MORE ON WHAT INDIVIDUALS CAN DO TO SAVE DEMOCRACY

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 (Les AuCoin), 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.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

I wrote a blog a day or so ago suggesting that democracy as we know it in the United States is in the cross-hairs.

One of the reasons is that many Republicans still follow Donald Trump and wish for a return to autocratic rule under him, even if that requires violence and insurrection.  What’s more, it is incredible to note that Trump still has not conceded the last presidential election to Joseph Biden.

Well, in response to my notions of actions individuals could take in the face of huge, anti-democracy risks, one of my readers got back to me by agreeing with my blog, with one exception.

This individual suggested that my advocacy for empathy was misplaced, at least on occasion, because, if you employed the trait and had to deal with others who wished you only ill, one-way empathy would not work. 

Point made.

Still, I believe empathy is a solid concept to employ as an individual.

The definition of the term is this:

“The ability to understand and share the feelings of another.”

There, good words, which capture exactly my meaning.  Another way to put is that what you see often depends on where you sit.  So, if you try to sit in another’s place, you come to understand that person’s position, even if you don’t agree with it. 

It would be all the better, of course, if one person’s empathy would lead to another person’s reciprocity.

My friend when one person’s empathy is met with another person’s confrontation, all is lost.  My friend also added thoughtful comments on what individuals could do to support democracy in this country.  His list:

• Speak up

• Remind others of the values of democracy and the responsibility to safeguard them

• Articulate consequences of embracing autocratic perspectives and what we lose by promoting them

• Spend time with those most likely to lose the most or who feel homeless

• Read, read, read

• Exercise the right to vote

All good points, worthy of more reflection.

THE FUTURE OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY IS AT STAKE

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 (Les AuCoin), 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.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

This blog headline could be overstated, but there is ample evidence around these days that many people view violence as better than democracy.  Or at least that violence could lead to what they want – to achieve their goals no matter the human cost.

Democracy is in the cross hairs.

But, before going on, I did check to make sure I understood the real meaning of the word democracy.  Here is the definition I found on-line:

“A government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections.”

Just what I thought.

Let me give you just one incredible example of democracy not at work these days.  Donald Trump still has not conceded that he lost the last presidential election.

For that reason and others, the Washington Post’s Jennifer Rubin wrote this week that “it’s easy to feel grim about the future of democracy in America.”

She went on:

“The Republican Party is getting worse in the wake of the Trump presidency, openly praising vigilantism, egging on violent extremists, continuing its crusade to limit access to the ballot, attempting to corrupt voting administration, and seeking to stymie reform at every turn.  The shortcomings of our criminal justice system cannot be ignored.  Social media platforms cling to a business model that monetizes disinformation and hate.  Voters’ memories remain short; their desire for accountability for elected officials is tepid.”

Rubin’s colleague, Greg Sargent added to the contention when he wrote this:

“It is fitting that two Fox News contributors have severed their ties with the network over Tucker Carlson’s glorification of January 6 at exactly the moment when more than 150 scholars are sounding a loud, clanging alarm about the future of our democracy.

“This story is unsettling.  It should rivet our attention on the increasing flirtation among large swaths of the right with political violence, and on the role that the right’s campaign to delegitimize our political system is playing in it.

“Its manifestations are everywhere.  This includes far-right members of Congress openly fantasizing about killing Democrats, and a refusal of GOP leaders to impose accountability for it.”

Sargent’s commentary prompts me to summarize a few personal thoughts about the growing potential that we actually could be seeing the demise of democracy – at least democracy as we have come to know it.

• In addition to refusing to concede that he lost to Joe Biden, Trump continues to foment dissension and violence to achieve his apparent objectives – bringing Biden down and aiming again to gain for himself the nation’s highest political office.
• Trump’s true intent is illustrated by his actions, to encourage his supporters to invade the U.S. Capital on January 6 and, when violence was available for all to see, decline to call off the mob.
• And he and his ilk are trying to put people in power who will do what the Georgia election official declined to do in the last election, which is “to find votes for Trump.” 
• One of Trump’s chief acolytes in Congress, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy continues to endorse violence as a way to achieve his objectives, which is to be in charge of an authoritarian America.

Sargent goes on to say that “a true reckoning requires more than just observing this trend.  It also requires reflecting on the instrumental nature of propaganda like that coming from Tucker Carlson.  Much of the discussion treats the possibility of violence as a mere incidental by-product of that propaganda, depicting it merely as conspiracy-theorizing-for-profit getting out of control.”

