Oregon Sen. Lisa Reynolds mulls conflict of interest declaration after ethics report
Oregon's statewide ethics watchdog on Thursday referred a Portland-area lawmaker to the Legislature for clarity over whether a bill she authored that could benefit her medical practice raises a substantial conflict of interest.
The Oregon Government Ethics Commission said Sen. Lisa Reynolds' decisions regarding votes and bill introductions were within the purview of the Legislature and its legal counsel, according to a Thursday letter written by Susan Myers, the commission's executive director. Introduced in January, Senate Bill 28 would mandate commercial insurers reimburse independent primary care clinics at rates equal to those of clinics owned by hospital systems.
In the letter, Myers said that Reynolds, D-Portland, 'would be met with a conflict of interest' unless she is able to receive a class exception. The rule is traditionally adjudicated by the commission, determining whether an official action by a public official would impact all members of a 'class,' such as business owners or members of a particular industry, equally.
But it's up to the Legislature, not the Commission, to decide whether the exception applies because the matter 'relates to the performance of legislative functions,' Myers wrote. Lawmakers are allowed to cast votes and perform legislative tasks under Oregon's 'speech and debate' rules for public officials even when they do declare conflicts of interest.
Reynolds told the Capital Chronicle she hasn't decided whether she will seek further advice. She said that she will consult with her staff and tends 'to err on the side of caution.'
'I'll see going forward,' she said. 'It would be interesting to note the votes I've taken. For example, the provider tax which funds Medicaid — do I have to say that's a conflict of interest because my clinic takes Medicaid? I don't think so.'
The advice follows a request from the commission in a May 6 letter written by her chief of staff, Christopher McMorran, a day before the Oregon Journalism Project ran a story in which Reynolds said she was open to seeking the ethics' commissions advice and declaring a conflict of interest.
McMorran sought information about potential conflicts of interest because of Reynolds' job as a primary care provider at The Children's Clinic, an independent clinic in the Portland region.
'SB 28 would likely result in a financial gain for her clinic, along with all other independent primary care clinics in the state,' he wrote to the commission. 'We are curious if her introducing, sponsoring and supporting this bill qualifies as a conflict of interest or if she would be considered a member of a class and be exempt from conflict of interest laws.'
Reynolds said the advice was 'reassuring' and that she believes she would likely qualify for a class exemption.
'I'm a citizen legislator. My day job is that of a pediatrician. In fact, I was in the clinic all last weekend,' she said. 'I still see patients and I actually ran as Dr. Lisa Reynolds. I ran for office leaning into the fact that I am a physician and it informs all that I do in the Legislature.'
Her legislation is currently sitting in the Joint Ways and Means Committee.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
15 minutes ago
- Fox News
'All-out war': Fleeing Texas Dems side with Newsom as redistricting standoff continues: 'fire with fire'
California Gov. Gavin Newsom said he is ready to fight "fire with fire" as state Republican lawmakers try to enact redistricting in Texas, opposing the move though promising to pursue similar measures if needed. At a press conference on Monday, Newsom said he supports independent redistricting, as well as a national framework, and a proposal being advanced in the legislature reinforces what he supports. "The proposal that we're advancing with the legislature has a trigger only if they move forward, to dismantling the protocols that are well-established," the governor said. "Would the state of California move forward in kind? Fighting? Yes, fire with fire." When asked about a meeting between California Democrats on Sunday night, during which time they drafted or were almost done with the draft of redistricting maps, and whether he had seen those maps, Newsom said he had not. But he said there has been an ongoing series of conversations into the evening last night, which continued on Monday morning and will continue until Democrats land on a process. "That process has to have the concurrence, the support of two-thirds of the legislature," he said. "The maps, we believe, should be transparent. They should be provided in a transparent way to the public, and as a consequence, those maps are being processed and will be brought to light." At the end of the day, though, Newsom said the people of California will have the ultimate say. "We will offer them the opportunity to make judgments for themselves, again, only if Texas moves forward," Newsom said. "I'll reinforce that we believe it should be a national model, independent national redistricting, and it would revert back to its original form, but it's done in response to the existential realities that we're now facing. Things have changed, facts have changed, so we must change." "They've triggered this response and we're not going to roll over and we're going to fight fire with fire, but we're going to do so not just punching with the weight of the fourth largest economy, the most populous state in our union, the size of 21 state populations combined," he continued. "We also will punch above our weight in terms of the impact of what we're doing, and I think that should be absorbed by those in the Texas delegation. Whatever they are doing will be neutered here in the state of California, and they will pay that price." California GOP Chairwoman Corrin Rankin told Fox News Digital that Newsom's actions could threaten the constitutional rights of Californians while also setting a dangerous precedent. "While Governor Newsom frames this redistricting as a defensive move, it undermines California's nationally respected, voter-approved Citizens Redistricting Commission, and if successful, sets a dangerous precedent that voters' choices can be overruled whenever politicians find it politically convenient," Rankin said. "Our primary concern is safeguarding Californians' constitutional rights against partisan manipulation disguised as defending democracy; true democracy means empowering voters, not politicians, to decide representation." Dozens of Texas Democrats fled their state and went to Chicago and New York on Sunday night in an effort to block a redistricting vote on Monday. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has since threatened to arrest and expel the lawmakers if they do not return by Monday afternoon. Shortly after Abbott released his statement, the Texas House Democratic Caucus issued a simple response, writing: "Come and take it." The statement also described Republicans' proposed districts, which would potentially secure five new GOP U.S. House seats in next year's midterm elections, as a "racist mid-decade redistricting scheme." Abbott criticized the Democrats' dramatic departure, saying that "real Texans don't run from a fight." On Monday evening, Illinois lawmakers hosted Texas Democrats for a press conference, during which time none of the lawmakers took a single question from the press. Still, Rep. Robin Kelly, D-Ill., welcomed her colleagues and said they could stay as long as they wanted because they believed in what they were doing. "What you're doing and what…they're trying to do in Texas affects you guys, but it affects the whole country," she said. "When you want to remove five Democrats…that hurts us in the House." She explained that when there are not enough Democrats, things like the Big Beautiful Bill, or as she referred to it as "the Big Ugly Bill," and other Republican initiatives get through. "They are trying to destroy our democracy, destroy fairness in our country," Kelly said. "And unfortunately, they're starting with Texas. But we want you to know, we stand by your side." Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, D-Ill., accused Abbott of not stepping up for the people affected by devastating floods in the Hill Country region of Texas. Specifically, he accused Abbott of not having a special session to help families rebuild, but instead of doing "the bidding" of President Donald Trump to "banish Democrats" from the federal delegation. Krishnamoorthi then directed his comments to Abbott, saying, "don't mess with Texas," because the people standing with him represent Texas. "You can silence them. You can smear them. You can saddle them with debts and fins. But you cannot intimidate them," Krishnamoorthi said. "You can gerrymander the hell out of that map. Guess what? Two can play that game. That's right. Other states will do exactly the same thing and neutralize what you're trying to do in Texas." Other lawmakers standing side-by-side in Illinois chose to accuse Trump's policies of being race-driven. Texas State Rep. Ana-Maria Rodriguez Ramos said Trump's policies hurt working families. "That is nothing short of racism," she said. "He is coming after all of us who don't look like him and his Republican colleagues in the Texas House." Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, followed Rodriguez Ramos with more accusations of racism, saying Republicans are doing what Trump has insisted be done. "I want you to know that we didn't introduce the race card when this message was sent by and through the Justice Department to the State of Texas, to our attorney general," he said. "They mentioned the race card because they talked about racial gerrymandering. They brought it up, and when they brought it up, they did it, knowing that this was a buzz word. It was a trigger." "They know that that's a buzz word that people would respond to in Texas, but we are going to respond to that buzz word by telling them that your racism is not going to change democracy in the state of Texas," Green continued. "In the United States of America, racism is going to be met with our taking a stand for democracy. You take a stand for racism, we will stand for democracy, and we will win." Rep. Julie Johnson, D-Texas, said she was pleased that states like California and New York were standing up for Texas Democrats because, once it happens in Texas, it will spread to other states. She called the issue a "national war," and "an all-out war" in which everything is on the table. "We come from a state of great pride, and I never thought as a Texan, as an elected member of the Texas House of Representatives and now as an elected member from Texas to the United States House of Representatives, that I would see the governor of the proud state of Texas bend a knee to a felon from New York," Johnson added. "I never thought I'd see the day, but here we are." Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Texas, was also standing with fellow Democrats in Illinois and accused Abbott of talking "a lot of noise." She also accused Republicans of being "weak." "The difference is they expect Democrats to kind of be the nice guys that we are," Crockett said. "They expect us to take the punch and say thank you. Well, I am here to tell you not only are we going to punch back, but we about to beat you down." Still, Abbott told Fox News host Sean Hannity on Monday that Texas is doing what it is allowed to do by law. He also accused state Democrats of doing something "un-Texas" by turning their back on Texans and not dealing with the flooding issues still echoing across the state. Abbott said four of the five seats that could change because of redistricting will be primarily Hispanic. "These are seats where Democrats are having to come to grips with reality," he said, explaining that Democrats are losing votes to Hispanics and Black voters in Texas. He also said Democrats are "freaking out" because they are realizing Texas has the authority to redistrict. "Texas will continue to fight for what is right," Abbott said.
