Insurance coverage, personal healthcare spending, longevity, mortality, health risks, and provider shortages.
Uninsured rate · all ages5.2%2024 · #42 of 50 · highest first
Uninsured rate · under age 656.4%2024 · #41 of 50 · highest first
Private coverage · under age 6570%2024 · #35 of 50 · highest first
Oregon over time
Explore Oregon readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. Oregon officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a Oregon effect.
Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Oregon change.
Enacted / issuedDid not proceedPending / in progressStatus unclear
Colors show the latest recorded status. Passing one chamber is not enactment. A number groups actions with the same date, body and status.
Uninsured rate · all ages Oregon · source units
OregonPublished U.S. benchmark
Move across the chart to inspect the nearest observation. Click or tap to keep a reading selected, or focus the chart and use the arrow keys. Hover over or focus a marker to explore; click or tap to pin. Press Escape to clear.
143 of 143 reviewed Oregon actions match · 48 date markers shown. 22 major events shown separately.
Oregon · 2024: 5.2% · Rank #42 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 8.2%
FactVote uses the Census Bureau's HIC-4_ACS historical table. Rates and 90% confidence margins of error are the published ACS 1-year estimates for the civilian noninstitutionalized population. ACS annual estimates, all ages. Standard ACS 2020 one-year data were not released; the chart leaves a gap. Survey ranks describe point estimates and do not establish significant differences. Annual observations use December 31; monthly observations use the first of the month. Lines connect consecutive readings and do not supply values between them. Missing observations break the lines.
The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.
Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.
Oregon · state comparison
Who has health coverage?
Compare ACS annual estimates for all ages or people under 65. Coverage categories can overlap and do not sum to the insured share.
Oregon · 20245.2%
Oregon rank#42among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark8.2%Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Uninsured rate · all ages
FactVote uses the Census Bureau's HIC-4_ACS historical table. Rates and 90% confidence margins of error are the published ACS 1-year estimates for the civilian noninstitutionalized population.
ACS annual estimates, all ages. Standard ACS 2020 one-year data were not released; the chart leaves a gap. Survey ranks describe point estimates and do not establish significant differences.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
Oregon
2024 · Oregon: 5.2% · Rank #42 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 8.2% · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Oregon Uninsured rate · all ages history
Period
Oregon
Compare
2014
9.7%
2015
7%
2016
6.2%
2017
6.8%
2018
7.1%
2019
7.2%
2020
Not available
2021
6.1%
2022
6%
2023
5.5%
2024
5.2%
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Oregon stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Oregon has a dark outline.
Lower value · 2.8%Higher value · 16.7%Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Oregon · 5.2%2024 · Rank #42 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Oregon with every state · 50 ranked
Uninsured rate · all ages · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Texas
16.7%
—
#2
Georgia
12%
—
#3
Oklahoma
11.5%
—
#4
Nevada
11.4%
—
#5
Alaska
11%
—
#6
Florida
10.9%
—
#7
Arizona
10.3%
—
#7
Wyoming
10.3%
—
#9
New Mexico
10.1%
—
#10
Mississippi
9.7%
—
#10
Tennessee
9.7%
—
#12
Arkansas
9.4%
—
#13
Idaho
9.2%
—
#14
South Carolina
9%
—
#15
Montana
8.8%
—
#16
North Carolina
8.6%
—
#17
Kansas
8.5%
—
#18
Utah
8.3%
—
#19
Alabama
8.2%
—
#20
South Dakota
8.1%
—
#21
Colorado
7.9%
—
#22
Louisiana
7.7%
—
#22
Missouri
7.7%
—
#22
New Jersey
7.7%
—
#25
Indiana
7.5%
—
#26
Nebraska
7.1%
—
#27
Delaware
6.9%
—
#27
Illinois
6.9%
—
#27
Virginia
6.9%
—
#30
Kentucky
6.8%
—
#31
Ohio
6.7%
—
#32
Washington
6.5%
—
#33
Maryland
6.3%
—
#34
North Dakota
6.1%
—
#35
California
5.9%
—
#36
Connecticut
5.8%
—
#36
Pennsylvania
5.8%
—
#36
West Virginia
5.8%
—
#39
Maine
5.5%
—
#40
Iowa
5.4%
—
#41
Wisconsin
5.3%
—
#42
Oregon · your comparison
5.2%
—
#43
Michigan
5.1%
—
#43
Minnesota
5.1%
—
#45
New York
5%
—
#46
Rhode Island
4.6%
—
#47
New Hampshire
4.5%
—
#48
Vermont
4.2%
—
#49
Hawaii
3.5%
—
#50
Massachusetts
2.8%
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Share of Oregon’s civilian noninstitutionalized residents under age 65 who lacked comprehensive health-insurance coverage at the time of the ACS survey.
This source snapshot keeps its own definition and period. A rank shown elsewhere applies only to that comparison’s measure and period.
Method and limitations
U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts, sourced from the 2024 American Community Survey 1-year estimate.
This is a survey estimate for people under 65 and does not describe coverage type or continuity of coverage.
Insurance status alone does not measure affordability, access, quality, or health outcomes.
State spending is reported for 2020, the latest year available in this CMS state series. Choose a service to compare Oregon with every state.
Oregon · 2020$10,071
Oregon rank#27among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$10,191Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Personal healthcare spending per resident
Personal health care expenditure per resident, assigned to the state where the patient resides.
2020 is the last year in this CMS state series. Personal health care excludes administration, public health, and investment included in national health expenditures. This is spending by all payers, not a household bill.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
Oregon
2020 · Oregon: $10,071 · Rank #27 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: $10,191 · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Oregon Personal healthcare spending per resident history
Period
Oregon
Compare
2014
$7,899
2015
$8,438
2016
$8,699
2017
$8,827
2018
$9,168
2019
$9,635
2020
$10,071
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Oregon stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Oregon has a dark outline.
Lower value · $7.52KHigher value · $14.01KStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Oregon · $10,0712020 · Rank #27 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Oregon with every state · 50 ranked
Personal healthcare spending per resident · 2020 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
New York
$14,007
—
#2
Alaska
$13,642
—
#3
Massachusetts
$13,319
—
#4
Delaware
$12,899
—
#5
West Virginia
$12,769
—
#6
Vermont
$12,756
—
#7
South Dakota
$12,495
—
#8
Connecticut
$12,489
—
#9
Maine
$12,077
—
#10
New Jersey
$11,868
—
#11
New Hampshire
$11,793
—
#12
Rhode Island
$11,694
—
#13
Pennsylvania
$11,603
—
#14
North Dakota
$11,301
—
#15
Wyoming
$10,989
—
#16
Minnesota
$10,846
—
#17
Maryland
$10,839
—
#18
Indiana
$10,517
—
#19
Louisiana
$10,515
—
#20
Nebraska
$10,514
—
#21
Ohio
$10,478
—
#22
California
$10,299
—
#23
Hawaii
$10,291
—
#24
Kentucky
$10,257
—
#25
Montana
$10,212
—
#26
Illinois
$10,190
—
#27
Oregon · your comparison
$10,071
—
#28
Wisconsin
$9,982
—
#29
Missouri
$9,921
—
#30
Michigan
$9,897
—
#31
Florida
$9,865
—
#32
Iowa
$9,789
—
#33
Oklahoma
$9,444
—
#34
Kansas
$9,408
—
#35
Mississippi
$9,394
—
#36
Arkansas
$9,338
—
#37
Tennessee
$9,336
—
#38
Alabama
$9,280
—
#39
Washington
$9,265
—
#40
Virginia
$9,195
—
#41
North Carolina
$8,917
—
#42
New Mexico
$8,902
—
#43
South Carolina
$8,766
—
#44
Georgia
$8,758
—
#45
Arizona
$8,756
—
#46
Colorado
$8,583
—
#47
Texas
$8,406
—
#48
Nevada
$8,348
—
#49
Idaho
$8,148
—
#50
Utah
$7,522
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Use age-adjusted mortality to account for different age distributions; life expectancy summarizes period death rates.
Oregon · 202277.7 years
Oregon rank#21among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark77.5 yearsSame measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Life expectancy at birth
FactVote uses CDC National Center for Health Statistics annual complete life-table estimates for the total Oregon population. Values are rounded to the published tenth of a year.
The latest published comparable state series ends in 2022, even though newer national life-expectancy estimates may be available. Period life expectancy summarizes current mortality rates; it is not a forecast of how long a particular person will live. The 2020 and 2021 estimates reflect the mortality shock during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
Oregon
2022 · Oregon: 77.7 years · Rank #21 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 77.5 years · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Oregon Life expectancy at birth history
Period
Oregon
Compare
2018
79.7 years
2019
79.6 years
2020
78.8 years
2021
77.4 years
2022
77.7 years
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Oregon stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Oregon has a dark outline.