A video timeline from inside the Capitol siege shows just how close some goons in America came to hurting or killing members of Congress, forcing Vice President Mike Pence to throw out the election, and keeping Trump in office.

To underline the tension, Sargent points to a new letter signed by dozens of scholars, which warns that attacks on the “legitimacy of America’s elections and, importantly, the use of this as justification to lay the groundwork to subvert democratic outcomes later, has grown to a crisis point.

“This represents a clear and present threat to the future of electoral democracy in the United States.  The history of other crisis-ridden democracies tells us this threat cannot be wished away.  It must be promptly and forthrightly confronted.”

By endorsing violence, various parties are effectively saying that democracy doesn’t work.

So, what can the rest of us do?  Well, on their own, no individuals are able to roll back the tide.  But several actions come to mind:

1. Vote for persons who have a heart for democracy.
2. Oppose those who favor violence over discussion and compromise.
3. Oppose every attempt by Trump to rise again.
4. Play a solid role as citizens of this country, not activators of violence and mayhem.
5. And, practice empathy, a trait mostly missing in action these days. 
   Empathy allows us to understand people whose life experiences are very different from our own.  If we had more of this in politics and in everyday life, we’d be better for it.

GOLF IN SCOTLAND CONJURES UP GREAT MEMORIES

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 (Les AuCoin), 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.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

Why, whenever I am in La Quinta, California, do my thoughts go to golf in Scotland?

Who knows?

Scotland and La Quinta – the latter in the California desert – could not be more different.

But there might be a couple reasons why golf in Scotland arrives top of mind for me.

First, as I noted, the two places are so different that, when you are in one place, you often think of the other. 

Courses in Scotland often are “links courses,” a phrase that refers to land that sits near the sea, so, for one thing, there often are not many trees on links courses.  And you often play the golf ball closer to the ground so it runs over humps and bumps of hard turf.

Golf is so different on links courses that it took pro golfer Phil Mickelson several years to learn how to play on such courses.  And, then in The Open, where I and my family had the privilege to be on hand, he won the tournament on one of the acknowledged best courses in the world, Muirfield.

[By the way, “The Open” is how the Scots and others in Europe refer to the British Open.  If you use the latter term, those in Europe will know you are from the other side of the pond.]

A second reason why Scottish golf comes to mind is that I have found playing there to be great fun.  I have had the privilege of traveling to Scotland five times with my wife Nancy, whose parents both emigrated from Scotland to America.  So, by extension, Scotland is a homeland of sorts for us.

On a number of occasions, I have enjoyed playing with Scotsman who love golf and play as much as they can, rain or shine.  My kind of people.

As my thoughts focus on Scotland, I often recall reading a great book, A Season in Dornoch, by golf writer Lorne Rubenstein. 

The book chronicles the time about 20 years ago when he and his wife traveled to Scotland in the far north of the country.  They booked a flat above a bookstore in the small town of Dornoch and stayed for four months.

Not only did Lorne play golf, he and his wife also made it a point to meet Scots who lived in and around that small town.  His book summarizes the special quality of golf at the major course in Dornoch, Royal Dornoch, as well as the times he and his wife spent with the Scots, learning their lifestyles and hearing homespun tales at “the home of golf.”

Motivated by reading Rubenstein’s book, I have had the privilege of playing Royal Dornoch three times and, later this winter, my wife and I are planning our own sojourn in Dornoch. 

If the pandemic eases enough, we will spend a month in Dornoch at an AirBNB we have rented while I join a course called Struie, which abuts Royal Dornoch.  The Struie membership will allow me to play Royal Dornoch at least four times during the month, as well as play at several other courses in the region.

All of these fond memories came flooding back to me as I began reading another book about Scottish golf, Playing Through, written by Curtis Gillespie.  An interesting link – pardon the play on words – is that, in the book, Gillespie describes several golf games he had played in Scotland with none other than Lorne Rubenstein.

Here is a great quote from Gillespie’s book that captures the essence of golf in Scotland:

“It’s best, most satisfying, if you say the words out loud.  Gullane.  Dirleton.  Muirfield.  Luffness.  Archerfield.  Musselburgh.  Kilspindie.  Longniddry.  I love speaking these names, hearing their sounds.  Even looking at the words on a map has always brought a smile to my lips.

“For a long time, these words had been signifiers in my mind of something both real and fantastic, indicators of both past experience and future enjoyment.

“The memories raised were shot through with images of hole after hole of subtle, perfect links golf, though these memories were always just a bit hazy, involving as they did a sense of awe toward the natural splendor of this hidden stretch of coastline.”

As Curtis Gillespie played golf in Scotland, he came in contact with a person we also met on one of our trips there, a short, stocky man named Archie Baird, now no doubt deceased.  On our first trip to Scotland, we met Archie in the town of Aberlady, where he lived a few miles from Muirfield.  He gave us a personal tour of a golf museum he operates in the town.

Very fond memories of golf in Scotland.  Here in La Quinta, I play on a “parkland course,” which is great fun, as well, though as different from Scottish courses as it could be.

If you live year-round in La Quinta, a term of endearment is to call you a “desert rat.”  So, just call me a “desert rat Scotsman.”

GOLF IN SCOTLAND CONJURES UP GREAT MEMORIES

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 (Les AuCoin), 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.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

Why, whenever I am in La Quinta, California, do my thoughts go to golf in Scotland?

Who knows?

Scotland and La Quinta – the latter in the California desert – could not be more different.

But there might be a couple reasons why golf in Scotland arrives top of mind for me.

First, as I noted, the two places are so different that, when you are one place, you often think of the other. 

Courses in Scotland often are  “links courses,” a phrase that refers to land that sits near the sea, so, for one thing, there often are not many trees on links courses.  And you often play the golf ball closer to the ground so it runs over humps and bumps of hard turf.

Golf is so different on links courses that it took pro golfer Phil Mickelson several years to learn how to play on such courses.  And, then in The Open, where I and my family had the privilege to be on hand, he won the tournament on one of the acknowledged best courses in the world, Muirfield.

[By the way, “The Open” is how Scot and others in Europe refer to the British Open.  If you use the latter term, those over the pond will know you are from the wrong side of the pond.]

A second reason why Scottish golf comes to mind is that I have found playing there to be great fun.  I have had the privilege of traveling to Scotland five times with my wife Nancy, whose parents both emigrated from Scotland to America.  So, by extension, Scotland is a homeland of sorts for us.

On a number of occasions, I have enjoyed playing with Scotsman who love golf and play as much as they can, rain or shine.  My kind of people.

As my thoughts focus on Scotland, I often recall reading a great book, A Season in Dornoch, by golf writer Lorne Rubenstein. 

The book chronicles the time about 20 years ago when he and his wife traveled to Scotland in the far north of the country.  They booked a flat above a bookstore in the small town of Dornoch and stayed for four months.

Not only did Lorne play golf, he and his wife also made it a point to meet Scots who lived in and around that small town.  His book summarizes the greatness of golf at the major course in Dornoch, Royal Dornoch, as well as the great times he and his wife spent with the Scots, learning their lifestyles and hearing homespun tales in “the home of golf.”

Motivated by reading Rubenstein’s book, I have had the privilege of playing Royal Dornoch three times and, later this winter, my wife and I are planning our own sojourn in Dornoch. 

If the pandemic eases enough, we will spend a month in Dornoch at an AirBNB we have rented while I join a course called Struie, which abuts Royal Dornoch.  The Struie membership will allow me to play Royal Dornoch at least four times during the month, as well as play at several other courses in the region.

All of these fond memories came flooding back to me as I began reading another book about Scottish golf, Playing Through, written by Curtis Gillespie.  An interesting link – pardon the play on words – is that, in the book, Gillespie describes several golf games he had played in Scotland with none other than Lorne Rubenstein.

Here is a great quote from Gillespie’s book that captures the essence of golf in Scotland:

“It’s best, most satisfying, if you say the words out loud.  Gullane.  Dirleton.  Muirfield.  Luffness.  Archerfield.  Musselburgh.  Kilspindie.  Longniddry.  I love speaking these names, hearing their sounds.  Even looking at the words on a map has always brought a smile to my lips.

“For a long time, these words had been signifiers in my mind of something both real and fantastic, indicators of both past experience and future enjoyment.

“The memories raised were shot through with images of hole after hole of subtle, perfect links golf, though these memories were always just a bit hazy, involving as they did a sense of awe toward the natural splendor of this hidden stretch of coastline.”

As Curtis Gillespie played golf in Scotland, he came in contact with a person we also met on one of our trips there, a short, stocky man named Archie Baird, now no doubt deceased.  On our first trip to Scotland, we met Archje in the town of Aberlady, where he lived a few miles from Muirfield.  He gave us a personal tour of a golf museum he operates in the town.

