Power parity in Oregon: after the 2002 general election resulted in a 15-15 tie in the Senate, Oregon lawmakers forged a historic power-sharing agreement.

• Author: Wong, Peter

As the Oregon Legislative Assembly met last year for a record five special sessions to cope with a sagging state budget, Senators Peter courtney and Lenn Hannon took a political beating from many of their colleagues.

Courtney got into vigorous political disagreements--even vehement personal exchanges--with fellow Democrats. Yet, he and his party's Senate leader attempted to broker agreements with thin Republican majorities and a lame duck Democratic governor about how to cut spending, draw from reserves, borrow money and even raise some taxes to rebalance the budget.

Hannon caught flak even worse from fellow Republicans, who forced him to step down--if only for a few days--as the Senate's chief budget negotiator.

"But we forged a working relationship during those five special sessions," Hannon says. "Everything has led up to this moment."

This year, there's a world of difference in the Oregon Senate--and for its two most experienced lawmakers. Together they are controlling the flow of legislation, setting budget priorities and negotiating with the House and governor.

The 2002 general election resulted in a 15-15 split between Democrats and Republicans. It was the first tie in almost half a century and only the second in Oregon's 144 years of statehood. Meanwhile, Republicans strengthened their majority in the House, and a Democrat was elected governor for the fifth straight time.

An historic power-sharing agreement between the parties thrust Courtney and Hannon into the top Senate leadership positions. Courtney was chosen president, to his surprise and that of almost everyone else. Hannon became president pro tem and second in command of the chamber.

"We felt they can do the job or we would not have put them there," says Senate Republican Leader Bev Clarno.

Courtney and Hannon have almost 50 years between them in the legislature, including service during Oregon's severe recession of 1981-82.

"We wanted to have leaders that both sides felt comfortable with," says Senate Democratic Leader Kate Brown. "That says a lot for these two men.

Still, Courtney says, every day brings forth events unforeseen under the agreement, "and it is nerve-wracking."

FORGING THE AGREEMENT

After Democrats gained and Republicans lost one seat in the 2002 election to create the 15-15 tie, they began to seek ways to resolve how to organize the Senate for Oregon's every-other-year regular legislative session.

The president is usually chosen by the Senate's majority party and controls the flow of legislation by appointing committee members and chairs and assigning bills to them. Because neither chamber amends legislation on the floor, committee control by presiding officers is the key to Oregon's lawmaking.

Until a president is chosen, the Senate cannot conduct business. The Oregon Constitution suspends payments to members if a chamber remains unorganized after five days.

And leadership crises are not new to the Senate. Organization was stalled in 1957 when the only other tie requited 10 days and 251 ballots to pick a president. It stalled again in 1971, 1983 and 1993.

In 1957 and 1971, the crises were resolved through coalitions with Democrats in the presidency and Republicans in key committee chairmanships. Those coalitions ran the Oregon Senate for almost two decades. Majority Democrats finally rallied around a candidate in 1983 and 1993.

One power-sharing option widely used in other states--including the Washington House from 1999 to 2002--requires co-presiding officers and committee co-chairmen from each major party. But that idea was quickly squelched by Hannon, a moderate Republican who as a former Democrat was considered likely to join a coalition with Democrats.

"When we started negotiations, we were concerned about gridlock," Hannon says. "That's what I think a co-leadership arrangement would have brought us."

Hannon never encouraged talk of a coalition, though many in the Capitol predicted that result. He says he wanted genuine negotiations toward power sharing.

Democratic Leader Kate Brown said leaders looked at shared power arrangements in Arizona, Maine and Washington and also consulted with NCSL staff. "We knew everything in terms of possibilities," she says. "We stole pieces of each to come up with a solution that fits Oregon."

The parties got down to business in December, a month after the election...