Lower value · 72.2 yearsHigher value · 80 yearsStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Oregon · 77.7 years2022 · Rank #21 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Oregon with every state · 50 ranked
Life expectancy at birth · 2022 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Hawaii
80 years
—
#2
Massachusetts
79.8 years
—
#3
New Jersey
79.6 years
—
#4
New York
79.5 years
—
#5
Connecticut
79.4 years
—
#6
California
79.3 years
—
#6
Minnesota
79.3 years
—
#8
Rhode Island
79.2 years
—
#9
Utah
79 years
—
#10
New Hampshire
78.7 years
—
#11
Colorado
78.5 years
—
#12
Idaho
78.4 years
—
#12
Washington
78.4 years
—
#14
Nebraska
78.3 years
—
#14
Vermont
78.3 years
—
#16
Wisconsin
78.1 years
—
#17
Florida
77.9 years
—
#17
Iowa
77.9 years
—
#17
North Dakota
77.9 years
—
#20
Maryland
77.8 years
—
#21
Oregon · your comparison
77.7 years
—
#22
Illinois
77.5 years
—
#22
Virginia
77.5 years
—
#24
Montana
77.3 years
—
#24
Pennsylvania
77.3 years
—
#24
South Dakota
77.3 years
—
#27
Texas
77.1 years
—
#28
Michigan
76.8 years
—
#28
Wyoming
76.8 years
—
#30
Arizona
76.7 years
—
#31
Maine
76.6 years
—
#32
Delaware
76.5 years
—
#32
Kansas
76.5 years
—
#34
Nevada
76.4 years
—
#35
Georgia
75.9 years
—
#35
North Carolina
75.9 years
—
#37
Alaska
75.8 years
—
#38
Ohio
75.6 years
—
#39
Indiana
75.4 years
—
#40
Missouri
75.2 years
—
#41
South Carolina
75.1 years
—
#42
New Mexico
74.5 years
—
#43
Arkansas
73.9 years
—
#44
Alabama
73.8 years
—
#44
Louisiana
73.8 years
—
#44
Oklahoma
73.8 years
—
#44
Tennessee
73.8 years
—
#48
Kentucky
73.6 years
—
#49
Mississippi
72.6 years
—
#50
West Virginia
72.2 years
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Compare age-adjusted adult prevalence using the same survey year and definition.
Oregon · 20239.5%
Oregon rank#31among 48 states with data
U.S. benchmark10.7%Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted
Adult self-reported prevalence, age-adjusted to a common population.
Published CDC 2019–2023 series. Missing or suppressed estimates remain unranked. Confidence intervals describe sampling uncertainty; point ranks are not significance tests.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
Oregon
2023 · Oregon: 9.5% · Rank #31 of 48, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 10.7% · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Oregon Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted history
Period
Oregon
Compare
2019
7.5%
2020
8.4%
2021
8.4%
2022
9.1%
2023
9.5%
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Oregon stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Oregon has a dark outline.
Lower value · 7.8%Higher value · 15.1%Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Oregon · 9.5%2023 · Rank #31 of 48, highest first95% confidence interval: 8.7% – 10.5%Selected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Oregon with every state · 48 ranked, 2 unavailable
Diagnosed diabetes · age adjusted · 2023 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Mississippi
15.1%
95% CI: 13.7–16.6
#1
West Virginia
15.1%
95% CI: 13.9–16.3
#3
Louisiana
14.6%
95% CI: 13.4–15.8
#4
Alabama
14%
95% CI: 12.7–15.3
#5
Arkansas
13.1%
95% CI: 12–14.3
#6
South Carolina
12.7%
95% CI: 11.9–13.6
#6
Tennessee
12.7%
95% CI: 11.7–13.8
#8
Texas
12.1%
95% CI: 11–13.3
#9
Indiana
11.7%
95% CI: 11.1–12.4
#10
Georgia
11.5%
95% CI: 10.7–12.3
#10
Ohio
11.5%
95% CI: 10.8–12.2
#12
Oklahoma
11.3%
95% CI: 10.5–12.1
#13
Delaware
11.1%
95% CI: 9.8–12.6
#14
North Carolina
11%
95% CI: 9.8–12.3
#15
Illinois
10.9%
95% CI: 9.9–12.1
#15
Maryland
10.9%
95% CI: 10.2–11.7
#15
Michigan
10.9%
95% CI: 10.1–11.8
#18
Nevada
10.8%
95% CI: 8.9–13
#18
New Mexico
10.8%
95% CI: 9.3–12.6
#20
Missouri
10.7%
95% CI: 9.9–11.7
#20
South Dakota
10.7%
95% CI: 8.9–12.8
#22
California
10.6%
95% CI: 9.8–11.4
#23
Kansas
10.5%
95% CI: 9.7–11.3
#24
Virginia
10.4%
95% CI: 9.5–11.4
#25
Florida
10.1%
95% CI: 9.1–11.1
#26
Rhode Island
10%
95% CI: 9.1–11
#27
Arizona
9.9%
95% CI: 9.2–10.7
#27
Iowa
9.9%
95% CI: 9.2–10.7
#29
Nebraska
9.7%
95% CI: 9–10.3
#30
Wisconsin
9.6%
95% CI: 9–10.2
#31
Hawaii
9.5%
95% CI: 8.7–10.5
#31
New York
9.5%
95% CI: 8.9–10.1
#31
Oregon · your comparison
9.5%
95% CI: 8.7–10.5
#34
Wyoming
9.4%
95% CI: 8.5–10.5
#35
Minnesota
9.3%
95% CI: 8.6–10
#36
New Jersey
9.1%
95% CI: 8.4–9.9
#37
Maine
9%
95% CI: 8.4–9.7
#38
North Dakota
8.9%
95% CI: 8.1–9.7
#39
Idaho
8.7%
95% CI: 7.9–9.6
#40
Washington
8.6%
95% CI: 8.2–9
#41
Massachusetts
8.5%
95% CI: 7.8–9.4
#42
Connecticut
8.4%
95% CI: 7.6–9.3
#43
Alaska
8.2%
95% CI: 7.4–9.2
#44
Utah
8.1%
95% CI: 7.5–8.7
#45
Colorado
8%
95% CI: 7.3–8.7
#46
Montana
7.9%
95% CI: 7.2–8.7
#46
New Hampshire
7.9%
95% CI: 7.1–8.8
#48
Vermont
7.8%
95% CI: 7–8.7
—
Kentucky
Not available
No comparable published observation for this period; excluded from rank.
—
Pennsylvania
Not available
No comparable published observation for this period; excluded from rank.
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Compare coverage of need, practitioners needed, or affected population for each discipline.
Oregon · June 30, 202643.9%
Oregon rank#29among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark47.4%Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Primary care · need met
HRSA-designated shortage areas; measures describe need within those areas, not the entire state population.
National report totals can include territories. Designation rules and populations differ by discipline; do not add disciplines. Absolute population and practitioner ranks also reflect state size.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Oregon stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Oregon has a dark outline.
Lower value · 11.2%Higher value · 83.2%Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Oregon · 43.9%June 30, 2026 · Rank #29 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Oregon with every state · 50 ranked
Primary care · need met · June 30, 2026 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
New Jersey
83.2%
—
#2
Vermont
82.6%
—
#3
South Carolina
79.4%
—
#4
New Hampshire
74.8%
—
#5
Rhode Island
74.3%
—
#6
Louisiana
72.1%
—
#7
Hawaii
67.1%
—
#8
Utah
65.4%
—
#9
Wisconsin
65.2%
—
#10
Alabama
63%
—
#11
Connecticut
60.3%
—
#12
Massachusetts
58%
—
#13
Tennessee
58%
—
#14
Virginia
57.2%
—
#15
Pennsylvania
56.7%
—
#16
Maine
56%
—
#17
Minnesota
55.4%
—
#18
Wyoming
54.4%
—
#19
Indiana
54.2%
—
#20
California
53.2%
—
#21
Arkansas
52.6%
—
#22
Texas
49.8%
—
#23
Ohio
49.7%
—
#24
Nebraska
49.1%
—
#25
Alaska
48.9%
—
#26
North Carolina
48.1%
—
#27
Colorado
47.5%
—
#28
Michigan
44.9%
—
#29
Oregon · your comparison
43.9%
—
#30
Idaho
43.9%
—
#31
Washington
42.4%
—
#32
Illinois
41.5%
—
#33
Nevada
41.5%
—
#34
Arizona
41.2%
—
#35
Kansas
41.1%
—
#36
Iowa
40.5%
—
#37
Florida
39.7%
—
#38
Georgia
39.1%
—
#39
Montana
38.5%
—
#40
West Virginia
38.3%
—
#41
North Dakota
36.5%
—
#42
New York
35.3%
—
#43
South Dakota
34.6%
—
#44
Mississippi
34.1%
—
#45
Maryland
31.6%
—
#46
New Mexico
31.4%
—
#47
Kentucky
30.8%
—
#48
Oklahoma
28.6%
—
#49
Missouri
23.7%
—
#50
Delaware
11.2%
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Premium comparisons use a published historical all-state employer survey. Total premiums combine employer and employee payments.
Oregon · 2020$6,917
Oregon rank#36among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$7,149Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Single coverage premium · all firms
Average total annual employer-plan premium per enrolled employee at private-sector establishments offering coverage.
Historical 2020 published all-state table; not a current quote. Includes both employer and employee contributions, rather than just a worker’s payment. Survey estimates and small firm samples carry uncertainty. Missing estimates remain unavailable.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Oregon stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Oregon has a dark outline.