Very fond memories of golf in Scotland.  Here in La Quinta, I play on a “parkland course,” which is great fun, as well, though as different from Scottish courses as it could be.

If you live full-time in La Quinta, a term of endearment is to call you a “desert rat.”  So, just call me a “desert rat Scotsman.”

WHAT TO BE THANKFUL FOR ON THANKSGIVING

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 (Les AuCoin), 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.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

Anyone who thinks about it for only a minute or two can find something to be thankful for, especially at this time of year.

For me:

• My wife
• My son and my daughter
• My daughter-in-law
• My three grandchildren
• My friends, many of whom enjoy the game of golf with me
• My heritage from a great family, with a mother and a father for whom I only have fond memories, as well as with four siblings
• As a Christian, my relationship with Jesus Christ

But, then, beyond these top priorities which cannot be replaced by anything elkse, I read a column in the Washington Post this week by Dana Milbank that appeared under this headline:

Be thankful that sanity has returned to America — for now

Here is how Milbank started his column based on the use of the timely term for today – being thankful — though his focus was on politics, which also can be worth forgetting these days:

“Did you see what President Biden tweeted?

“Probably not, because they were earnest missives about booster shots and preschool access.

“Did you hear about the latest chaos at the White House?

“Doubtful, because turnover is low.

“Can you believe he insulted the chancellor of Germany and shoved the prime minister of Montenegro?

“No, because we all know Biden never has and never would.”

In this season of thanksgiving, Milbank adds, “let us be grateful that some measure of calm and sanity has returned to the White House.  The United States, at least for now, has a stable, functioning government.  The president is not making everything about himself, nor creating chaos for its own sake.”

So, with Milbank, consider the alternative, which would exist if we were stuck with Donald Trump as president.

“The stock market is higher than it ever was under Trump; the S&P 500 has hit more than 50 record highs so far in 2021.

“Fully 5.6 million new jobs have been created in Biden’s first nine months, a record pace for a new president, and unemployment is down to 4.6 per cent from an estimated 10 per cent.

“Wages for American workers have increased this year at the fastest rate in more than two decades.  Economic growth for 2021 is on course to hit a healthy 5 per cent.

“Life is returning to normal after the pandemic, as the country finally overcomes a delay worsened by right-wing resistance to vaccination and prevention.

“Biden has managed to secure broadband Internet and better roads, bridges, electric power and drinking water for all Americans. Despite fierce Republican opposition,he is within striking distance of securing better child-care assistance, free pre-kindergarten and lower drug prices, as well as requiring the ultra-rich to pay more in taxes.”

Milbank contends – and I agree – that what isn’t happening is almost as important as what is happening.

By this time in Trump’s first year, Milbank remembered that Trump had praised the “very fine people” marching among violent neo-Nazis in Charlottesville, fired the FBI director for investigating his national security adviser;  replaced his national security adviser, chief of staff, press secretary, communications director, chief strategist, secretary of homeland security, and secretary of health and human services, ripped up treaties and threatened to pull out of NATO, threatened nuclear war on Twitter, attempted to impose what aides called a “Muslim ban” and disparaged a “so-called judge” who objected, belittled U.S. intelligence and shared sensitive Israeli intelligence with Russia sabotaged ObamaCare, falsely claimed his predecessor had tapped his phone lines, embraced Stalin’s phrase “enemy of the people” to describe the free press, exposed the “dreamers” to deportation, stood by a Senate candidate accused of sexually assaulting a minor, tossed paper towels (but not the needed aid) at hurricane-ravaged Puerto Rico, continued nonsense claims about a “deep state,” insulted hundreds of people in often vulgar and misspelled tweets, made more than 1,600 false or suspect statements, and, yes, shoved the prime minister of Montenegro before a photo op and insulted German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

In the years of Trump as president, I longed for a return to what I call the “norms and conventions” of regular government, including in the Oval Office.  To work well, government should often be a dull, plodding business of doing the people’s work.  Nothing fancy.  Just the hard work of finding consensus, compromise, and middle ground.

While I don’t agree with everything Biden is doing or has done, I appreciate that he has acted with honesty, decency, and transparency. 

With Trump, his business-as-usual was lying and cheating his way to personal aggrandizement, the country be damned.

With Biden, at least we have returned to the “norms and conventions” of government.  And, as Milbank has indicated, the actual record isn’t too bad either.

ANOTHER HARD-TO-GRASP GOLF DEFINITION

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 (Les AuCoin), 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.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

Ask most golfers today and they will say that the handicap number assigned to each hole on a golf course illustrates its difficulty.

They’d be wrong…mostly.

The actual definition is this:

“The number one handicap stroke hole should be assigned to the thole where the bogey golfer needs an additional stroke in order to halve the hole with a scratch golfer.”

The fact is, however, that the true meaning of the handicap number probably relates more or less to the difficulty, despite the more specific definition.

All of this came up for me recently when the guys I play golf with at The Palms in La Quinta, California, were flummoxed when the new scorecards for this year did not include handicap numbers for holes played from the gold tees – the tees many old folks use at the course.

So, that started a series of requests to prompt the head pro to come up with gold tee numbers.  It was strange that this was not on the scorecard because, if nothing else, the cards last year included gold tee numbers.  So, why not this year?

After a few days, all was well when one of my friends obtained a list of the handicap numbers that we could use to keep score – including “net scores” on the gold tee holes because net scores translate to who wins money in the games every week.

One issue was that the process caused a number of players to come up with their own handicap hole numbers and that’s where the misconception arose.  Some of them didn’t know the real definition.

That prompted me to seek information from the Southern California Golf Association (SCGA) to which I belong, along with the Oregon Golf Association.

The SCGA provided the official definition quoted above.

And, to go to an extreme, what follows is the SCGA’s further guidance on the issue, which will appeal only to those, like me, who don’t have much else to do in retirement than play and think about golf.

“So how does the club determine where the strokes should be allocated? Section 17 of the USGA Handicap System offers two methods by which a course can apply stroke allocation to their golf holes.  It can be a time consuming and mathematically challenging process if done by hand, but one of the benefits member clubs will realize by the SCGA’s January 2010 change to the GHIN handicap system is the ability for the club to capture the scoring information and run the analysis themselves.

“Comparison Method:  Scores of low handicap players are compared to scores of higher handicap players from the same set of tees.  The club collects a sampling of 200 gross, hole-by-hole scores from players whose course handicap does not exceed an 8 for men (Group A), and another sampling of 200 from players whose course handicap is in the 20 to 28 range (Group B).

“Scores should be gross and not adjusted for Equitable Stroke Control. Scores for each hole are then averaged for Group A and Group B, and the difference is then determined for each hole by subtracting the average of Group A from the average of Group B.  The holes would then be ranked starting with the hole where the biggest difference is between Group A average scores and Group B average scores.  Thus, showing the number one handicap stroke hole where the bogey golfer needs that additional stroke.

“Regression Method:  Allows the collection of 400 gross scores from players of all handicap levels.  Scores need to be gross, not adjusted, and scores must be provided from the same set of tees and from the same gender golfer.  Each hole is evaluated by the score and player’s course handicap.”

Then The Palms, with either method, assigns number values to the holes and produces – usually at least – a scorecard bearing the numbers.  That almost happened this year – the proper scorecards, though their lack has now been corrected.

See, there you have it – and aren’t you glad you now know more than you used to know before I went on to this extreme.

THE DEPARTMENT OF BITS AND PIECES IS OPEN AGAIN

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 (Les AuCoin), 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.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

This is one of several departments I run with a free hand to manage as I see fit.

The others, now closed for the moment, are the Department of Pet Peeves, the Department of Good Quotes Worth Remembering, and the Department of “Just Saying.”

So, the Department of Bits and Pieces is now open.

Two Views of Rittenhouse:  Is there a need for someone else – me — to comment on the Rittenhouse not guilty verdict?  No.  But, remember, I run this department with a free hand, so here is my comment.

Apart from implications of the verdict for gun control, racism and the judicial system as a whole – I’ll leave that commentary to others — I was struck by a couple vivid images in the trial and its end. 

One was of Rittenhouse, when he carried a gun into a protest in Konosha, Wisconsin, swaggering and strutting down the street apparently looking for something or someone to shoot.  He should have stayed home.

The second was of Rittenhouse, acting like a juvenile as he cried on the witness stand or nearly fainted as the verdict was read.

Implications of what I saw?  Probably none, other than the clear need for more gun control to avoid a major weapon to get into the hands of an immature individual like Rittenhouse.

The New 6^th Congressional District in Oregon:  Predictably, the new 6^th Congressional District in Oregon, a result of the 10-year re-districting process, is drawing a welter of candidates, either already declared or apparently planning to do so.

Obviously, there is no incumbent in the race, though it is likely that, given the mostly urban make-up of the district, a Democrat will win.

