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.

Here’s a pipe dream.

With a lot of time on my hands in retirement, a question crossed my mind this week.

It was this.

What would happen if we elected an official who spent time on the job making reasoned decisions about public policy without any focus on whether he or she would get elected again?

I imagine we would have better decisions. And, not just one such official, but a retinue of them.

I also hope – despite evidence to the contrary – that, as voters, we would see the value of an elected official who acted without regard to the next election and, then, vote that person into office again.

Too much to ask, you say.

Probably.

But, whether it’s this or some other reform, we need to see something different in politics today. And not just see something, but react positively ourselves when we observe a new way of doing the public’s business.

I also believe that, if we were to see elected officials who did not just focus on the next election, they would evidence one other very important trait. It would be always to ask this key question: Is there a role for government in this problem, and, if there is, what should it be?

Too often, that question is not asked because many act as if they believe that, if a problem exists, there always should be a role for government to address it.

Plus, when designing a new or expanded role for government, another key proposition should be gain more recognition. It is this: How will a decision by made on whether there has been a return on the government investment and, if not, then the new government program should not be continued.

One example of this kind of process occurred when, in 2011, legislators, at the request of my firm’s client, Youth Villages, passed Senate Bill 964. It was designed to fund model programs with proven track records to reduce Oregon’s intolerably high foster care caseload. And, for the first time in Oregon’s social service statutes, the phrase “performance based contracting” was included in Oregon law, which meant that competitors for state dollars would have to accountable for their performance, not just take the public dole.

This was a clear case of expecting a return on the investment of government dollars.

[Unfortunately, despite passage of the law, the Department of Human Services has tended to ignore it, which raises another question worthy of another blog – state laws that are on the books, but ignored by agencies, should be a focus of interest and investigation. At the moment, agencies suffer almost no consequences for failure to observe the law.]

As one voter – not to mention a retired lobbyist – I intend to support candidates who will run on a platform of getting the public’s business done without regard to the next election and in a way that takes maximum advantage of government money.

We’ll see if any such candidates emerge.