Friends,
The following is an email from Oregon Rep. Barnhart regarding SB589.
Rep. Barnhart and his staff worked tirelessly throughout this session to
make this happen:
--------------------Begin Forwarded Message----------------------------
Ken,
Yes indeed, the bill is back. This time better than ever. It consists of
the amendments to HB 2892 we could never get adopted. As you recall, I
drafted them with the help of the Department of Adiministrative Services
to get their support for HB 2892. The bill is not a "gut and stuff" but
an entirely new bill.
I got out a press release last week. I apologize if I didn't get it to
you. We have been very busy working on the budget.
The bill will continue to require that agencies "consider" open source
software and adds "open standards" to the definition of open systems
that DAS is already charged with obtaining for us.
The bill was introduced by the Senate Rules Committee. I provided
support, the draft, and urged Senator Kate Brown, the Democratic Leader
to go with it. But it would not have happened without the very good work
of many people who emailed the Senators to point out the value of the
bill. Finally, Cooper Stevenson has been working the bill tirelessly for
months and finally got Senator Atkinson (probably with the help of
unknown to me others) to support it.
You get credit for the idea and the original bill and much work
thereafter. Many, many open source supporters' emails and letters got
it on the radar in the Senate ("Phil, what is this open source stuff I
keep hearing about?? (puzzled look)",from several Senators over the last
three months).
Finally, Cooper went into the offices of the Rules Committee members and
got the final "OKs".
I never ever want to be on the bad side of you guys. I am enjoying
moving around the opponents. If we play our cards right, this bill could
even be a part of the "end game" for the session.
My suggestion, email the Rules Committee members in the Senate and thank
them for introducing the bill. Urge them to get it to the floor for a
vote. Go to the public hearing if one is scheduled and help get it
passed there. No wild promises, there, just sober support for the future
of the state being in control of its software at an efficient cost. In
many areas the decision to require open standards will be even more
important than open source for keeping the states costs down and in
control of its own data.
Congrats again on the good work. Keep it up.
Phil
Phil Barnhart
State Representative
Central Lane and Linn Counties
-----Original Message-----
From: Ken Barber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sat 8/9/2003 8:07 PM
To: Darren Shepard; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Eric Harrison; Jeremy Hogan; Phil Barnhart; Robin 'Roblimo'
Miller
Subject: Re: [lug] HB 2892, SB 589 -- now SB 941?
On Tuesday 05 August 2003 14:01, Darren Shepard wrote:
> Apologies if this is old news. Has the open-source bill been
> resurrected !?
>
> SB 941 <http://pub.das.state.or.us/LEG_BILLS/PDFs/SB941.pdf>
It looks like it. There's been an ongoing effort in the Senate to
find a dead bill that could be "gutted and stuffed" with the
language of the amended HB 2892. The original target was an
agricultural bill with a number in the 500's, but no one could
get enough votes in its committee to move it.
This appears to be a new bill that was introduced Monday while I
was away at Linuxworld. Its language is identical to what HB
2892 would have looked like after amendments. Too bad I didn't
know about this until now; I told everyone at Linuxworld (and
several asked!) that Oregon's open source bill is "probably
dead."
This looks like very good news. I'll reserve comment until I have
a chance to talk to my contacts in Salem next week.
Ken Barber
Author, Oregon's open source bill
---------------------------End Forwarded Message-----------------------
Best,
Cooper Stevenson
MWVLUG Coordinator
Em: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Www: http://www.mwvlug.org
_______________________________________________
EuG-LUG mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug
