He was one of only 3 people to testify before the Oregon Legislature against adoption of the primary screenout in 2005. COFOE in 2007 then filed an amicus brief in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in a lawsuit filed by a local activist to challenge the constitutionality of the primary screenout. The 9th Circuit adopted the COFOE position (that the activist’s lack of standing meant that the District Court had no authority to opine on the merits) and reversed the District Court decision (which had upheld the constitutionality of the screenout).

Now, the Oregon Legislature has repealed the screenout bill he opposed in 2005. Several legislators actually apologized for having originally voted for the screenout. One said it was her worst vote during a decade of service in the Legislature.

There are two reasons that this bill may not go into effect:

First, I have heard that the Democratic Party of Oregon (DPO) is urging the Governor to veto this bill. The only known organizational opponents to the fusion lite part of the bill were the teachers’ union (OEA) and the DPO.

Second, Senator Devlin vowed on the floor of the Senate to amend the “fusion lite” part of SB 326 in the 2010 Session, before its provisions will have had a chance to be used. He said (my rough transcript): “My intention is to come back in February and address the problems with fusion lite.” He did not specify what those problems are. He mentioned the county clerks, but the Association of County Clerks testified that they could handle “fusion lite” with existing software. Knowing that his party opposed this bill, Senator Devlin’s changes in February may be significant.