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.

As I write this, I am sitting in La Quinta, California where, yes, more golf is on my agenda.

But between golf games, I have had some time to reflect on developing a wish list for the Oregon Legislature where I plied my trade as a lobbyist for more than 25 years.

It is easy to have a wish list from the cheap seats, but that’s all it is – a wish list, not something I have to support in the hallways at the Capitol.

So, here goes:

• I wish legislators would find a way to get about the business of governing instead of reverting to the normal gambit, which is to begin campaigning for election immediately. It is a problem that dogs the Oregon Legislature, but is even more prevalent in Congress. And that’s what produces gridlock and acrimony.
• I wish legislators would find a way to make the tough decisions about the role of government, including the decision that, no, this or that new issue is not appropriate for government action.

At the bottom of this blog, I repeat the basic questions I believe legislators should ask before they take action on individual bills. It is appropriate to list these questions again as lawmakers plan to return to Salem after the first of the year.

• I wish legislators would find a way to trim state government spending before they immediately support new taxes. Because the Democrats have super-majorities in both the House and the Senate, increasing taxes will be very tempting, especially because the Ds can do what they want to do without enticing any Rs to join them. Spending control is not a goal.

Instead, state agencies develop a new two-year budget proposal based on the last one. There is seldom, if ever, a process to consider whether the initial two-year budget should be continued for another two years. That’s not spending control.

• I wish those who lead the Legislature would find a way to prod more movement toward meeting in the middle – perhaps not the exact middle – on a variety of public policy issues. That’s often where the best solutions lie anyway. The trouble, of course, is that those who lead the legislature belong to the party in charge, so their goal is often to support their party, not to prod action toward the middle.

Permit me to two examples.

1. Back in 2011, the legislature was evenly split down the middle in both houses. There were 30 Democrats in the House and 30 Republicans. There were 15 of each in the Senate. The split made for better policy decisions because legislators had no choice but to find middle ground.
2. Another reform – I know it has very little, if any, chance of being enacted – is to form joint committees on every issue in Salem, not just on the budget, where the joint committee is called Joint Ways and Means. It counts as members both Ds and Rs, as well as both representatives and senators. Do the same for other committees.

In this case, there is a requirement in the Oregon Constitution that the budget must be in balance, so there is no choice other than to do the deed. Such a constitutional requirement doesn’t exist in other areas – health care, transportation, environmental regulation, public safety and others. But, while the House Speaker and the Senate President would never tolerate wholesale joint committees, the idea still makes sense from the perspective of driving legislators toward compromise. Legislators would have to spend ALL session working together to produce consensus.

Enough. From the cheap seats, I have no doubt that I will think of more grand reform ideas, even if none of which have a chance to be enacted. For now, I’ll leave it here, with the addition being what appears below – questions legislators should ask before they act.

What is the specific problem for which a proposed policy or action is deemed to be the solution?

Is there an appropriate role for government to play?

If there is a role for government, what does the state expect to get for the money it is spending? In other words, what is the expected return on investment?

How will government action affect the private sector, especially individual and corporate taxpayers on whom the state depends to fund government?