Who says Democrats and Republicans can’t get along?

Leaders in both parties have united in opposition to Measure 118, one of five measures on the Oregon ballot this November. And, for such an innocuous-sounding ballot measure, it’s attracted an impressive list of opponents.

And for good reason.

You might have heard Measure 118 referred to as the “Oregon rebate.” It would increase by 3% the corporate minimum tax on sales above $25 million and would distribute the proceeds evenly among all Oregonians.

Estimates are that every eligible person (not just every taxpayer) in Oregon would receive about $1,600 annually from the rebate. It’s worth noting that every person, regardless of their income, would receive the same amount — although the measure makes it clear that people can decline to receive the dough. (The measure specifies that money from declined rebate payments could be spent only on services for senior citizens, health care, public early childhood education or K-12 education; while these areas are worthy of additional investment, this sounds like it would be a budgeting nightmare.)

But still: $1,600 or so every year doesn’t sound like a bad deal.

That is, until you take a look at the flip side.

A recent analysis of the measure by the state Department of Administrative Services raised serious issues with Measure 118.

For starters, the analysis found the measure actually would reduce the amount of money available to the state’s general fund, “due to its interactions with existing tax and transfer programs.”

The general fund is how the state pays for programs such as education, health care and public safety.

And the measure, if passed, could end up squeezing your pocketbook as well, according to an analysis by the Legislative Revenue Office.

This analysis concluded if the measure passes, prices in 2030 would be 1.3% higher than otherwise projected as businesses that are able to do so pass along at least some of the increased taxes to their customers.

Personal income in 2030 would be 0.71% lower than it would have been had the measure not passed, the analysis found. Employment would decline slightly, by about 0.99%, the analysis concluded.

Measure 118 supporters are hoping Oregon could become a test case showing the rest of the nation how a universal basic income could work. But this appears to be a case in which Oregonians would be best served if another state raised its hand first.

Supporters also argue the measure could help alleviate child poverty in Oregon, and there’s likely a measure of truth to that.

But surely there are better ways to work toward easing child poverty in the state than passing an ill-conceived ballot measure that would hobble the state’s economy — and put Oregon at a severe tax disadvantage when compared to other states.

We don’t doubt the supporters of Ballot Measure 118 have the best of intentions. But Oregon voters this November will need to look past those good intentions and take a hard look at the measure’s unintended consequences.