Lower value · $6.39KHigher value · $8.64KStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Oregon · $6,9172020 · Rank #36 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Oregon with every state · 50 ranked
Single coverage premium · all firms · 2020 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Alaska
$8,635
—
#2
New York
$8,177
—
#3
New Hampshire
$7,991
—
#4
Vermont
$7,868
—
#5
Wyoming
$7,743
—
#6
Nebraska
$7,611
—
#7
South Carolina
$7,516
—
#8
Connecticut
$7,501
—
#9
Maine
$7,496
—
#10
Massachusetts
$7,452
—
#11
Washington
$7,440
—
#12
New Mexico
$7,424
—
#13
Illinois
$7,376
—
#14
New Jersey
$7,373
—
#15
Maryland
$7,352
—
#16
Rhode Island
$7,326
—
#17
Indiana
$7,319
—
#18
Delaware
$7,280
—
#19
Wisconsin
$7,250
—
#20
Pennsylvania
$7,246
—
#21
North Dakota
$7,216
—
#22
Colorado
$7,206
—
#23
Missouri
$7,179
—
#24
California
$7,173
—
#25
Florida
$7,078
—
#26
South Dakota
$7,070
—
#27
Oklahoma
$7,058
—
#28
Hawaii
$7,040
—
#29
North Carolina
$7,036
—
#30
Texas
$7,017
—
#31
West Virginia
$6,993
—
#32
Ohio
$6,989
—
#33
Kentucky
$6,949
—
#34
Iowa
$6,932
—
#35
Virginia
$6,928
—
#36
Oregon · your comparison
$6,917
—
#37
Minnesota
$6,910
—
#38
Georgia
$6,876
—
#39
Montana
$6,860
—
#40
Idaho
$6,744
—
#41
Louisiana
$6,713
—
#42
Michigan
$6,683
—
#43
Kansas
$6,675
—
#44
Arizona
$6,612
—
#45
Utah
$6,593
—
#46
Mississippi
$6,561
—
#47
Nevada
$6,493
—
#48
Tennessee
$6,485
—
#49
Arkansas
$6,414
—
#50
Alabama
$6,393
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Adult statewide estimates use the same SAMHSA model and survey period. Treatment use is a share of all adults, not a share of adults with mental illness.
Oregon · 2023–202431.6%
Oregon rank#1among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark23.1%Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Any Mental Illness · adults 18+
Civilian noninstitutionalized adults age 18+, past-year prevalence or treatment use, estimated by small-area survey models.
Mental illness and depression estimates pool 2023–2024; treatment use covers 2024 only. Definitions and model-based uncertainty differ from the national page’s annual 2025 survey estimates. Point-estimate ranks do not establish significant differences. Serious mental illness is a subset of any mental illness, so their percentages must not be added.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Oregon stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Oregon has a dark outline.
Lower value · 18.1%Higher value · 31.6%Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Oregon · 31.6%2023–2024 · Rank #1 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Oregon with every state · 50 ranked
Any Mental Illness · adults 18+ · 2023–2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Oregon · your comparison
31.6%
—
#2
Vermont
29.1%
—
#3
West Virginia
28.1%
—
#4
Washington
27.9%
—
#5
New Hampshire
27.7%
—
#6
Tennessee
27%
—
#7
Utah
26.7%
—
#8
Maine
26.7%
—
#9
Arkansas
26.6%
—
#10
Colorado
26.4%
—
#11
Rhode Island
25.8%
—
#12
Missouri
25.7%
—
#13
Montana
25.6%
—
#14
Indiana
25.3%
—
#15
Kentucky
25.3%
—
#16
Georgia
25.2%
—
#17
Iowa
25%
—
#18
Massachusetts
24.9%
—
#19
Wyoming
24.7%
—
#20
Nevada
24.6%
—
#21
Arizona
24.6%
—
#22
Wisconsin
24.6%
—
#23
Idaho
24.5%
—
#24
Nebraska
24.1%
—
#25
Louisiana
24.1%
—
#26
Alaska
24%
—
#27
Pennsylvania
23.9%
—
#28
New Mexico
23.9%
—
#28
Ohio
23.9%
—
#30
Connecticut
23.7%
—
#31
Kansas
23.7%
—
#32
Michigan
23.6%
—
#33
Virginia
23.1%
—
#34
Alabama
23%
—
#35
North Dakota
23%
—
#36
Maryland
22.7%
—
#37
Oklahoma
22.6%
—
#38
Minnesota
22.6%
—
#39
Illinois
22.2%
—
#40
Delaware
22.1%
—
#41
New York
21.9%
—
#42
South Dakota
21.8%
—
#43
California
21.6%
—
#44
North Carolina
21.4%
—
#45
Florida
20.8%
—
#46
Texas
20.7%
—
#47
Mississippi
20.5%
—
#48
Hawaii
19.8%
—
#49
South Carolina
19.8%
—
#50
New Jersey
18.1%
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Explore current officeholders and explicitly reviewed historical executive officials, labeled at the time of their actions. Timeline dates, action type, status and search also filter this list. Read any record’s summary, latest recorded status and official evidence below, or open it beside the timeline.
143 of 143 reviewed Oregon actions · newest first
Jul 22, 2026 · S 5071 · Children's Safe Welcome Act of 2026 · IntroducedU.S. Congress · Oregon delegation · S 5071
Children's Safe Welcome Act of 2026
Jul 22, 2026 · Introduced
Sen. Jeff Merkley · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Would change asylum processing, custody and placement protections for noncitizen children.
2026-07-22: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. No enactment is recorded in this snapshot.
Why this record is included
Foreign-born residents include naturalized citizens and lawfully and unlawfully present noncitizens. A provision about a particular immigration status concerns only a subset of that population; it does not change a person’s birthplace. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Oregon evidence context: Residents who are foreign-born. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
res and temporary placements following apprehensionSec. 101. Prohibition on family separation.Sec. 102. Protections for noncitizen children.Sec. 103. Nonadversarial asylum processing for noncitizen children.Sec. 104. Standards for U.S. Customs and Border Protection detention of noncitizen children.Sec. 105. Standards for U.S. Customs and Border Protection facilities housing noncitizen children.Sec. 106. Modification of term asylum officer to exclude officers of U.S. Customs and Border Protection.TITLE II—Standards for Department of Health and Human Services custody of unaccompanied noncitizen childrenSubtitle A—Standards for foster care homes and childcare facilitiesSec. 201. Operation of foster care homes and childcare facilities.Sec. 202. Notice of rights.Sec. 203. Staffing and training.Subtitle B—Services for unaccompanied noncitizen childrenSec. 211. Required services.Sec. 212. Evaluation for disability.Sec. 213. Education.Sec. 214. Recreation.Subtitle C—Placement of childrenSec. 221. Phasing out large congregate care facilities.Sec. 222. Least restrictive setting.Sec. 223. Foster family care.Sec. 224. Additional requirements relating to children with disabilities and children with mental health needs.Sec. 225. Minimizing transfers.Sec. 226. Restrictive placements.Sec. 227. Judicial review of placement.Subtitle D—Family reunification and standards relating to sponsorsSec. 231. Family reunification efforts by Office of Refugee Resettlement.Sec. 232. Standards relating to sponsors.Sec. 233. Special considerations relating to release of children with disabilities.Subtitle E—ReleaseSec. 241. Procedures for release.Sec. 242. Post-release services.Sec. 243. Individuals attaining 18 years of age.Sec. 244. Custody review by Ombudsperson.TITLE III—Emergencies and influxesSec. 301. Sense of Congress.Sec. 302. Definitions.Sec
Would change childhood disability benefit eligibility and applications under Social Security title II to reduce work disincentives.
2026-07-15: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance. No enactment is recorded in this snapshot.
Why this record is included
The fact counts Social Security retirement, survivors, and disability beneficiaries in current-payment status. Benefit administration concerns a component of that population; SSI, Medicare, and state pensions are separate programs. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Oregon evidence context: People receiving Social Security benefits. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Act to eliminate work disincentives for childhood disability beneficiaries.1.Short titleThis Act may be cited as the Work Without Worry Act of 2026.2.Elimination of work disincentive for childhood disability beneficiaries(a)In generalSection 202(d) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 402(d)) is amended—(1)in paragraph (1)(B)(ii), by striking is under a disability (as defined in section 223(d)) which began before he attained the age of 22, and and inserting the following: “is under a disability (as defined in section 223(d)), and—(I)the physical or mental impairment (or combination of impairments) that is the basis for the finding of disability began before the child attained the age of 22 (or is of such a type that can reasonably be presumed to have begun before the child attained the age of 22, as determined by the Commissioner), and(II)the impairment or combination of impairments could have been the basis for a finding of disability (without regard to whether the child was actually engaged in substantial gainful activity) before the child attained age 22, and; and(2)by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:(11)(A)In the case of a child described in subparagraph (B)(ii) of paragraph (1) who—(i)has not attained early retirement age (as defined in section 216(l)(2));(ii)has filed an application for child's insurance benefits; and(iii)is insured for disability benefits (as determined under section 223(c)(1)) at the time of such filing;such application shall be deemed to be an application for both child's insurance benefits under this subsection and disability insurance benefits under section 223.(B)In the case of a child described in subparagraph (B)(ii) of paragraph (1) who—(i)has attained early retirement age (as defined in section 216(l)(2));(ii)has filed an application for child's insurance benefits; and(i
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Jun 29, 2026 · AG 2026-06-29 · Attorney General Rayfield Sues Trump Administration over Unlawful Implementation of Medicaid Work Requirements for Medically Frail Individuals · Reported actionOregon agencies · AG 2026-06-29
Attorney General Rayfield Sues Trump Administration over Unlawful Implementation of Medicaid Work Requirements for Medically Frail Individuals
Jun 29, 2026 · Reported action
Attorney General Dan Rayfield · Filed lawsuit
FactVote reviewed summary
Challenged Medicaid work-requirement implementation affecting exemptions for medically frail people and continued insurance coverage.
