Democratic lawmakers are considering a plan to sidestep election laws so they can handcraft ballot language for two proposed amendments to the Oregon Constitution. They want to give Democrats extra say in what voters are told about proposed health and housing provisions, in the expectation that would make voters more likely to approve them.

Democrats in the Legislature carried out a similar plan last year, rankling Republicans, who described the tactic as subversive and undemocratic.

That time, Democrats were able to write the ballot language for Measure 101, the health care funding measure that voters passed with ease last month. With Democrats in charge of the ballot language, they avoided calling the funding package a "tax" in favor of the term "assessment." Republicans challenged that wording with the Oregon Supreme Court, which okayed use of the term "assessment" on ballots.

Democrats are contemplating a similar strategy for two proposed 2018 constitutional amendments. The first would declare access to affordable health care a right in Oregon. The second would allow cities to issue bonds to finance affordable housing projects.

Under Oregon law, the attorney general, currently Democrat Ellen Rosenblum, is supposed to write neutral ballot language for proposed constitutional amendments. Not so under Democrats' new plan.

Instead, Democrats would be allowed to form a legislative committee of four Democrats and two Republicans to write the ballot materials, according to draft language obtained by The Oregonian/OregonLive. That committee's language could still be appealed by any voter to the Oregon Supreme Court, which could order rewrites. All members of the state high court are registered Democrats.

The proposed plan lists the House Rules Committee as its sponsor. As chairwoman of that committee, House Majority Leader Jennifer Williamson, D-Portland, controls the proposed bill language it considers.

In a statement, Williamson described the proposed rule changes as creating "an open, transparent process for a bipartisan group of legislators" to explain their intent behind the proposed constitutional amendments. She said it "makes sense" that legislators would create a process to explain that intent because they are the ones asking voters to decide public policy via the ballot referrals.

House Speaker Tina Kotek, D-Portland, did not return a message seeking comment.

The proposed rule change drew cries of partisanship from Republican lawmakers and unease from Capitol observers.

"It's just stealing the process away from voters," said Rep. Julie Parrish, R-West Linn, who orchestrated the ill-fated "no" campaign against Measure 101.

Parrish said lawmakers should stick to the nonpartisan ballot language process that already exists.

"To take that process away and to keep doing this for one-off bills that's something [Democrats] oppose or is their pet project – it should make any voter angry that we are circumventing the process," Parrish said. She referred to the Democrat-dominated committee that wrote the Measure 101 ballot language as "a charade."

"If the shoe was on the other foot and Republicans were doing this, our Democratic colleagues would be screaming from the rooftops about abuse of power," Parrish said.

House Republicans spokesman Preston Mann tweeted Thursday, "Second time in less than a year Democrats have tried to say the normal rules don't apply to them when it comes to ballot titling."

Rob Harris, an attorney and volunteer with the Independent Party of Oregon, said his party was alarmed at last year's ballot rules rewrite. They're now analyzing the newly-drafted amendment.

"Democracy only works when you have a fair process," Harris said.

Norm Turrill, president of the League of Women Voters of Oregon, said he's seen the proposed rule change, but declined to comment on its specifics. He said that in general, his group's concern is that voters "be well informed as to what they're voting on" and get "the most clarity" possible from ballot language and the voters' pamphlet.

House members passed a resolution advancing the health-care-for-all amendment this week, on a party-line vote. A vote on the housing finance amendment is scheduled for Monday. Both resolutions must also be adopted by a majority of senators before they can placed on the November 2018 ballot.

-- Gordon R. Friedman

503-221-8209; @GordonRFriedman