Changes

Even though the bill had passed, the OSMA still feared that the governor would veto it. Governor Sylvester Pennoyer had expressed several concerns about the bill. If he chose to veto the bill late in the legislative session, it would have been at least two years before the bill could be reintroduced. Fortunately for the OSMA, Pennoyer decided not to veto it. Instead, Pennoyer issued a non-signing statement arguing that the bill should have been vetoed because it gave the medical board too much power to take away a physician’s diploma for unprofessional conduct. These broad powers were not circumscribed because the act failed to define dishonorable conduct, but Pennoyer instead decided “to obviate any difficulty by appointing as examiners men known to be cool-headed and conservative.”<ref> “The Governor Dodges. The Medical Bill Becomes a Law Without His Signature – His Excellency longed to a farewell shot at the bill, but he concluded to check the veto impulse and trust in luck.” <ref>The Oregonian</ref>, Feb. 28, 1889.</ref>

After almost fifteen years of failure, the OSMA finally succeeded in passing a regulatory act by paying a two-hundred dollar bribe from the “corruption fund” to a legislator who then passed an amendment to protect his own medical practice. Additionally, the remaining one-hundred-and-five dollars were distributed to other legislators on Pope’s suggestion. Despite Pope’s self-dealing, his modifications to the bill made it more palatable to Oregon physicians who were practicing without diplomas. Pope’s concerns were similar to other physicians in the state, and those doctors would have opposed the 1889 bill without those changes. The conclusion that the three-hundred-five dollars raised by the association was intended for bribes is unavoidable. It is not surprising that Strong was cagey about explaining what the money was for. Strong also acknowledged that even with Pope’s help and the OSMA members’ money, getting the bill passed was extremely difficult; “[i]f they knew the way that committee worked, the difficulties that arose, and the pressure brought to bear, the thumb screws we used here and there of one kind or another.”<ref><i>Proceedings Sixteenth Annual Meeting</i> (1889): 208.</ref>

The legislative committee of the OSMA was not satisfied with the final bill, but it was willing to accept it because the committee was convinced that the bill could be easily remedied in the future. Even though the act fell “far short of perfection,” it fundamentally altered who could become an officially sanctioned physician in the state. The OSMA, like most other state societies, decided it was more important to pass something then to continue without any licensing law. <ref> A. C. Panton, M.D., “Address,” <i>Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Meeting of the Oregon State Medical Society 16</i> (1889): 6</ref> Strong also stated that the bill would silence the dissent of diploma-less practicing physicians. As long as any future bill did not encroach on those physicians’ rights, he argued that they would support future legislation. He stated it would be in the best interest of those physicians to support “the most stringent law against the admission of others.” <ref><i>Proceedings Sixteenth Annual Meeting</i> (1889): 108.</ref> Strong understood that “it is to be hoped that it may go through a course of evolution that may ultimately bring our State abreast of the other states and territories in respect to legislation to regulate medicine and surgery.” <ref>C.C. Strong, M.D., “Opening Address,” <i>Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Meeting of the Oregon State Medical Society 17</i> (1889): 6.</ref> Under the original 1889 act, physicians and surgeons were required to receive a diploma from a medical institution in good standing, but the act explicitly stated that the medical board was not permitted to discriminate against the holders of genuine licenses or diplomas from a licensed medical school or system. Therefore, the Oregon law did not discriminate against Homeopaths or Eclectics but due to sloppy drafting, the law not only avoided discriminating against any of three major sects, it prevented the board from excluding physicians who acquired medical degrees from diploma mills. In the end, Strong was correct. Even though the law originally was amended to eliminate the drafting problem, the 1891version 1891 version was modified in several ways, and it ultimately resembled the original bill proposed by the OSMA rather than the bill promulgated by Pope.