PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE: This is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus use an image from my favorite sport, golf. Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as a Congressional press secretary in Washington, D.C., an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and a private sector lobbyist. This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.

One of the worst ways to set tax policy in Oregon is to let biased individuals propose it from their kitchen table or from the backrooms of advocates’ offices out of the glare of public scrutiny.

But that’s what is happening in Oregon these days as public employee unions propose a huge tax increase and are prepared to spend $15 million to pass it.

It will be decided at the ballot box in November, not where it should be hashed out in the push and pull of the legislative process in Salem.

What’s on the ballot is called Measure 97. It would impose a 2.5% tax on sales of goods and services in Oregon. It’s a tax on sales – not profits – and it would be passed on to Oregon consumers and small businesses through higher prices on everything from food, gas and electricity to insurance, medicine and health care.

In other words, what public employee unions want is for someone else to pay the tax, which illustrates the age-old prescription for good tax policy – someone else pays it.

This is one of the worst tax grabs in memory.

Consider this quote from a recent opinion piece in The Oregonian written by two owners of local Oregon business Umpqua Dairy:

“We can all agree that Oregon’s budget is in bad shape. It is clear that we need the legislative and executive branches of our government to come together with ideas that will work for all Oregonians. But we can’t fix it with a poorly designed law enacted through the ballot box.

“This is a problem that requires thoughtful solutions. Measure 97 will destroy many Oregon-based companies and hurt hardworking families. Studies estimate a loss of over 38,000 private sector jobs — almost twice the number of people in Roseburg!  Prices for goods and services will increase dramatically throughout Oregon.

“Please don’t believe that this is just a tax on big out-of-state corporations. It is not. The corporations that will be hurt the most are those that call Oregon their home.”

Kudos to the Umpqua owners for going public with their position.

Further, it might sound strange for me to endorse the public policy-making process in the Legislature. The easiest thing to do is to be cynical about a process that sometimes, to use an old example, resembles making sausage.

But, as someone who has been involved in that process for more than 40 years, 25 of them as a private sector lobbyist, I am more than willing to endorse the process.

When it comes to forming tax policy, there is no substitute for the interplay of the legislative process, which carries these virtues:

• Developing public policy, especially on such a controversial area as tax policy, occurs in the sunlight. That is, all meetings of committees such as the House or Senate Revenue Committees, are public and advertised as being so; interested parties, as well as members of the general public, are allowed to observe and/or participate in the process.

• Both sides – Democrats and Republicans – are part of the process. One party may be in charge, but the minority party is recognized.

• All actions are conducted by a public vote. In other words, legislators, either in committees or on the House or Senate floors, must register their votes for all to see.

• Finally, the draft of a piece of legislation, one that sets tax policy, is written by attorneys for the Legislative Counsel Office. Thus, the language is written by expert drafters rather than by someone with an ax to grind at their kitchen table, or in the case of Measure 97, in the backrooms of public employee unions strategists.

On tax policy – or anything else for that matter – we need new laws that are crafted in the cauldron of legislative policy-making. The result, however imperfect it may be, will be better than one written by biased individuals.

The owners of Umpqua Dairy have good reasons to oppose Measure 97. Beyond their views, which I support, my reason is that Measure 97 is the product of left-wing, public employee union activists who believe the best tax is one someone else pays

In this case, we’ll all pay it! So, vote NO!