BUDGET-MAKING PROCESS IN OREGON MAY BE A MODEL FOR CENTRIST ACTION

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19TH 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.

The statement in the headline may come across as a bit gruff, but, in this day of political name-calling, it is likely to be true.

Not my wish. My prediction.

There is at least one notable required exception to this prediction for gridlock and disagreement. It is this:

The Oregon Constitution requires legislators to develop a balanced budget before they leave the Capitol at the end of any legislative session.

Note the word “balance.”

Most of us don’t associate the word with what happens in Washington, D.C. as Members of Congress develop a budget. What’s more, they don’t always develop an approved budget, which balances revenue with expenditures.

In Oregon, the word balance means that revenue must equal expenses. Must.

After a legislative session, when lawmakers are ready to leave Salem about late June or early July, the two-year budget they leave behind must be in balance.

This is achieved, among other things, by creating a joint committee to work all session on the budget. It is called the Joint Committee on Ways and Means and, in this case, the word joint means two things – that both Republicans and Democrats sit on it, and that membership includes both representatives and senators.

Usually, legislative committees are tied to one chamber, either the House or the Senate. They may have members of both parties, but not both chambers.

With Joint Ways and Means, the implication is that smart legislators – yes, there are some left – take all session to work on the budget, not just the last few weeks when tempers are short and pressure is on.

A few years ago, my friend, then Oregon House Speaker Larry Campbell, threatened to split the Joint Ways and Means Committee into one House committee and one Senate committee. All that would have done is postpone the inevitable – approving a balanced budget in accord with the State Constitution.

The good news is that Campbell’s threat never became reality and he probably realized it was a foolhardy move.

My view is that creating more joint committees – Republicans and Democrats, House and Senate members – would be one way to assure that legislators work together to find middle ground. Of course, you also might have to consider imposing a constitutional requirement to reach agreement on issues beyond the budget, which, admittedly, would be very difficult.

But something must be done because, at the moment, apart from the balanced budget requirement, the Oregon Legislature is heading down the road to becoming like Congress – in two ways. One is that those in charge – in Oregon, the Democrats are in charge everywhere – impose their will on the other side, often without even the barest form of consultation.

For an example – this time in Congress — look at the Affordable Care Act, commonly called ObamaCare. It passed without one Republican vote, which one of my friends would say shows that Republicans only know how to say “no.” For me, what it shows that the party in charge imposes its will.

The second implication for Oregon is that those who win election usually start running for re-election as soon as they get into office. There is a permanent campaign, with little, if any, support for the business of governing.

My idea – joint committees on all issues, not just the budget – won’t be enacted, but I suggest it because, as I wrote earlier, something must be done. Otherwise, we’ll face an Oregon Legislature that functions much like Congress that would not good for anyone.

Leave a comment