By now you’ve heard that Oregon voters decided last Tuesday to tax themselves. If by “themselves” you mean “someone else.”

The election (actually, a referendum of legislated tax increases) decided the fate of two measures that were carefully targeted to maximize the ratio of voters to unpopular taxpayers. Measure 66 added two new brackets (10.8% on income over $125,000 for individuals/$250,000 for families; 11% on income over $250,000 for individuals/$500,000 for families) to Oregon’s basically flat income tax rate of 9%. Taxpayers in those brackets account for about two percent of Oregon’s income taxpayers, but is estimated to bring in $470 million a year. Measure 67 adds a new corporate tax rate (7.9%, from 6.6%), applying to business incomes over $250,000 and estimated to raise more than $250 million annually. The new top rates for the income and corporate taxes will partially sunset after four years.

Voters approved the Measure 66 by an eight point margin and Measure 67 by a six point margin. Typically, Oregon voters have rejected income tax increases by referendum, although none has been so carefully targeted as these. Oregon has no sales tax, and its property tax was limited by a vote of the people.

The California spending lobby is predictably overjoyed by this turn of events, seeing a possible precedent for California legislative or voter approval of targeted taxes. It’s axiomatic that targeted taxes have better prospects for success than general tax increases; recent ballot experience in California is proof of that. But outcomes are never pre-ordained: the Oregon measures succeeded in large part because the labor unions supporting them outspent taxpayers by 1.5-to-1. They poured into the Oregon campaign the equivalent of what in California would be a sixty million dollar effort. They made a commitment and an overwhelming show of force. California businesses and taxpayers should make note of that as the ballot wars unfold this year.