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.

Republicans in Congress are replicating mistakes Democrats made about seven years ago.

In the tax bill, now undergoing vetting among Republicans in the U.S Senate, they are talking only between and among themselves. Democrats, even some who might be willing to consider middle-of-the-road tax proposals, are shut out of the process.

That mimics what Democrats did with then-President Barack Obama when they produced Obama Care without one Republican vote.

As a former state lobbyist in Oregon, I say that is exactly one of the wrong ways to do the public’s business.

One side – either Republicans or Democrats – doesn’t have all the answers and should not behave as if they do.

What should matter is finding the smart middle ground. Not always the exact middle, but a compromise, which has become, unfortunately, a dirty word in politics these days.

It’s been 16 years since the last tax bill passed Congress and was signed by a president, George W. Bush, in his first year in office.

As Kimberley Strassel opines in the Wall Street Journal, “the Bush tax package was hardly as sweeping as today’s proposed reform, but it did contain similar provisions. It cut marginal rates across the board, even knocking nearly 5 points off the top marginal rate for the 1 per cent. It cut capital-gains taxes and lowered the estate tax to zero in 2010, before the reductions expired. These are all cuts that House and Senate Democrats today uniformly decry as giveaways to the rich and powerful.

“Yet back then,” Strassel continues, “nobody doubted some Democrats would support the legislation. Republicans barely commanded a Senate majority, with just 50 Senate votes, yet the tax-cut train rolled unswervingly on. Ultimately, 12 Senate Democrats voted yes. Some of these were moderate Democrats, a species that is now all but extinct— John Breaux of Louisiana, Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Tim Johnson of South Dakota. But the ayes also included Dianne Feinstein from California and Bob Torricelli from New Jersey.”

The process 16 years ago may not have been pretty. Most efforts to develop compromise are not. But it was a process. Which is more than anyone can say these days as we watch one side, the Democrats, do damage with ObamaCare, then watch the other side, the Republicans, risk the same with tax reform. Getting even appears to be the main objective.

To those suggest that I appear to be more interested in process than substance, I say, “guilty.” For me, a solid process produces solid substance.

Further, it was telling for me that the Wall Street Journal endorsed the Senate tax package and the New York Times wrote an editorial opposing it. That means there is middle ground for the taking. Let’s hope those in Congress find it.