Reported 2026-06-29. This records the dated action; litigation and proposed settlements do not establish final liability or current enforceability.
Why this record is included
The fact measures residents under 65 without health insurance. Insurance eligibility, enrollment, coverage continuity and premium assistance concern the covered population. Provider payments and covered services alone do not establish a coverage change, and Medicare-only changes mostly concern a different age population. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Oregon evidence context: People under 65 without health insurance. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
AG Rayfield: “Eligible people will lose coverage despite doing nothing wrong.” Attorney General Dan Rayfield announced a lawsuit today over the Trump Administration’s unlawful implementation of new Medicaid work requirements that would strip healthcare access from thousands of Oregonians and create unreasonable burdens for vulnerable patients. “When someone is fighting cancer, managing a serious disability or struggling with a chronic illness, the last thing they should have to worry about is jumping through bureaucratic hoops to prove they deserve care,” said Attorney General Rayfield. “These new requirements create unnecessary barriers for people who are already sick. History shows what happens next: eligible people lose coverage despite doing nothing wrong.” The new requirements were included in last year’s Congressional budget bill (H.R. 1) and are being implemented through rules issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). Today’s multi-state lawsuit – filed by 24 attorneys general and two governors – challenges provisions of an interim final rule published by the agencies on June 3, 2026. Medicaid is the nation’s safety net healthcare program for low-income Americans and is jointly funded by states and the federal government, with the federal government providing at least 50% of the cost of services. Congress created exemptions from Medicaid’s work requirements to ensure that people with serious illnesses and disabilities do not lose coverage or face interruptions in care. Despite months of working with states on implementation, CMS surprised states with the interim final rule, “Community Engagement Requirement for Certain Individuals,” which adopts a new interpretation of key terms like “medically fra
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑May 4, 2026 · AG 2026-05-04 · U.S. Supreme Court Issues Temporary Stay on Restrictions on Mifepristone after Attorney General Rayfield and Coalition File Brief · Reported actionOregon agencies · AG 2026-05-04
U.S. Supreme Court Issues Temporary Stay on Restrictions on Mifepristone after Attorney General Rayfield and Coalition File Brief
May 4, 2026 · Reported action
Attorney General Dan Rayfield · Filed amicus brief
FactVote reviewed summary
Supported a Supreme Court stay of restrictions on mifepristone dispensing by mail and telehealth. The release describes a temporary stay, not a final merits judgment.
Reported 2026-05-04. This records the dated action; litigation and proposed settlements do not establish final liability or current enforceability.
Why this record is included
The fact counts reported abortions occurring in Oregon, including patients from other states and excluding Oregon residents treated elsewhere. Access, restrictions and reporting concern this occurrence measure. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Oregon evidence context: Abortions occurring in Oregon. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
ing would reinstate a medically unnecessary in-person dispensing requirement for mifepristone, which can be safely provided through telehealth. In an amicus brief filed with the Supreme Court, Attorney General Rayfield and the coalition argue that the Fifth Circuit’s ruling is not supported by law or science, would create regulatory and administrative chaos nationwide, and would interfere with states’ ability to protect access to reproductive health care within their borders, particularly in rural and medically underserved areas. Mifepristone, when used in combination with misoprostol, is the standard medication used to terminate a pregnancy through 10 weeks. Since the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved mifepristone in 2000, an estimated 7.5 million people in the United States have used the medication safely. Medication abortion now accounts for 63 percent of all abortions in the formal U.S. health care system, with approximately one in four abortions provided via telehealth. Studies have consistently found mifepristone to be safe and effective. In 2023, after extensive review, the FDA eliminated the in-person dispensing requirement for mifepristone as medically unnecessary. That decision followed years of evidence, including during the COVID-19 pandemic, showing that mifepristone could be safely provided without requiring patients to appear in person. The FDA’s action allowed providers to offer mifepristone through telehealth and enabled patients to obtain the medication through certified mail-order pharmacies and other approved channels, expanding access for patients who face significant barriers to in-person care. Attorney General Rayfield and the coalition argue that reinstating the in-person dispensing requirement would curtail telehealth access to mifepristone, forcing patients to rely on more diffi
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Apr 7, 2026 · HB 4145 · Provides that the provisions of Ballot Measure 114 (2022) apply to firearm transfers conducted, and large-capacity magazine manufacture, importation, possession, use, purchase, sale or transfer occurring, on or after January 1, 2028. · EnactedOregon Legislature · HB 4145
Provides that the provisions of Ballot Measure 114 (2022) apply to firearm transfers conducted, and large-capacity magazine manufacture, importation, possession, use, purchase, sale or transfer occurring, on or after January 1, 2028.
Apr 7, 2026 · Enacted
Rep. Dacia Grayber · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Chief sponsorship of HB 4145 (2026R1): Provides that the provisions of Ballot Measure 114 (2022) apply to firearm transfers conducted, and large-capacity magazine manufacture, importation, possession, use, purchase, sale or transfer occurring, on or after January 1, 2028.
2026-04-13: Chapter 120, (2026 Laws): Effective date April 7, 2026. The session has adjourned. This records legislative disposition, not current enforceability.
Why this record is included
Firearm mortality includes suicide, homicide, and other intents. The provision concerns firearm access, safety, or prevention of firearm injury and may address only part of the death count. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Oregon evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Provides that the provisions of Ballot Measure 114 (2022) apply to firearm transfers conducted, and large-capacity magazine manufacture, importation, possession, use, purchase, sale or transfer occurring, on or after January 1, 2028.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Apr 7, 2026 · HB 4145 · Signed HB 4145: Provides that the provisions of Ballot Measure 114 (2022) apply to firearm transfers conducted, and large-capacity magazine manufacture, importation, possession, use, purchase, sale or transfer occurring, on or after January 1, 2028. · SignedGovernor · HB 4145
Signed HB 4145: Provides that the provisions of Ballot Measure 114 (2022) apply to firearm transfers conducted, and large-capacity magazine manufacture, importation, possession, use, purchase, sale or transfer occurring, on or after January 1, 2028.
Apr 7, 2026 · Signed
Gov. Tina Kotek · Signed
FactVote reviewed summary
Signed HB 4145 (2026R1): Provides that the provisions of Ballot Measure 114 (2022) apply to firearm transfers conducted, and large-capacity magazine manufacture, importation, possession, use, purchase, sale or transfer occurring, on or after January 1, 2028.
Approved 2026-04-07. 2026-04-13: Chapter 120, (2026 Laws): Effective date April 7, 2026. The session has adjourned. This records legislative disposition, not current enforceability. A signature is separate from implementation.
Why this record is included
Firearm mortality includes suicide, homicide, and other intents. The provision concerns firearm access, safety, or prevention of firearm injury and may address only part of the death count. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Oregon evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
OREGON LAWS 2026 Chap. 120 CHAPTER 120 AN ACT HB 4145 Relating to firearms; creating new provisions; amending sections 10 and 13, chapter 1, Oregon Laws 2023; and declaring an emergency. Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon: SECTION 1. Section 10, chapter 1, Oregon Laws 2023, as amended by section 6, chapter 594, Oregon Laws 2025, is amended to read: Sec. 10. ORS 166.503, 166.505 and 166.508 and the amendments to ORS 166.412, 166.435, 166.436 and 166.438 by sections 6 to 9, chapter 1, Oregon Laws 2023, apply to firearm transfers conducted on or after [ March 15, 2026] January 1, 2028. SECTION 2. Section 13, chapter 1, Oregon Laws 2023, as amended by section 7, chapter 594, Oregon Laws 2025, is amended to read: Sec. 13. The provisions of ORS 166.355 apply to the manufacture, importation, possession, use, purchase, sale or transfer of a large-capacity magazine occurring on or after [ March 15, 2026 ] January 1, 2028. SECTION 3. The Legislative Assembly does not intend this 2026 Act to render moot or otherwise affect any proceedings pending before the Oregon Supreme Court concerning the constitutionality of Ballot Measure 114 (2022), and the court has authority to issue a judgment on the issue of the constitutionality of Ballot Measure 114 (2022) notwithstanding any amendments to chapter 1, Oregon Laws 2023, by this 2026 Act. SECTION 4. This 2026 Act being necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety, an emergency is declared to exist, and this 2026 Act takes effect on its passage. Approved by the Governor April 7, 2026 Filed in the office of Secretary of State April 7, 2026 Effective date April 7, 2026 1
Records come from published fact relationships or reviewed topic records with official supporting evidence and verified Oregon officeholder attribution. Historical executive officials require evidence tied to the action date and are excluded from incumbent proposals. Inclusion follows an explicit topic review, a related state fact, or the action’s title and supporting evidence. Explicit topic reviews take priority; repeated actions use the most recent explicit review for this topic. Duplicate actions attached to several facts appear once. This topic match is not a new finding that an action caused a result, and the reviewed collection is selective. Collection reviewed Oct 5, 2026.