State Representative Andrea Salinas, who helped to design the new district, is the early favorite, in part because she is likely to get most of the public employee union money to fund her campaign.

On a personal level, one of my friends, Dr. Kathleen Harder, has thrown her hat into the ring, though she’ll have a long and tough road to win against more well-known candidates.  She has a heart for the job, but heart doesn’t always matter in congressional races.

Pelosi – Pro and Con:  I’ve always had mixed emotions about U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.  Is she good for the country or bad?  I don’t know.

But, I was struck yesterday when I read a column by Washington Post writer Jennifer Rubin, which said this:

“Speaker Sam Rayburn served longer.  Speaker John W. McCormack shepherded through the Great Society legislation.  But Speaker Nancy Pelosi might be the most accomplished and consequential speaker in the modern era on the following basis:  The California Democrat passed more major legislation with smaller margins than any of her predecessors.  And yes, she was the first woman to hold the job.

“After tortuous negotiations among the White House, her moderate and progressive House members and Democrat Senators Kyrsten Sinema from Arizona and Joe Manchin from West Virginia, she ushered the Build Back Better $1.75 trillion legislative package through the House, losing a single Democratic vote.

“This follows the largest infrastructure bill in history and the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan in March.  She defied critics who repeatedly pronounced the Build Back Better effort dead, calmed irate members, refrained from making public attacks against Senate Democrats making her life difficult, and attained what may be the capstone of her career.

“Keep in mind that she also got the Affordable Care Act through the House, impeached a lawless president twice, supplied necessary votes to bail out the economy under Republican President George W. Bush, raised the profile of a long list of female legislators (going so far as to put freshmen women in subcommittee chairs) and led her members through the violent insurrection of Jan. 6, during which the vicious MAGA mob tried to hunt her down.”

So, compliments to Pelosi for melding a fractious Democrat caucus.  But, for me, things are a bit more complicated than Rubin suggests.  For one thing, no single individual achieves all Pelosi is credited for achieving.  There is some credit, not total credit.  For another, I am not sure the country can afford the huge price tags associated with the Democrat agenda Pelosi advances at the behest of President Joe Biden.

What Democrats have not learned is that there is a time to say “no” to more government. 

McCarthy – Con:  If you want to consider political idiots, go no farther than U.S. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy. 

He took to the well of the House the other day and proceeded to rant uncontrollably for more than eight hours, all to stop Democrats from acting on the Build Back Better bill.

Here’s how Washington Post columnist Alexandra Petri wrote about McCarthy’s performance:

“For someone who wants to be speaker of the House, Kevin McCarthy is very bad at speaking.

“Usually, when you give a speech (one example would be the Gettysburg Address, which McCarthy invoked several times during his remarks), you try to express ideas using words.  Unless you are Kevin McCarthy.”

No one knew what McCarthy was talking about – and, of course, McCarthy didn’t either.  He just ranted on – and on, and on, and on.  Which, he must think, is a way to become speaker, though to achieve that goal two things have to happen.  One, obviously, is that the Rs have to win the mid-term elections.

The other is that McCarthy has to cater to the over-the-top demands of the Trumpian legislators who are becoming a key part of his party.

INFRASTRUCTURE: FOCUS ON THE NEED, NOT JUST THE COST

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 (Les AuCoin), 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.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

A funny thing happened on the way to passage of the major infrastructure legislation in Congress.

Some members began to realize how much good stuff would result from the federal investment.  Need, not just cost.

So, it was not just a piece of legislation that cost $1.2 trillion.  It was money to fund needed highway, bridge, rail and Internet projects around the country – projects that have languished for years.

Nowhere was this put better than in blog written by a former colleague of mine, Joel Rubin, who runs my old firm’s Washington, D.C. office, now called CFM Advocates.

“News coverage of the $1.2 trillion Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act centered on how much it will cost,” he wrote.  “But, in its advocacy for local governments, port districts and transit agencies, CFM focused on how much the investment is needed.

“We don’t advocate in terms of big, round numbers.  Our job on behalf of clients (both those based in Oregon and in Washington) was to help lawmakers see how big the need is and how investments would be made in the communities they represent in Congress.”

The results are impressive – Oregon will receive $3.4 billion and Washington $8.6 billion in formula funds for highways, bridges, broadband, EV charging stations, and more.  Those totals will increase as state and local governments successfully compete for discretionary funds.

