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.

What is that one thing, you may ask?

Well, it is that, in the end, the state budget must be in balance, which means that spending can only reach the level of available revenue.

Contrast that to the federal government where no such limit exists.

Now, some surely would say that it is appropriate for there to be no limit at the federal level because spending must be available for top-line U.S. security interests, including the military and economic recovery.

Point made. Point taken.

But there is still major virtue in the Oregon system. Those who want spending on certain subjects must compete for dollars within revenue limits. And, at the end of an odd-numbered year, the “long” legislative session, members of the Joint Ways and Means Committee and the full legislature must approve a budget in balance and it must be voted on by both the House and the Senate and, finally, the governor.

No extra spending beyond revenue.

This process forces political decisions to be made on how much to spend within the reality of limits – and that makes the decisions better.

As we approach the start of the 2017-19 long legislative session, the state budget again will be the major issue under consideration in Salem. Some players want more money, chief among them Governor Kate Brown who has built a total of $897 million in new taxes into her “Recommended Budget for 2017-19.”

If she really wanted legislators to approve new taxes, she should have developed a “current tax rate” budget to underline, at least from her perspective, the need for more taxes. In fact, just last week the Joint Ways and Means Committee produced a “current taxes” budget and that will give legislators a starting point for spending decisions, a better starting point than provided by the governor.

So far, those competing for more money are the usual suspects:

• Higher education institutions in Oregon have sent along to the governor and legislators, via a public letter, an aggressive appeal for more money, which they contend is necessary to avoid huge tuition increases.

• K-12 schools always want more money and, in some cases, there is relative agreement from all sides that they need it, at least to a degree.

• The biggest hole in the 2017-19 budget revolves around the Medicaid program, which provides health care for low-income Oregonians.

• With prison populations still on the rise and calls for more law enforcement, corrections and cops always compete well for state dollars.

• And, the elephant in the room where budget decisions will be made is the Public Employee Retirement System (PERS), which faces a substantial underfunding problem, and, for that reason, extra spending burdens will fall on all levels of government.

Now, back to the good news. All of these spending decisions – some call them “investments” – will be made, by law, within the amount of revenue available.

No deficit spending!