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 to 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 press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon, as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as 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.

In many ways, it’s a sad commentary on politics in Oregon when many readers will know exactly the meaning in the headline of this blog.

It’s a question related to a tactic being employed by Republicans at the Capitol during the current “short legislative session.”

They say rural Oregon cannot tolerate what is called a “cap and trade” bill which aims to put climate change provisions into Oregon law.

Proponents say it’s needed in the face of federal inaction on climate change, which is already affecting the state.  Opponents say it would do little to solve climate change while increasing costs for consumers across the state and particularly damaging Oregon’s rural economy.

So, Republicans have “walked out” to deny legislative leaders a quorum to conduct business in the Senate and House chambers.

The tactic has employed for years by both Republicans and Democrats when one or the other couldn’t tolerate outcomes proposed by those in charge in Salem.

In the last long legislative session, it was the Senate Rs who walked over cap-and-trade.  Now, they have done so again and their colleagues in the House have joined the protest.

One risk for the Rs is that state financial allocations they favor could fall into the dust bin, the main one of which is a proposal by Governor Kate Brown to fund flood relief efforts in Eastern Oregon.

There are two competing views about walk-outs.

Republicans say cap-and-trade is so onerous for rural Oregon that there is no choice but to kill it in any way they can.  They also say the in-charge Democrats have turned a deaf ear to proposals from Republicans to amend the bill.

One tactic that enraged Republicans occurred the other day when Senate President Peter Courtney went into a Joint Ways and Means Committee, appointed himself temporarily to the committee, and provided the final vote to send the bill to the Senate floor.  What Courtney did was legal under Senate rules, but the action didn’t go down well with the Rs.

“Senator Courtney’s actions leave no other option for Senate Republicans but to boycott and deny quorum because cap and trade is on the way to the Senate floor,” said Senate Minority Leader Herman Baertschiger.  “Democrats refused to work with Republicans and denied every amendment that was presented.  Pay attention Oregon – this is a true example of partisan politics.”

On the other side, Democrat leaders say legislators have an obligation to show up for work to do the public’s business rather than, as one Democrat put it, “take a vacation on the public’s dime.”  The comment was a reference to the fact the Rs had to go out of state to avoid being rounded up by the State Police if the cops had been dispatched to bring them back to Salem – which, by the way, has not occurred so far.

Senate Majority Leader Ginny Burdick, D-Portland, issued a statement saying, “Walking out on the job is a dereliction of duty” and also describing Republicans’ boycott as “dishonorable and disrespectful.”

From my post in the cheap seats, it strikes me that there is a relatively easy solution here.

It is to send the cap-and-trade bill out to a vote of the people and count on urban voters in Portland, Eugene, Medford and, even, Bend to pass the bill over the likely objections of rural Oregonians.  As various statewide political races have shown, Democrat have more votes than Republicans and, thus, are able to control many outcomes at the polls.

Then, with such a compromise in place (no, compromise is not a dirty word), Republicans could return to the Capitol and vote to make the final decisions on the remaining issues that should be handled as “emergencies” in a short legislative session.

As one example, flood recovery money for Eastern Oregon would be approved.