What candidates are saying
Explore statements about health coverage, healthcare costs, access to care and public health from FactVote’s Oregon candidate profiles. Compare candidates within each recorded race, with each person’s matching statements kept together. These are candidate and campaign statements, not verified outcomes.
69 statements from 13 candidates
2026 Oregon Governor — General Election
2 candidates with matching statements · 7 statements
Issue a Day One Affordability Executive Order directing every executive branch agency to identify rules, regulations, fees and procedures that materially increase the cost of housing, energy, food, transportation, childcare, healthcare or operating a business.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Transportation and infrastructure
Candidate campaign source
Issue a Day One Affordability Executive Order directing every executive branch agency to identify rules, regulations, fees and procedures that materially increase the cost of housing, energy, food, transportation, childcare, healthcare or operating a business.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Prioritize addiction recovery, long-term sobriety and mental health treatment by focusing state resources on programs that help people achieve lasting stability.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Health care
Candidate campaign source
Prioritize addiction recovery, long-term sobriety and mental health treatment by focusing state resources on programs that help people achieve lasting stability.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Protected homeowners' insurance during wildfires, closed an online-lending interest-rate loophole, and barred medical debt from lowering credit scores.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Consumer Protection Record
Candidate campaign source
Protected homeowners' insurance during wildfires, closed an online-lending interest-rate loophole, and barred medical debt from lowering credit scores.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 23, 2026
Health care is a human right. Our health care system is too complicated, too expensive, and leaves too many people out. With the current system, many families are burdened by medical debt or can’t afford the care they need. We need affordable, accessible health care for everyone, and all proposals t…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Social Security, Medicare, and retirement
Candidate campaign source
Health care is a human right. Our health care system is too complicated, too expensive, and leaves too many people out. With the current system, many families are burdened by medical debt or can’t afford the care they need. We need affordable, accessible health care for everyone, and all proposals to achieve that, including Medicare for All, must be on the table. No one should have to choose between putting groceries on the table and paying for medicine, which is why I’m working to lower the cost of prescription drugs.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Unfortunately, the Trump administration and Congressional Republicans have set their sights on dismantling Social Security. It’s alarming and unacceptable. These are earned benefits that must not be taken away from those who has been paying into the system for their entire working life. I will conti…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Social Security, Medicare, and retirement
Candidate campaign source
Unfortunately, the Trump administration and Congressional Republicans have set their sights on dismantling Social Security. It’s alarming and unacceptable. These are earned benefits that must not be taken away from those who has been paying into the system for their entire working life. I will continue to oppose privatizing Social Security and I will fight ending Medicare as we know it. These efforts would impose thousands of dollars in extra costs on older Americans. I am a vocal advocate for giving Social Security recipients a cost-of-living adjustment so their payments keep up with the rising costs of housing, medication, and other basic needs.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
I helped care for my mom and stepfather in their later years, so I experienced firsthand the challenges of being a family caretaker. Everyone should be able to live with dignity and respect as they age, which is why a secure retirement and earned benefits like Social Security and Medicare are so imp…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Social Security, Medicare, and retirement
Candidate campaign source
I helped care for my mom and stepfather in their later years, so I experienced firsthand the challenges of being a family caretaker. Everyone should be able to live with dignity and respect as they age, which is why a secure retirement and earned benefits like Social Security and Medicare are so important.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
In Northwest Oregon, the warming ocean, droughts, more frequent extreme weather events, wildfires, and hazardous smoke increasingly threaten the environment, economy, and public health. I’m proud of our work to pass the Inflation Reduction Act, the largest climate investment in history. This transfo…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: National security, foreign policy, and veterans
Candidate campaign source
In Northwest Oregon, the warming ocean, droughts, more frequent extreme weather events, wildfires, and hazardous smoke increasingly threaten the environment, economy, and public health. I’m proud of our work to pass the Inflation Reduction Act, the largest climate investment in history. This transformative bill supports an equitable transition to renewable energy and creates good paying jobs in emerging industries. But that work is under attack now. Congress should be taking meaningful action to confront the climate crisis, but we are now in defense and trying to save whatever programs we can to help with a just transition to renewable energy.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Unfortunately, Republicans are trying to take away health care from millions of Americans and raise premiums for many more. I’m doing everything I can to stop these attacks and protect coverage for everyone. You deserve better.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Health care
Candidate campaign source
Unfortunately, Republicans are trying to take away health care from millions of Americans and raise premiums for many more. I’m doing everything I can to stop these attacks and protect coverage for everyone. You deserve better.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
And Congress must increase funding for behavioral health services and addiction treatment, as well as other social safety net programs that support those on the brink of homelessness.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Housing, homelessness, addiction, and recovery
Candidate campaign source
And Congress must increase funding for behavioral health services and addiction treatment, as well as other social safety net programs that support those on the brink of homelessness.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
The Inflation Reduction Act took a meaningful first step to lower monthly out-of-pocket insulin costs for seniors to $35/month, saving them hundreds to thousands of dollars a year. I will continue to work to make prescription drugs affordable for everyone. I am also a strong supporter of medical res…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Health care
Candidate campaign source
The Inflation Reduction Act took a meaningful first step to lower monthly out-of-pocket insulin costs for seniors to $35/month, saving them hundreds to thousands of dollars a year. I will continue to work to make prescription drugs affordable for everyone. I am also a strong supporter of medical research and support investments in the National Institutes of Health so our country can lead new, innovative treatments and cures for diseases like cancer, Alzheimer’s, diabetes, Parkinson’s, mental illness, substance-use disorders, and more.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Reproductive freedom and the right to abortion care are under attack. The Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade has been devastating and dangerous. Politicians and judges have no business dictating the intensely personal decision about whether and when someone bears a child, and his…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Reproductive rights and health care
Candidate campaign source
Reproductive freedom and the right to abortion care are under attack. The Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade has been devastating and dangerous. Politicians and judges have no business dictating the intensely personal decision about whether and when someone bears a child, and history shows that laws restricting abortion do not work; they only restrict safe abortion. I will always stand up for reproductive rights, including abortion care, access to family planning and contraception, and affordable health care services. Access to contraceptives and reproductive health care reduce health costs for individuals and the health care system and reduce the number of unplanned pregnancies and abortions.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
To solve our housing crisis, we must immediately increase the supply of affordable housing. I’ve secured more than $6.25 million in funding to build hundreds of affordable housing units in NW Oregon. I’m also working to increase funding for the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) to incentivize th…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Housing affordability
Candidate campaign source
To solve our housing crisis, we must immediately increase the supply of affordable housing. I’ve secured more than $6.25 million in funding to build hundreds of affordable housing units in NW Oregon. I’m also working to increase funding for the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) to incentivize the construction of more affordable housing. Access to a living wage job, job training opportunities, and universal health care will also help people who are unhoused.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
As soon as possible, Congress must repeal HR 1 (aka Big “Beautiful” Bill) and restore the mountain of funding it stripped away from Medicaid and SNAP benefits. Every member of Congress who voted for this bill—including Cliff Bentz—should be ashamed.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Health care
Candidate campaign source
As soon as possible, Congress must repeal HR 1 (aka Big “Beautiful” Bill) and restore the mountain of funding it stripped away from Medicaid and SNAP benefits. Every member of Congress who voted for this bill—including Cliff Bentz—should be ashamed.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
We must immediately repeal HR-1, aka the Big Beautiful Bill, which is having devastating effects on rural healthcare. It has always been harder for people in rural areas to find even basic wellness care, not to mention reliable emergency services, and now it’s getting worse.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Health care
Candidate campaign source
We must immediately repeal HR-1, aka the Big Beautiful Bill, which is having devastating effects on rural healthcare. It has always been harder for people in rural areas to find even basic wellness care, not to mention reliable emergency services, and now it’s getting worse.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
I will find allies in Congress from both parties who want to reform healthcare and stabilize rural health services. Thanks to legislators like my friend, the late Senator Alan Bates, and Governor John Kitzhaber, Oregon pioneered a transformative healthcare system that provides basic services while c…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Health care
Candidate campaign source
I will find allies in Congress from both parties who want to reform healthcare and stabilize rural health services. Thanks to legislators like my friend, the late Senator Alan Bates, and Governor John Kitzhaber, Oregon pioneered a transformative healthcare system that provides basic services while controlling costs, and we should do the same at the national level.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Some specific solutions I support are: medical malpractice reform that stops frivolous lawsuits and provides patient safety, allowing individuals and small businesses to join to together to purchase group insurance plans like large businesses and allowing consumers to buy health insurance plans acro…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Campaign Issues
Candidate campaign source
Some specific solutions I support are: medical malpractice reform that stops frivolous lawsuits and provides patient safety, allowing individuals and small businesses to join to together to purchase group insurance plans like large businesses and allowing consumers to buy health insurance plans across state lines to increase competition and lower costs, and assurance that whatever we do, pre-existing conditions are covered.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 19, 2026
I strongly oppose government run healthcare. Estimates show that the democrat’s proposal of a single payer healthcare system would cost over $30 trillion. I believe Obamacare should be replaced with solutions that focus on free market principles to help drive down the skyrocketing cost of healthcare…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Campaign Issues
Candidate campaign source
I strongly oppose government run healthcare. Estimates show that the democrat’s proposal of a single payer healthcare system would cost over $30 trillion. I believe Obamacare should be replaced with solutions that focus on free market principles to help drive down the skyrocketing cost of healthcare.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 19, 2026
I strongly oppose government run healthcare. Estimates show that the democrat’s proposal of a single payer healthcare system would cost over $30 trillion. I believe Obamacare should be replaced with solutions that focus on free market principles to help drive down the skyrocketing cost of healthcare…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Candidate statement
Candidate campaign source
I strongly oppose government run healthcare. Estimates show that the democrat’s proposal of a single payer healthcare system would cost over $30 trillion. I believe Obamacare should be replaced with solutions that focus on free market principles to help drive down the skyrocketing cost of healthcare. I will support efforts in Congress to promote healthcare reforms that lower premiums and overall healthcare costs, improve quality care, protect the doctor patient relationship, increase much needed transparency and create more choices for consumers of healthcare.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 19, 2026
I did not support the assisted suicide law. I helped lead the Oregon Senate Republican opposition to the change in Oregon law passed in 2019 to reduce the waiting period for assisted suicide from 15 days to one day. I led the opposition in the Oregon Senate against life damaging changes to Oregon’s …
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Campaign Issues
Candidate campaign source
I did not support the assisted suicide law. I helped lead the Oregon Senate Republican opposition to the change in Oregon law passed in 2019 to reduce the waiting period for assisted suicide from 15 days to one day. I led the opposition in the Oregon Senate against life damaging changes to Oregon’s Power of Attorney for health care law. I do not support the harvest of stem cells from embryos.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 19, 2026
I will support efforts in Congress to promote healthcare reforms that lower premiums and overall healthcare costs, improve quality care, protect the doctor patient relationship, increase much needed transparency and create more choices for consumers of healthcare.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Campaign Issues
Candidate campaign source
I will support efforts in Congress to promote healthcare reforms that lower premiums and overall healthcare costs, improve quality care, protect the doctor patient relationship, increase much needed transparency and create more choices for consumers of healthcare.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 19, 2026
This section matches specific health coverage, healthcare costs, access to care and public health terms in retained, attributed source text from published Oregon candidate profiles. A profile heading or biography alone does not qualify. The Florida geography is fixed; saved state preferences cannot change these results. A mention can concern a community or group rather than Florida’s statewide measure.
