Amazing to think that the difference between a bill passing or not passing in the Oregon State Legislature this past spring was a push by our tiny team at the Oregon Center for Christian Values. But that was precisely the case with Senate Bill 839, otherwise known as the “Confidentiality Bill,” which in the end passed both houses unanimously.
Simply put, the Confidentiality Law provides anonymity to rescued victims of human trafficking. A lobbyist for another nonprofit with ties to OCCV alerted our leadership who sent a volunteer to testify. Why would the bill not have passed if there was no opposition? Voter interest or lack thereof made all the difference in the world.
That was the start of OCCV’s involvement in domestic human trafficking concerns, an area of vital need we are now addressing alongside related issues like poverty and health care. Last night we had the second meeting of the OCCV Human Trafficking advisory committee. We reviewed various recommendations for a course of action in the next couple of years and decided to meet again on November 9. What we agreed on last night was that in the November meeting we will come up with a specific plan of action to present to the OCCV board for their approval before the end of the year.
We’re particularly interested in pushing through a bill in February’s short legislative session. There is no funding available for anything that is money-intensive, so we are thinking that a simple step low in cost concerns may be the best option for now.
This bill, at least as it is currently envisioned, would require the posting of the Polaris Project hotline wherever alcohol is sold. This national hotline number is 1-888-3737-888. A piece of legislation like this seems so minor compared with the massive need facing us, but every step counts. The ubiquitous posting of this hotline would promote the issue itself, much as the amber alert has done for missing kids, and raising awareness (education) is key to getting more extensive legislation passed in the next session.
A more aggressive approach would be to pass something along the lines of the New York Safe Harbor Act, but there is no way to get such a major bill through the state legislature in this biennium. The problem is not opposition, but lack of state funds and also a lack of time due to the very brief nature of February’s session. New York passed its bill a couple years back and the governor duly signed it, but to this date, there’s been no money to implement it. So the feeling is to push for the hotline bill now and then go for the bigger bill in 2011, when, hopefully, budgeting concerns have eased.
Why is a safe harbor act is so important? The city’s sex crimes unit works along the guidelines of the safe harbor act already, treating minors as victims instead of criminals. However, the police in other units arrest and treat the girls as adults (prostitutes), because it is the law they have to follow. Even if they go light on them, they are not approaching these underage girls as victims.
There are many levels at which we can address human trafficking – national, county and city, as well as state. On the city level, we can advocate with City Commissioner Saltzman to get more personnel into the Sex Crimes Unit. Presently there are three personnel, counting a sergeant, for a city the size of Portland. There is a great need to push for more officers "out there". Apparently it is more a matter of priorities and citizen response in contrast to funding, as the idea is to transfer existing personnel from other units. On this issue, we also do not have to wait for a legislative session to begin.
On the county level, I understand Commissioner McKeel's office is considering a "john school". While this was tried by Multnomah County back in the ‘90s, lessons learned back then could ensure a much better run this time. The idea is to go with something like the D.C. or San Francisco model, with a "school" for first offenders. Talks could be given by the D.A., judges, ex-victims, etc., as a means of showing what impact the johns' actions are having. Each john would be charged a $1,000 fine to attend the school. If they comply both to the fine and to school attendance and they don't commit a second offense within 6 months, then the 1st offense would be kept off their record. A second offense would go on their record.
This school is a way of working to stop the john activity up front. And it seems to be having some effect in these other cities. The fine money in San Francisco is divided between the D.A.'s office to help prosecute the crimes, the Police Department to help them in their pursuit of these criminals, and for victim services. Basically it is relatively cost neutral. It could be done here on a county-wide level to fight prostitution in general and as a way of getting at those who encourage sex trafficking, since the market is consumer driven.
I’ve asked about how we can work on solving the pimp side of problem. What I hear is that, with pimps as well as the victims, the issue is a state problem primarily with the fairly broken foster care system, which produces a high percentage of prostitutes and pimps. But such systemic issues need long-range approaches.
It is so easy to be overwhelmed with the need or to throw up our hands in dismay at how slowly things move. Yet even small steps are better than no steps. It takes time to build a base for advocacy and education, something we as a committee and OCCV are committed to doing.