NBC News
38 minutes ago
- NBC News
Nebraska Republican faces rowdy town hall with questions about Epstein files and fired BLS chief
Rep. Mike Flood, R-Neb., held a town hall Monday that started with boos from the crowd shortly after he took the stage and ended with chants of 'vote him out' when the event ended. In between, the Nebraska Republican was consistently heckled while responding to questions about releasing more information on Jeffrey Epstein, President Donald Trump's firing of the Bureau of Labor Statistics commissioner and cuts to Medicaid in the GOP's 'Big, Beautiful Bill.' Audience members began yelling at Flood and booing him when he talked about Medicaid and the impact of Trump's sweeping domestic policy law on hospitals in Nebraska. Flood argued that there's 'a lot of misinformation' about the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act,' which no Democrats voted for when it made its way through Congress this summer. Later he faced a question that suggested he was covering up files related to Epstein. Flood responded by saying he supports releasing the files and will co-sponsor a non-binding House resolution calling for their publication. Flood added that he supports an effort led by House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer, R-Ky., to have Epstein co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell sit for a deposition. Comer last week postponed Maxwell's deposition, previously scheduled for Aug. 11, until at least October to let the Supreme Court decide in late September whether it will review her case. Flood also weighed in on the firing of BLS chief Erika McEntarfer, who Trump dismissed Friday shortly after the agency published figures showing that hiring in the U.S. had significantly slowed significantly in recent months. The congressman suggested he might have handled the situation differently, while adding that he does not know 'all the details' about McEntarfer's firing. 'I don't know what the situation was with the Department of Labor person. Neither do you. I don't know. I don't know,' Flood said. 'I can tell you I've been an employer for a lot of years, and there's always two sides to every story, and I don't know what that side was. I will say this, though, if all that person did was get the data out there, if all that, and I don't know that's the case, but if that's all they did, I would not have fired her.' Several Republican senators, as well as economists and statisticians, took issue with Trump terminating McEntarfer last week. Audience members yelled, jeered and booed throughout the event, with audible chants of 'free Palestine,' 'tax the rich,' and during the town hall's conclusion, calls to 'vote him out.' When Flood attempted to engage with audience members on those topics, he was largely met with more protests. Attendees asked at least three different questions about the Department of Homeland Security and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, specifically about Florida's 'Alligator Alcatraz,' which one attendee called 'Alligator Auschwitz.' Inquiring about the immigration detention facility in Florida, one attendee asked Flood, 'How much do taxpayers have to pay for a fascist country?' Flood responded to by saying the majority of Americans voted for Trump and not for Democratic nominee Kamala Harris. 'Americans voted for a, for a border that is secure, and I support the president enforcing our immigration laws, which, by the way, were written by Congress,' he added, prompting more boos. The Nebraska Democratic Party encouraged people to attend Flood's town hall, telling voters of Nebraska's 1st Congressional District in a social media post, 'you know what to do!' The party also encouraged attendance at Flood's last in-person town hall in the state, in May, when he was grilled by audience members and at one point conceded he had not read a bill in full before voting in favor of it.
CNN
38 minutes ago
- CNN
‘How much does it cost for fascism?': Tensions erupt at Nebraska GOP congressman's town hall
Rep. Mike Flood faced a barrage of criticism at a packed town hall in Lincoln, Nebraska, Monday evening as constituents repeatedly confronted him over his support for President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill,' immigration policy and what they described as threats to democracy. It didn't take long for the audience gathered for the meeting at the University of Nebraska to erupt in chants of 'tax the rich,' while the Republican congressman attempted to defend his decision to vote for the the president's massive agenda. 'I truly believe that this bill will allow America to experience growth, that it will allow our communities to thrive, that it will spark our economy, that it will help farmers and ranchers, that it will take care of the vulnerable. And more than anything, I truly believe this bill protects Medicaid for the future,' Flood said, speaking over outbursts from the crowd. Flood, one of few members of his party to hold in-person events during spring's congressional recess as the GOP looked to avoid blowback from the president's DOGE initiative, heeded the National Republican Congressional Committee's updated guidance to focus this August district work period on selling Trump's agenda. 'With the One Big Beautiful Bill signed into law just a few weeks ago, this is a critical opportunity to continue to define how this legislation will help every voter and push back on Democrat fearmongering,' the memo from the NRCC, the House GOP's campaign arm, stated. But as he did earlier this year, Flood met a largely hostile crowd. The congressman was pressed on everything from the president's sweeping tax and spending cuts legislation to veterans' issues, Medicaid funding and the war in Gaza during a wide-ranging question-and-answer period – all against a backdrop of near-constant heckling, chants and booing from the audience. Still, the he maintained his position on the president's domestic agenda package. 