Matching is automatic and does not establish a candidate’s stance, the accuracy of a claim, or an effect on the measured result. Results are grouped by recorded race, then by candidate name. Within each candidate, the matching issue mentions appear first. Only candidates with matching retained statements are shown; this is not a complete race roster. Repeated identical text for the same candidate is shown once. Coverage follows the existing state profiles and is not a complete record of all candidates or everything they have said. Review dates are not statement dates.
Oregon incumbents
What incumbents are proposing
Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current Oregon legislators and Oregon’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from Oregon’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.
244 matching sponsorships or proposals · 66 Oregon incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.
Attorney General Dan Rayfield
Attorney General of Oregon · D–OR
4 proposalsView proposals from Attorney General Dan RayfieldOregon Legislature · SB 1503
Establishes the Task Force on Community Safety and Firearm Suicide Prevention and requires the task force to report to the interim committees of the Legislative Assembly related to health care.
Apr 4, 2024 · Enacted
Sen. Rob Wagner · Sponsored / Attorney General Dan Rayfield · Sponsored / Sen. James I. Manning Jr. · Sponsored / Sen. Janeen Sollman · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Chief sponsorship of SB 1503 (2024R1): Establishes the Task Force on Community Safety and Firearm Suicide Prevention and requires the task force to report to the interim committees of the Legislative Assembly related to health care.
2024-04-11: Effective date, June 6, 2024. The session has adjourned. This records legislative disposition, not current enforceability.
Why this record is included
Firearm mortality includes suicide, homicide, and other intents. The provision concerns firearm access, safety, or prevention of firearm injury and may address only part of the death count. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Oregon evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Establishes the Task Force on Community Safety and Firearm Suicide Prevention and requires the task force to report to the interim committees of the Legislative Assembly related to health care.
Requires Department of Human Services to provide medical assistance to employed individuals with disabilities without regard to individuals' income or resources.
Jun 26, 2021 · Did not pass
Sen. Sara Gelser Blouin · Sponsored / Attorney General Dan Rayfield · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Chief sponsorship of SB 584 (2021R1): Requires Department of Human Services to provide medical assistance to employed individuals with disabilities without regard to individuals' income or resources.
2021-06-26: In committee upon adjournment. The session has adjourned. This records legislative disposition, not current enforceability.
Why this record is included
The fact measures residents under 65 without health insurance. Insurance eligibility, enrollment, coverage continuity and premium assistance concern the covered population. Provider payments and covered services alone do not establish a coverage change, and Medicare-only changes mostly concern a different age population. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Oregon evidence context: People under 65 without health insurance. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Requires Department of Human Services to provide medical assistance to employed individuals with disabilities without regard to individuals' income or resources.
Directs Department of State Police to establish voluntary firearm Do Not Sell List using secure Internet website.
Jun 30, 2019 · Did not pass
Attorney General Dan Rayfield · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Chief sponsorship of HB 2705 (2019R1): Directs Department of State Police to establish voluntary firearm Do Not Sell List using secure Internet website.
2019-06-30: In committee upon adjournment. The session has adjourned. This records legislative disposition, not current enforceability.
Why this record is included
Firearm mortality includes suicide, homicide, and other intents. The provision concerns firearm access, safety, or prevention of firearm injury and may address only part of the death count. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Oregon evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Directs Department of State Police to establish voluntary firearm Do Not Sell List using secure Internet website.
Extends Oregon Reinsurance Program and authorizes Department of Consumer and Business Services to request extension of waiver for state innovation.
Mar 13, 2019 · Enacted
Attorney General Dan Rayfield · Sponsored / Treasurer Elizabeth Steiner · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Chief sponsorship of HB 2010 (2019R1): Extends Oregon Reinsurance Program and authorizes Department of Consumer and Business Services to request extension of waiver for state innovation.
2019-03-27: Chapter 2, (2019 Laws): Effective date January 1, 2020. The session has adjourned. This records legislative disposition, not current enforceability.
Why this record is included
The fact measures residents under 65 without health insurance. Insurance eligibility, enrollment, coverage continuity and premium assistance concern the covered population. Provider payments and covered services alone do not establish a coverage change, and Medicare-only changes mostly concern a different age population. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Oregon evidence context: People under 65 without health insurance. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Extends Oregon Reinsurance Program and authorizes Department of Consumer and Business Services to request extension of waiver for state innovation.
U.S. House of Representatives, Oregon District 6 · D–OR
7 proposalsView proposals from Rep. Andrea SalinasU.S. Congress · Oregon delegation · HR 6367
Social Security Data Transparency Act
Dec 2, 2025 · Introduced
Rep. Andrea Salinas · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Would require publication of Social Security claims, approvals, denials, pending claims and payment-processing statistics. This concerns administration and measurement of OASDI claims, not SSI.
2025-12-02: Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means. No enactment is recorded in this snapshot.
Why this record is included
The fact counts Social Security retirement, survivors, and disability beneficiaries in current-payment status. Benefit administration concerns a component of that population; SSI, Medicare, and state pensions are separate programs. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Oregon evidence context: People receiving Social Security benefits. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
wer;(F)percentage of callers that reach a representative;(G)average service time;(H)agent busy rate; and(I)percentage of calls handled by callback.(4)Old age and survivors benefitsWith respect to claims for a benefit under title II that is not a disability benefit under section 223, information measuring the—(A)percentage of claimants who received benefits within 2 weeks of applying;(B)average time to receive a benefit payment from the date an application is submitted;(C)benefits claims approved or denied;(D)benefits claims pending;(E)percentage of benefit claim appointments scheduled within 28 days of applying; and(F)percentage of claims filed online.(5)Disability determinationInformation related to disability insurance benefit claims under section 223 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 423), including—(A)the average processing time of such claims;(B)the average time to receive a benefit payment from the date an application is submitted;(C)the number of initial determinations pending;(D)the number of such claims received;(E)the number of claims approved or denied;(F)the percentage of appointments scheduled within 28 days of the claimant applying;(G)the percentage of such claims filed online; and(H)processing times and percentage of such claims processed at the initial, reconsideration, and hearings levels.(6)Disability decision reconsiderationInformation related to the processing time for appeals of denials of a disability determination, including—(A)the average processing time of an appeal; and(B)the number of appeals filed and the number of decisions of such appeals.(7)Hearing informationInformation related to hearings conducted after the initial decision and reconsideration of a disability determination, including—(A)the average time it takes for a claimant to have a hearing;(B)the number of hearings conducted—(
Renames Health Care for All Oregon Children program as Cover All People program and expands eligibility to adults who would qualify for Medicaid-funded state medical assistance program but for their immigration status.
Jul 19, 2021 · Enacted
Sen. Wlnsvey Campos · Sponsored / Rep. Andrea Salinas · Sponsored / Sen. Lisa Reynolds · Sponsored / Rep. Maxine Dexter · Sponsored / Treasurer Elizabeth Steiner · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Chief sponsorship of HB 3352 (2021R1): Renames Health Care for All Oregon Children program as Cover All People program and expands eligibility to adults who would qualify for Medicaid-funded state medical assistance program but for their immigration status.
2021-09-25: Chapter 554, (2021 Laws): Effective date September 25, 2021. The session has adjourned. This records legislative disposition, not current enforceability.
