Efforts in Oregon

By None, Death with Dignity Update, Feb. 17, 2006

Oregon is the only state in which physician-assisted dying is legal. The Oregon Death with Dignity Act [Ballot Measure 16] was supported by a majority of Oregon voters in 1994, and voters defeated efforts to overturn the law in 1997 [Ballot Measure 51]. In addition, the law has been upheld in every legal challenge before the federal courts -- U.S. District Court, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court. The Oregon law's defenders have also defeated two congressional efforts at nullification.

Oregon Democratic Senator Ron Wyden
Informs Senate Leadership He'll Block
Efforts fo Overturn Oregon's Law

Office of U.S. Senator Ron Wyden
JacksonvilleOregonNews.com
1/19/2006

Washington, DC - U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) today informed U.S. Senate leadership that he will block any Federal legislative efforts that would impact Oregon's Death with Dignity Act, which the U.S. Supreme Court upheld yesterday. In a statement submitted to the Congressional Record and in a letter to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), Wyden stated his intention "to use every legislative and procedural tool at my disposal as a United States Senator to block any attempt to overturn, invalidate or otherwise affect Oregon's law in any way."

In 2000, Wyden used his ability to filibuster to block legislative efforts in the U.S. Senate that would have invalidated Oregon's Death with Dignity Act, which has been approved twice by the state's voters. In July 2005, Wyden, along with U.S. Reps. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.), Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.), Darlene Hooley (D-Ore.) and David Wu (D-Ore.) filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court opposing efforts by the U.S. Department of Justice to overturn the Oregon law, first enacted by the state in 1997.

In that brief they maintained that former Attorney General John Ashcroft used the Controlled Substances Act incorrectly to bring the Justice Department's case and threaten Oregon physicians who follow the Oregon law. The Supreme Court upheld the Oregon law yesterday in a 6-3 decision.

As a matter of policy, Wyden publicly announces any formal objection he lodges with regard to the nominees or legislation, and does so with a formal statement in the Congressional Record. The text of Wyden's statement and letter to Senator Reid can be found below.

For the Congressional Record

Statement by United States Senator Ron Wyden

Mr. President, consistent with my practice of announcing publicly my intent to object to unanimous consent requests, I am asking unanimous consent to print this statement and the attached letter in the Congressional Record. It explains that I will use every legislative and procedural tool at my disposal as a United States Senator to block any attempt to affect in any way Oregon's Death with Dignity Act, which the Supreme Court upheld yesterday.

Text of Letter to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid:

January 18, 2006

The Honorable Harry Reid
Minority Leader

S-221, The Capitol
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Leader Reid:

I am writing to inform you of my intent to object to any unanimous consent request to consider any measure or matter that might affect end of life care generally and Oregon's Death with Dignity Act in particular.

As you know, the U.S. Supreme Court yesterday upheldOregon's unique Death with Dignity Act, and I intend to use every legislative and procedural tool at my disposal as a United States Senator to block any attempt to overturn, invalidate or otherwise affect Oregon's law in any way.

Consistent with my practice of publicly announcing my intent to place a "hold" on a measure or matter, I will ask that this letter be printed in the Congressional Record. If your staff has any questions, please feel free to contact my Legislative and Policy Director, Carole Grunberg, or my Senior Health Policy Advisor, Stephanie Kennan at 202-224-5244.

Sincerely,

Ron Wyden
U.S. Senator
To contact Senator Wyden, go to http://wyden.senate.gov/contact/

Given Ruling, Smith Says He Won't Fight Assisted Suicide
by Jim Barnett, The Oregonian, 1/18/2006

"I accept the Supreme Court's decision, and Congress should do the same."

WASHINGTON -- After winning a 6-3 Supreme Court decision Tuesday, supporters of Oregon's law allowing physician-assisted suicide gained a second, unexpected victory: the grudging support of Oregon's Republican Sen. Gordon Smith.

In 2000, Smith supported legislation that would have blocked the Oregon law by preventing doctors from prescribing lethal doses of federally controlled pain medications. But on Tuesday, Smith suggested that he would not do so again.

"Regardless of my personal position on assisted suicide, Oregon's law has been tested at every branch of our government, and the judgment of Oregon's voters has been affirmed," Smith said in a statement. "I accept the Supreme Court's decision, and Congress should do the same."

Chris Matthews, a spokesman for Smith, said the senator was with his family and could not be reached for further comment Tuesday. Matthews declined to elaborate on Smith's prepared statement.

Congress is not in session this week, so there was little congressional reaction to the ruling .

Republicans control both chambers of Congress, and they likely could muster enough votes for legislation that would block use of the Oregon law. But Smith's apparent about-face could alter the political landscape dramatically in the Senate: Rules allow individual senators to halt legislation, and senior Republicans likely would defer to Smith's wishes.

Nathan Diament, director of public policy for the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, said it would be difficult, though not impossible, to pass a law without Smith's support.

Smith's three-sentence statement left unanswered how far he would go to head off new legislation. Opponents of the Oregon law called on Congress to act, in effect promising to test the limits of Smith's resolve.

"In no sense can assisting a suicide be called a 'legitimate medical purpose' for any drug," said Richard M. Doerflinger of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. "Congress now has an obligation to reaffirm that fact."

Sen. Don Nickles, R-Okla., led the charge against the Oregon law in 2000 and nearly succeeded in passing a bill called the Pain Relief Promotion Act. It stalled only when Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., threatened a filibuster that would have tied up the Senate floor shortly before the 2000 election.

Wyden said in an interview Tuesday that he welcomed Smith's statement, but he declined to speculate on what role Smith might play in a defense of the Oregon law.

A bigger factor, he said, would be the public backlash to the case of Terry Schiavo, an incapacitated Florida woman who died in April after her feeding tube was removed. Congress passed legislation forcing federal courts to take the case, but they also refused to order the tube to be reinserted.

"I think the Schiavo case was a watershed in this country's consideration of end-of-life care," Wyden said. "I am hopeful that will ripple over to any effort that may come up with respect to the Oregon law. It's too early to tell, but that's my hope."

Smith was the only member of the Oregon delegation to support Nickles' legislation. Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., the delegation's only other Republican, opposed a similar House bill, calling it a threat to states' rights.

Smith endorsed Nickles' bill in emotional testimony before the Judiciary Committee in April 2000. His voice choking with emotion, Smith said: "I'm caught in the crosshairs between the majority and my conscience. I find it very uncomfortable, but I also find that to be responsible to the people who elected me, I should be clear on where I am."

Nickles retired last year, but there likely will be no shortage of senators to fill his role in the debate. His successor, Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., indicated that he might pick up where Nickles left off.

"I'd like to block that law, too," Coburn, a practicing physician, said in a brief interview last week.

In an interview last year, Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., Nickles' lead Democratic co-sponsor, said that he would seek a new partner. "I believe in that bill, and I'd like to re-introduce it."

Email this page to a friend Share on Facebook Share on StumbleUpon Print this page