mann and myself)have sent in donations to help in this fight!

Russ,John and myself man the helm of the miners issues committee of SMGP in Mo. We have a raffle at each meeting with all the proceeds going to to help fight where we feel we are needed. If every club that belonged to any organisation would do the same it would sure help. Greens are on the move everywhere you look now. I was told just tonite that several groups are trying to make a large area of the Mark Twain National Forrest in Missouri a wilderness area. Joe

yep ive been watching this in its development.

Awesome work Joe, Russ, and John. You guys are tops!
Thank you for your efforts all around!

CP