Why this record is included
The fact measures residents under 65 without health insurance. Insurance eligibility, enrollment, coverage continuity and premium assistance concern the covered population. Provider payments and covered services alone do not establish a coverage change, and Medicare-only changes mostly concern a different age population. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Oregon evidence context: People under 65 without health insurance · Residents who are foreign-born. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Renames Health Care for All Oregon Children program as Cover All People program and expands eligibility to adults who would qualify for Medicaid-funded state medical assistance program but for their immigration status.
Establishes Task Force on Universal Health Care charged with recommending to Legislative Assembly design of Health Care for All Oregon Plan, administered by Health Care for All Oregon Board to provide publicly funded, equitable, affordable, comprehensive and high quality health care to all Oregon residents.
Jul 23, 2019 · Enacted
Sen. James I. Manning Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Julie Fahey · Sponsored / Rep. Andrea Salinas · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Chief sponsorship of SB 770 (2019R1): Establishes Task Force on Universal Health Care charged with recommending to Legislative Assembly design of Health Care for All Oregon Plan, administered by Health Care for All Oregon Board to provide publicly funded, equitable, affordable, comprehensive and high quality health care to all Oregon residents.
2019-08-08: Effective date, July 23, 2019. The session has adjourned. This records legislative disposition, not current enforceability.
Why this record is included
The fact measures residents under 65 without health insurance. Insurance eligibility, enrollment, coverage continuity and premium assistance concern the covered population. Provider payments and covered services alone do not establish a coverage change, and Medicare-only changes mostly concern a different age population. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Oregon evidence context: People under 65 without health insurance. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Establishes Task Force on Universal Health Care charged with recommending to Legislative Assembly design of Health Care for All Oregon Plan, administered by Health Care for All Oregon Board to provide publicly funded, equitable, affordable, comprehensive and high quality health care to all Oregon residents.
Requires owner or possessor of firearm to secure firearm with trigger or cable lock or in locked container except in specified circumstances.
Jun 30, 2019 · Did not pass
Sen. James I. Manning Jr. · Sponsored / Rep. Andrea Salinas · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Chief sponsorship of SB 275 (2019R1): Requires owner or possessor of firearm to secure firearm with trigger or cable lock or in locked container except in specified circumstances.
2019-06-30: In committee upon adjournment. The session has adjourned. This records legislative disposition, not current enforceability.
Why this record is included
Firearm mortality includes suicide, homicide, and other intents. The provision concerns firearm access, safety, or prevention of firearm injury and may address only part of the death count. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Oregon evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Requires owner or possessor of firearm to secure firearm with trigger or cable lock or in locked container except in specified circumstances.
Requires person to secure permit before purchasing or otherwise receiving firearm.
Jun 30, 2019 · Did not pass
Sen. Rob Wagner · Sponsored / Rep. Andrea Salinas · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Chief sponsorship of SB 501 (2019R1): Requires person to secure permit before purchasing or otherwise receiving firearm.
2019-06-30: In committee upon adjournment. The session has adjourned. This records legislative disposition, not current enforceability.
Why this record is included
Firearm mortality includes suicide, homicide, and other intents. The provision concerns firearm access, safety, or prevention of firearm injury and may address only part of the death count. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Oregon evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Requires person to secure permit before purchasing or otherwise receiving firearm.
Allows individuals who do not qualify for medical assistance or premium tax credits under Affordable Care Act to enroll in coordinated care organizations by paying premiums that cover actuarial value of health services.
Jun 30, 2019 · Did not pass
Rep. Andrea Salinas · Sponsored / Rep. Rob Nosse · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Chief sponsorship of HB 2009 (2019R1): Allows individuals who do not qualify for medical assistance or premium tax credits under Affordable Care Act to enroll in coordinated care organizations by paying premiums that cover actuarial value of health services.
2019-06-30: In committee upon adjournment. The session has adjourned. This records legislative disposition, not current enforceability.
Why this record is included
The fact measures residents under 65 without health insurance. Insurance eligibility, enrollment, coverage continuity and premium assistance concern the covered population. Provider payments and covered services alone do not establish a coverage change, and Medicare-only changes mostly concern a different age population. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Oregon evidence context: People under 65 without health insurance. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Allows individuals who do not qualify for medical assistance or premium tax credits under Affordable Care Act to enroll in coordinated care organizations by paying premiums that cover actuarial value of health services.
Requires Oregon Health Authority to develop plan for Medicaid Buy-In program or public option for Oregon residents who do not have access to health care.
Jun 30, 2019 · Did not pass
Rep. Andrea Salinas · Sponsored / Rep. Rob Nosse · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Chief sponsorship of HB 2012 (2019R1): Requires Oregon Health Authority to develop plan for Medicaid Buy-In program or public option for Oregon residents who do not have access to health care.
2019-06-30: In committee upon adjournment. The session has adjourned. This records legislative disposition, not current enforceability.
Why this record is included
The fact measures residents under 65 without health insurance. Insurance eligibility, enrollment, coverage continuity and premium assistance concern the covered population. Provider payments and covered services alone do not establish a coverage change, and Medicare-only changes mostly concern a different age population. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Oregon evidence context: People under 65 without health insurance. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Requires Oregon Health Authority to develop plan for Medicaid Buy-In program or public option for Oregon residents who do not have access to health care.
Oregon House of Representatives, District 47 · D–OR
2 proposalsView proposals from Rep. Andrea ValderramaOregon Legislature · HB 4088
Declares this state's policy to protect engagement in certain activities relating to reproductive health care and gender-affirming treatment.
Mar 31, 2026 · Enacted
Rep. Lisa Fragala · Sponsored / Sen. Lisa Reynolds · Sponsored / Sen. Floyd Prozanski · Sponsored / Rep. Farrah Chaichi · Sponsored / Rep. Willy Chotzen · Sponsored / Rep. April Dobson · Sponsored / Rep. Sue Rieke Smith · Sponsored / Rep. Andrea Valderrama · Sponsored / Sen. Sara Gelser Blouin · Sponsored / Sen. James I. Manning Jr. · Sponsored / Sen. Deb Patterson · Sponsored / Sen. Khanh Pham · Sponsored / Sen. Courtney Neron Misslin · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Chief sponsorship of HB 4088 (2026R1): Protects lawful reproductive-health activities from specified federal and interstate enforcement and disclosure. The connection concerns abortion access within the broader health-care shield provisions.
2026-04-06: Chapter 52, (2026 Laws): Effective date March 31, 2026. The session has adjourned. This records legislative disposition, not current enforceability.
Why this record is included
The fact counts reported abortions occurring in Oregon, including patients from other states and excluding Oregon residents treated elsewhere. Access, restrictions and reporting concern this occurrence measure. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Oregon evidence context: Abortions occurring in Oregon. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
The new law starts right away. (Flesch Readability Score: 60.7). Declares this state's policy to protect engagement in certain activities relating to reproductive health care and gender-affirming treatment. Prohibits cooperation with law enforcement agencies of the federal government or other states in actions involving legally-protected reproductive or gender-affirming health care activities. Modifies provisions regarding interstate actions involving legally-protected reproductive or gender-affirming health care activities. Makes specified records and information confidential. Provides protection from disciplinary action for direct entry midwives who provide reproductive health care and gender-affirming treatment under specified circumstances. Declares an emergency, effective on passage.
Modifies provisions relating to reproductive health rights.
Jul 13, 2023 · Enacted
Rep. Andrea Valderrama · Sponsored / Rep. Travis Nelson · Sponsored / Sen. Kate Lieber · Sponsored / Treasurer Elizabeth Steiner · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Chief sponsorship of HB 2002 (2023R1): Changes reproductive-health rights, access and protections, including protections against interstate proceedings concerning care lawful in Oregon. The connection concerns abortion care, not the separate gender-affirming provisions.
2023-07-24: Chapter 228, (2023 Laws): Effective date July 13, 2023. The session has adjourned. This records legislative disposition, not current enforceability.
Why this record is included
The fact counts reported abortions occurring in Oregon, including patients from other states and excluding Oregon residents treated elsewhere. Access, restrictions and reporting concern this occurrence measure. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Oregon evidence context: Abortions occurring in Oregon. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Modifies provisions relating to reproductive health rights. Modifies provisions relating to access to reproductive health care and gender-affirming treatment. Modifies provisions relating to protections for providers of and individuals receiving reproductive and gender-affirming health care services. Creates crime of interfering with a health care facility. Punishes by maximum of 364 days' imprisonment, $6,250 fine, or both. Creates right of action for person or health care provider aggrieved by interference with health care facility. Makes statutory change to achieve gender neutral language with respect to unlawful employment discrimination because of sex. Declares public policy regarding interstate actions arising out of reproductive health care and gender-affirming treatment. Prohibits public body from participating in interstate investigation or proceeding involving reproductive health care and gender-affirming treatment. Creates exceptions. Prohibits clerk of court from issuing subpoena if foreign subpoena relates to reproductive health care or gender-affirming treatment. Declares that Oregon law governs certain actions arising out of reproductive health care or gender-affirming treatment provided or received in this state. Declares emergency, effective on passage.
Oregon House of Representatives, District 23 · R–OR
1 proposalView proposals from Rep. Anna ScharfOregon Legislature · HB 2704
Requires district school board or higher education governing board that adopts policy limiting possession of firearms by concealed handgun licensees on school grounds to install metal detectors at entrances to buildings subject to policy.