'Is every bill perfect? No, but I supported this bill,' he told the crowd. In one tense back-and-forth in Nebraska, an audience member confronted Flood about government spending and authoritarianism. 'My question is fiscal,' the attendee began, referencing reports that the makeshift immigration detention facility in Florida dubbed 'Alligator Alcatraz' is expected to cost $450 million to operate for a single year. 'How much does it cost for fascism? How much do the taxpayers have to pay for a fascist country?' the attendee asked, as the crowd erupted in applause. Flood responded, 'Americans went to the polls in November, and they had a choice between a Democratic candidate that had an open border, no enforcement, fentanyl, drugs, human trafficking, and they had a choice between that and a candidate that said close the border, get illegal immigrants out of our country, stop the fentanyl, stop the human trafficking, stop the drugs, stop the crime, stop the violence. That's what Americans voted for.' 'Americans voted for a border that is secure, and I support the president enforcing our immigration laws, which, by the way, were written by Congress.' The audience appeared to grow increasingly agitated, with continued shouts hurled at the congressman. Another member from the audience accused Flood of staying silent in the face of what they called a 'fascist machine,' referring to the conservative blueprint Project 2025. 'You said in Seward that you were not a fascist,' the person said. 'But your complicity says otherwise.' 'Fascists don't hold town halls with open question-and-answer series,' he responded. The audience again booed. Despite his efforts to present the recently passed budget bill – which one constituent called 'the big, ugly bill' – as a solution for Medicaid funding and rural hospitals, audience members attacked Flood over cuts to SNAP benefits, veterans' programs and health care access. Veterans in the audience criticized him for backing a law they said threatens benefits for those who served. 'How can you stand a bill that erodes the very services that people like me, my family, and younger vets rely on?' one Marine Corps veteran asked. Flood said he had personally met with the VA secretary and promised improvements to the system but offered no specifics. The Nebraska lawmaker also fielded a question on the Jeffrey Epstein files – a topic that has consumed Capitol Hill in recent weeks but yielded limited exchanges so far in the early public town halls during lawmakers' break from Washington. Read aloud by an aide at the event, the written question posed: 'Why are you covering up the Epstein files?' It was met with raucous applause from the audience. Flood responded: 'Let's be very clear – at the next pro forma session of the Congress, you will find my name as a sponsor on a resolution from the House Rules Committee to release the Epstein files to protect the victims and not re-victimize them again.' He added that he supports Congress' subpoena of Epstein's former associate Ghislaine Maxwell for a deposition, and declard: 'I am for the release of those records.' The topic also arose at a Democrat's town hall Monday night in Benton Harbor, Michigan, where Democratic Sen. Elissa Slotkin made a case against presidential pardon power. Asked by an audience member if she thinks the presidential pardon power should be limited, Slotkin called it 'a quirk of history that does not make sense in America for either party, for any reason.' 'To me, it is just a strange thing that the president of the United States has a few extra chits in their pocket to give away,' she continued, adding that she doesn't think people who are wrongly imprisoned should be in jail. As pressure grows on the Trump administration to release more information related to the Epstein case, the president hasn't ruled out a pardon for Maxwell, who met recently with a top Justice Department official and also was transferred to a lower security prison camp from where she was previously being held. Asked last week if clemency was on the table in exchange for Maxwell's testimony, Trump said, 'I'm allowed to do it, but nobody's asked me to do it. I know nothing about it. I don't know anything about the case, but I know I have the right to do it.' Slotkin expressed wariness that Trump is talking about pardon for Maxwell 'in year one of his presidency, not the end of his presidency, which is what you typically see.' 'Look, I thought it was controversial with President Biden, too. It was controversial with everyone that Obama or Clinton or Bush did. So to me, it's just this weird kind of literally get out of jail free card that I just think muddies the waters,' she said. 'When you have a president who has a deep, deep problem with corruption, it just can be taken to such a dangerous degree that he's letting out pedophiles and criminals, violent people because he's paying back favors to others. I just can't support that,' she continued. The Michigan senator, who delivered what she called her 'economic war plan for America' and argued against the massive domestic policy bill that Trump signed into law July 4, addressed another issue that looms large for lawmakers when they return to DC in a matter of weeks: government funding. As Democrats weigh how to approach negotiations with Republicans to keep the government funded past the September 30 deadline, Slotkin, who did not vote for the GOP-led bill to avert a shutdown earlier this year, said she would not be open to any proposal without a commitment by Republicans to restore some of the health care-related funding they have voted to slash. 'For me, for my vote, for my willingness to join in that negotiation, you're going to have to restore something of Americans' health care in order to get me back on that team,' she said.