“The legislation is like a layered cake, consisting of a stack of different federal programs with different objectives,” Rubin explains. “This is a transformational investment that will help states and local communities upgrade their infrastructure, create good-paying jobs and maintain competitiveness.

“The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act is not legislation that can be summarized in a paragraph or two because the problems it addresses are complex and variable across the nation.  We prepare the blogs to inform our clients, but also to help the general public see how much thought and consideration by congressional leaders went into the many provisions in the legislation.”

The bill’s provisions and bottom line were hammered out in the Senate last summer when it passed with a bi-partisan 69-30 vote.  Its fate in the House was tied to the even larger Build Back Better initiative rendered in a budget reconciliation resolution, which led to delays and legislative maneuvering.

“The debates and delays generated a rollercoaster of emotions, but final passage should put the doubts and doomsday predictions in the rear-view mirror,” Rubin continued.  “The challenge now, as it should be, is to put the investments to work as quickly and as wisely as possible.  Our role as advocates will now shift to advising our municipal clients how to take advantage of the enriched programs that Congress authorized.”

So, is my purpose to laud Joel and his D.C. colleagues?  Well, yes, but the point is less that than to summarize the reality of the new investments. 

Beyond the federal machinations, another of my former colleagues, Dale Penn, who run’s CFM’s state lobbying operation, wrote about a special infrastructure challenge for Oregon, which no doubt is mimicked in all other states.

It is this:  Oregon Must Develop a Plan to Spend Its Broadband Funding

Significant money will pour into Oregon to expand broadband service in underserved areas, but government watchers should not expect instant connections.  

That’s because it turns out that Business Oregon, the state agency in charge of Internet expansion, doesn’t yet have a plan on how to spend the money.

The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act contains $100 million for broadband expansion in Oregon.  Something called the “American Rescue Plan” adopted earlier this year provided another $120 million for broadband expansion.  

Both federal bills require Oregon to apply by December 27 for formula fund allocations.

Business Oregon, Penn wrote in one of his blogs, says the cost to ensure all Oregonians are connected could range up to $1.32 billion.  

But, still, a plan must be developed to spend the money.

In a way, the numbers do tell a tale. 

But Rubin and Penn are exactly on target when they contend that most of the attention should now go to two places – (a) verifying the need for infrastructure investments, and (b) assuring that the money is spent wisely. And not – remember this? – like an earlier debacle in the State of Alaska whi

PLAYING TWO GREAT GOLF COURSES

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 (Les AuCoin), 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.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

I have had the privilege of playing more than 200 golf courses during my “career” as I followed what some have called “the little white ball” around several-acre tracts of land.

It’s called golf, but how do I know the number?

Well, a couple years ago, I worked hard to make a list of courses I have played during my life as a follow-up to a challenge laid down by the editor of Links Magazine, George Peper.  He said he had his own records showing he had played 750 courses, which was enabled by his position as a long-time golf magazine editor, not to mention his trips to the “home of golf,” Scotland, where he lived for a couple years hard by the 18^th hole at the Old Course in St. Andrews.

I had no idea my number would exceed 200.  Great memories!

But, in truth, I play most of my golf these days on two courses – Illahe Hills Golf and Country Club in Salem area where I live above the 7^th hole, and The Palms Golf Course in La Quinta which is about five miles from where my wife and I live during the winter in the California desert.

Both Illahe and The Palms are challenging but fair tracks.  That’s how I describe both to friends of mine who have played neither — tough but fair.

Illahe Hills/All of the 18 holes on this 60-year-old track in Salem lay out in front of you as a golfer.  To be sure, there are dogleg holes, but usually the change in direction occurs as you play your second or third shots into a green.

The course is in great shape, even during the winter.  And this is due to the expertise of Illahe’s greens superintendent, Steve Beyer, who came on board about three years ago.  He had the tall task to replace a legend, the former super Bill Swancutt, who had spent more than 30 years in his role at Illahe, watching it, under his leadership, become one of the “must visit” courses in the Pacific Northwest.

The greens at Illahe are known as among the best in the region and, today, Beyer keeps them running fast, even in the winter.

Illahe also re-built all of its bunkers three or four years ago, a project that was due, if only because in the Northwest, it is tough to maintain bunkers beyond about 10 years, given the winter rain.

If I had to choose one course – and only one – to play for the rest of my life, it would be Illahe.

The Palms/This course, now just more than 20 years old, is very different than Illahe.  That may because it lies in the California desert rather than the rainy Northwest.