Jun 25, 2023 · Did not pass
Rep. Anna Scharf · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Chief sponsorship of HB 2704 (2023R1): Requires district school board or higher education governing board that adopts policy limiting possession of firearms by concealed handgun licensees on school grounds to install metal detectors at entrances to buildings subject to policy.
2023-06-25: In committee upon adjournment. The session has adjourned. This records legislative disposition, not current enforceability.
Why this record is included
Firearm mortality includes suicide, homicide, and other intents. The provision concerns firearm access, safety, or prevention of firearm injury and may address only part of the death count. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Oregon evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Requires district school board or higher education governing board that adopts policy limiting possession of firearms by concealed handgun licensees on school grounds to install metal detectors at entrances to buildings subject to policy.
Oregon House of Representatives, District 39 · D–OR
2 proposalsView proposals from Rep. April DobsonOregon Legislature · HB 4127
Requires the Oregon Health Authority to adopt a payment mechanism to pay certain nonprofit reproductive health care providers that are not eligible to receive federal Medicaid funds for services provided to medical assistance recipients.
Mar 31, 2026 · Enacted
Rep. Ben Bowman · Sponsored / Rep. Tom Andersen · Sponsored / Sen. Deb Patterson · Sponsored / Rep. Farrah Chaichi · Sponsored / Rep. Willy Chotzen · Sponsored / Rep. April Dobson · Sponsored / Rep. Rob Nosse · Sponsored / Rep. Sue Rieke Smith · Sponsored / Sen. Wlnsvey Campos · Sponsored / Sen. Lew Frederick · Sponsored / Sen. Floyd Prozanski · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Chief sponsorship of HB 4127 (2026R1): Requires state-funded payment to certain nonprofit reproductive-health providers excluded from federal Medicaid funding. This connects to the availability of abortion providers; it does not change whether a patient has insurance.
2026-04-06: Chapter 63, (2026 Laws): Effective date March 31, 2026. The session has adjourned. This records legislative disposition, not current enforceability.
Why this record is included
The fact counts reported abortions occurring in Oregon, including patients from other states and excluding Oregon residents treated elsewhere. Access, restrictions and reporting concern this occurrence measure. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Oregon evidence context: Abortions occurring in Oregon. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
using only state funds. (Flesch Readability Score: 62.7). Requires the Oregon Health Authority to adopt a payment mechanism to pay certain nonprofit reproductive health care providers that are not eligible to receive federal Medicaid funds for services provided to medical assistance recipients. Applies to claims for payment for services provided on or after July 4, 2025, if the claim is not eligible for federal financial participation and has not yet been paid. Declares an emergency, effective on passage.
Declares this state's policy to protect engagement in certain activities relating to reproductive health care and gender-affirming treatment.
Mar 31, 2026 · Enacted
Rep. Lisa Fragala · Sponsored / Sen. Lisa Reynolds · Sponsored / Sen. Floyd Prozanski · Sponsored / Rep. Farrah Chaichi · Sponsored / Rep. Willy Chotzen · Sponsored / Rep. April Dobson · Sponsored / Rep. Sue Rieke Smith · Sponsored / Rep. Andrea Valderrama · Sponsored / Sen. Sara Gelser Blouin · Sponsored / Sen. James I. Manning Jr. · Sponsored / Sen. Deb Patterson · Sponsored / Sen. Khanh Pham · Sponsored / Sen. Courtney Neron Misslin · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Chief sponsorship of HB 4088 (2026R1): Protects lawful reproductive-health activities from specified federal and interstate enforcement and disclosure. The connection concerns abortion access within the broader health-care shield provisions.
2026-04-06: Chapter 52, (2026 Laws): Effective date March 31, 2026. The session has adjourned. This records legislative disposition, not current enforceability.
Why this record is included
The fact counts reported abortions occurring in Oregon, including patients from other states and excluding Oregon residents treated elsewhere. Access, restrictions and reporting concern this occurrence measure. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Oregon evidence context: Abortions occurring in Oregon. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
The new law starts right away. (Flesch Readability Score: 60.7). Declares this state's policy to protect engagement in certain activities relating to reproductive health care and gender-affirming treatment. Prohibits cooperation with law enforcement agencies of the federal government or other states in actions involving legally-protected reproductive or gender-affirming health care activities. Modifies provisions regarding interstate actions involving legally-protected reproductive or gender-affirming health care activities. Makes specified records and information confidential. Provides protection from disciplinary action for direct entry midwives who provide reproductive health care and gender-affirming treatment under specified circumstances. Declares an emergency, effective on passage.
Oregon House of Representatives, District 25 · D–OR
2 proposalsView proposals from Rep. Ben BowmanOregon Legislature · HB 4127
Requires the Oregon Health Authority to adopt a payment mechanism to pay certain nonprofit reproductive health care providers that are not eligible to receive federal Medicaid funds for services provided to medical assistance recipients.
Mar 31, 2026 · Enacted
Rep. Ben Bowman · Sponsored / Rep. Tom Andersen · Sponsored / Sen. Deb Patterson · Sponsored / Rep. Farrah Chaichi · Sponsored / Rep. Willy Chotzen · Sponsored / Rep. April Dobson · Sponsored / Rep. Rob Nosse · Sponsored / Rep. Sue Rieke Smith · Sponsored / Sen. Wlnsvey Campos · Sponsored / Sen. Lew Frederick · Sponsored / Sen. Floyd Prozanski · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Chief sponsorship of HB 4127 (2026R1): Requires state-funded payment to certain nonprofit reproductive-health providers excluded from federal Medicaid funding. This connects to the availability of abortion providers; it does not change whether a patient has insurance.
2026-04-06: Chapter 63, (2026 Laws): Effective date March 31, 2026. The session has adjourned. This records legislative disposition, not current enforceability.
Why this record is included
The fact counts reported abortions occurring in Oregon, including patients from other states and excluding Oregon residents treated elsewhere. Access, restrictions and reporting concern this occurrence measure. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Oregon evidence context: Abortions occurring in Oregon. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
using only state funds. (Flesch Readability Score: 62.7). Requires the Oregon Health Authority to adopt a payment mechanism to pay certain nonprofit reproductive health care providers that are not eligible to receive federal Medicaid funds for services provided to medical assistance recipients. Applies to claims for payment for services provided on or after July 4, 2025, if the claim is not eligible for federal financial participation and has not yet been paid. Declares an emergency, effective on passage.
Renames task force to create bridge program as Joint Task Force on Affordable Coverage and charges joint task force with creating comprehensive plan for expanded bridge program that provides affordable health insurance to individuals with incomes above 200 percent of federal poverty guidelines and meets specified criteria.
Jun 25, 2023 · Did not pass
Rep. Ben Bowman · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Chief sponsorship of HB 3422 (2023R1): Renames task force to create bridge program as Joint Task Force on Affordable Coverage and charges joint task force with creating comprehensive plan for expanded bridge program that provides affordable health insurance to individuals with incomes above 200 percent of federal poverty guidelines and meets specified criteria.
2023-06-25: In committee upon adjournment. The session has adjourned. This records legislative disposition, not current enforceability.
Why this record is included
The fact measures residents under 65 without health insurance. Insurance eligibility, enrollment, coverage continuity and premium assistance concern the covered population. Provider payments and covered services alone do not establish a coverage change, and Medicare-only changes mostly concern a different age population. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Oregon evidence context: People under 65 without health insurance. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Renames task force to create bridge program as Joint Task Force on Affordable Coverage and charges joint task force with creating comprehensive plan for expanded bridge program that provides affordable health insurance to individuals with incomes above 200 percent of federal poverty guidelines and meets specified criteria.
Only current Oregon officeholders retained in the reviewed collection qualify. Bills require a recorded primary sponsorship; cosponsors and signing officials are excluded from sponsorship counts. An official introducer recorded as acting by request is labeled “Introduced by request”; that procedural role does not establish personal policy endorsement. Governor and agency records qualify when recorded as proposed. A separately verified governor transmittal can also establish an original proposal whose latest status reflects its later outcome. Signing an enacted law alone does not establish a proposal. A record appearing under several facts is counted once per officeholder. A bill with multiple primary sponsors appears under each recorded sponsor.
Enacted bills, adopted resolutions and unsuccessful measures remain visible as proposal history. Passing one chamber is not enactment. These counts do not measure effectiveness or prove that an action changed a Oregon statistic. Collection reviewed Oct 5, 2026.
Sources & methods
Every section retains its primary sources, units, reporting periods and comparison limits. Maps, graphs and tables use the same observation and cohort. All 50 states are listed; D.C. and territories are excluded. Missing and suppressed values remain unavailable and never become zero.
#1 is the highest measured value. Equal source values share a rank and leave gaps (1, 2, 2, 4). Ranks use source precision and are descriptive, not a score of the state. Survey uncertainty and reporting coverage can limit comparisons. Published U.S. benchmarks are used where available; a state average is not substituted.
Oregon snapshots and fiscal sources keep their own dates and accounting scope. National events and federal distribution explainers describe national context. Actions and statements are filtered to Oregon, retain their reviewed evidence, and do not establish that a policy caused a measured change.
Retained state source collections assembled October 5, 2026. Original review and source dates remain visible. Refreshing this page does not refresh an official data release.