Trying to add a payment method? You can do this on the 
Thirty-five days. That’s all Oregon lawmakers were given in this even-year, short legislative session to tackle some of the state’s most pressing issues.
Chief among them? Finding at least $670 million to plug budget holes caused by the failure of state Democrats to reach a compromise on Oregon Department of Transportation funding, and the Trump administration’s tax-and-spending bill (the “One Big Beautiful Bill”), which reduced or eliminated a variety of corporate and individual taxes.
To that end, lawmakers accomplished much in barely more than a calendar month. They realized more than $400 million in savings with a combination of cuts, redirecting uncommitted funds to core services and keeping vacant state jobs unfilled.
And the successful effort to decouple Oregon from elements of Trump’s federal tax changes — a move roughly half of U.S. states have taken over decades to shield themselves from provisions of the federal tax code they don’t like — is projected to generate more than $340 million in revenue.
Mission accomplished, right?
Not quite. Left unanswered is how lawmakers plan to address Trump administration cuts to health and social services, which are expected to cost Oregon an estimated $15 billion in lost Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program funding over the next six years.
And Democrats’ maneuvering to change the date of a voter referendum on the gas tax and transportation fees they passed last year signals more fights over road maintenance to come. But these are the kinds of thorny issues typically addressed in the 160-day long legislative sessions held in odd-numbered years.
Given this year’s time constraints, the dozens of bills lawmakers passed still provided several key wins for the state, as well as a few head-scratchers. Here’s what we liked, and what we didn’t, from the 2026 Oregon legislative session:
The good
Protections for immigrants: Lawmakers took several steps to protect Oregon immigrants from the Trump administration’s radical deportation policies. A bill requiring law enforcement officers to identify themselves and ban their wearing of masks is likely to face legal challenges from the federal government. But other bills take a less confrontational, and arguably more effective, approach to fighting back against federal immigration overreach. They include changes to Oregon law that would require federal law enforcement to provide verifiable warrants before conducting immigration enforcement at public schools or higher education institutions, as well as requiring hospitals to set clear guidelines for responding to law enforcement.
Automated license-plate reader regulation: Lawmakers took some steps to prevent a repeat of the Flock Safety automated license-plate reader debacle that played out in Eugene last year, when dozens of cameras were placed around the city without public input, leading to fears that data collected by the cameras could be shared with federal law enforcement agencies conducting immigration enforcement activities. A bill passed in this year’s session seeks to specify what information collected by these cameras can be shared with other law enforcement agencies. The bill is missing several key pieces, including a clearer definition of data encryption. But lawmakers are likely to take another crack at tightening their use next year.
Urgent care legislation: With urgent care clinics seeing more patients due to overcrowded emergency departments, a bill requiring at least one licensed health care provider to be on site during operating hours at urgent care clinics is a small but important step to ensuring medically vulnerable patients have at least some access to quality care when emergencies arise.
Urban Growth Boundary flexibility: Yes, Lane County (and Oregon, and much of the West Coast) is still in a housing crisis. Lawmakers took several small but important steps toward giving cities more flexibility in how they bring new land into their growth boundaries to address their housing shortages. One bill passed makes it easier for cities to expand their boundaries for the specific purpose of creating new senior and manufactured housing. Another bill, passed specifically for the city of Eugene, makes it easier for the city to annex properties in the River Road and Santa Clara areas that don’t currently border land in the city limits, in order to zone them for city rather than county residential use.
The bad
Transportation trickery: Democrats conducted a masterclass in avoidance by muscling through legislation that moves the voter referendum on gas taxes and transportation fees from November to the May ballot. While reasoning for the move makes some sense — giving lawmakers more time to figure out how much funding they’ll need to come up with in next year’s long session — it was a highly cynical move, keeping the controversial tax and fee hikes off of the November general election ballot — you know, the same ballot those lawmakers will be facing Republican challengers on. Instead, it will be voted on during the lower-turnout May primaries.
Subsidizing the Trail Blazers: This editorial board is pro-Trail Blazers. But legislation authorizing the state to sell bonds to update Portland’s Moda Center — fueled by fears that a new owner might try to move the team — contains some troubling budget math. Under the state’s current tax law, income taxes paid by Trail Blazers players, as well as employers and performers in Portland’s Rose Quarter entertainment district, go into Oregon’s general fund. But the new law would redirect an estimated $72 million from that pot in the state’s next budget cycle to pay off those bonds instead. Which makes this feel a bit like a “stadium tax” Oregonians are indirectly on the hook for.
Watering down gun safety: We’re disappointed the Democratic majority seemingly validated House Republicans’ walkout strategy by watering down their bill to modify elements of Oregon Measure 114, the package of gun control measures voters passed in 2022. Instead of making some modest changes to the law, they paused its implementation until 2028, citing uncertainty surrounding a challenge to the measure at the Oregon Supreme Court. We understand lawmakers’ reluctance to enact legislation before legal rulings are settled. But we’re confident Measure 114’s restrictions on high-ammo rounds and expanded background checks, permit and firearm safety requirements are on the right side of state and federal law. A federal judge and the Oregon Court of Appeals have already declared it constitutional, and the state Supreme Court is considering an appeal stemming from a single circuit court judge’s decision in Harney County.
Punching holes in public meetings law: Advocates of transparency in government are rightly alarmed by a bill passed giving government officials a loophole to circumvent Oregon’s Public Meetings Law. The change would allow officials to communicate privately to gather information outside of a public meeting. Theoretically, it could allow members of an elected body, like a city council, to conduct business through a series of one-on-one conversations with each other, outside of a meeting subject to public meeting law, shielding them from public scrutiny. We applaud and join with the Oregon Newspaper Publishers Association in calling on Gov. Tina Kotek to veto this bill. And do it soon, to send the message that there is no room in Oregon for legislation that damages the public’s right to know how they are being governed.