Like Illahe, however, The Palms lays out in front of you as golfer, with no tricked-up holes.  On occasion at The Palms, it makes sense to twist your tee shot one way or the other given the contours of the holes, but there is not a blind shot to be found.

What I tell my friends who have not played the course is that its main defense is the 18 greens – hitting them, holding them, and putting on them.

When I arrived as a member about four years ago, veteran Palms players told me this about the greens:  “You can try to read them, but the best way to play them is to memorize what putts do.”

The greens are good enough that legend has it that Canadian golfer, Mike Weir, came to The Palms to putt on the greens as a tune-up for the Masters Tournament in Augusta, Georgia, which he then proceeded to win for his only “major.”

Several other factors distinguish The Palms:

• There are no tee times.  The pros work you in on the first tee as you arrive at the course.

• You are required to play 18 holes in three hours and 40 minutes, which is unusual for desert courses.

• You can walk the course, if you choose to do so – and that, too, is unusual for desert courses.

Well, let me quit writing about these two courses, at least for now, though it’s fun for me to compare the two – and to remember as many as possible of the other courses I have played.

But, now, it’s time for me to go play golf…again.

PERCEPTIONS FROM ANOTHER TRIP SOUTH TO LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA

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 (Les AuCoin), 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.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course

I came up with a few more perceptions based on the last few days as my wife and I made our annual trek by car from Salem, Oregon to our winter home in La Quinta, California.

I did so on the 16-hour drive south because I had nothing else to occupy my mind, other than staying in my lane (see below).

Dollar general:  I don’t know why exactly, but I noticed a lot of Dollar General big rigs on the drive south.  Who knew that a store specializing in buying stuff for $1 could become big enough to buy a fleet of big trucks?  I never have been to a Dollar General store, but those that exist must attract a lot of customers.

Amazon prime trucks:  As always, I saw lot of Amazon trucks, carrying stuff from one place to another so Jeff Bezos could continue making millions, if not billions, thus funding more private space travel.

Fog:  Driving in fog is not fun and we had many hours of that reality on the trip south.  It was not bad enough for us to feel trapped, but it was a tough slog.

Road conditions:  There were bad road conditions a lot of the way south, both on U.S. 99, which we traveled for a number of miles on our second day, and also, on I-5.  Then, heading east on I-10 heading, the road was basically under construction.

On some of the roads, highway engineers – perhaps that’s an oxymoron – appeared to have created an additional lane heading east.  That made the lanes very narrow.   On several occasions, I felt hemmed in by big trucks on both sides.

I did hear our GPS voice say something like, “Stay in the right five lanes,” a distinctly California phrase you would never hear in Oregon.

Our Air BNB in Lodi, California:  We have stayed in an Air BNB in Lodi, California on several of our trips north and south.  The other day as we arrived in Lodi, we checked with our “landlord” and learned that a person who had stayed in the Air BNB site reserved for us had come down with Covid and was so sick she could not leave the house.

Of course, we wouldn’t have wanted to stay there anyway, with its exposure to Covid.  But our landlord said he would make other arrangements for us.  And he did – another Air BNB in the area.

We made the best of this potentially bad situation by venturing a few blocks away to a winery where he whiled away a couple hours with drinks in hand.  That reminds me to say that the Lodi area is much like Yamhill County, both in terms of topography and wine.

Is the middle ground always the best?  As I drive, I thought of this question because a friend of mine had raised it in regard to issues between Packer quarterback Aaron Rodgers and one of the companies he endorses, State Farm.

The issue was that Rodgers provided faulty information about his Covid vaccination status, leaving the impression that he had been vaccinated, though he used the word “immunized,” instead of “vaccinated.”  But, he finally admitted that he had not been vaccinated.

Based on his invalid assurances, he came under intense criticism, including having to sit out for a game and pay a National Football League fine (which did not amount to much because of his high salary).

Now, as for the middle ground, it’s this.

State Farm tried to have it both ways as it, (a) criticized Rodgers’ conduct, but (b) said he was entitled to his personal views.  So, it would not remove him as an endorser. 

In politics, I have long been an advocate for middle ground on pressing public policy challenges.  After all, that’s often where the best solutions lie.

But, is middle ground always right?  No.  In the case of Rodgers and State Farm, I believe the insurance company should have fired him, given the terrible example he set in the face of a continuing national tragedy – the pandemic.

Then how about this imponderable?:  If you send something by ship, it is called “cargo.”  But, if you send it by car or track, it is called “shipment?”

Why?

Inquiring minds want to know.