A BENEATH-THE-SURFACE ISSUE: NON-COMPETE AGREEMENTS

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 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 had never heard of the issue – “non-compete agreements” — before I encountered it at the State Capitol in Oregon when I was a lobbyist.

On behalf of the Oregon Association of Broadcasters – more than 200 radio and television stations around the state – I had to defend the use of non-compete agreements.

For broadcasters, the agreements were used to protect multiple million dollar investments in top-tier, on-air talent, usually anchors.

What did these agreements mean?  That talent was not allowed to leave for another station for several years after the major investment.

At was at that point, that an Oregon legislator expressed his displeasure with broadcast managers.  He had been a TV sports reporter before winning an election, so generally disliked radio and TV managers.

To express his angst, also with support from broadcast unions, he proposed a new law that would bar non-compete agreements.  It forced me to negotiate a sort-of middle ground position, though with this legislator’s cat-bird seat, the agreement when more his way than mine.

All of this came to mind last week when I read a story in the Wall Street Journal that appeared under this headline:

“Lina Khan’s latest rule instantly invalidates 30 million contracts without Congressional authority.”

Given that headline, the Journal’s editorial board position was clear.  Khan, the Federal Trade Commission chair, had exceeded her authority.

More from the story:

“Is there anything that Khan doesn’t think she can do?  Apparently not.  On Tuesday she and her fellow Democrat commissioners effectively invalidated tens of millions of employment contracts without authority from Congress.

“The FTC’s 570-page rule outlaws so-called non-compete agreements across the economy.  Employers use these agreements to restrict workers from joining competitors or starting their own firms for a specified duration after leaving.  They protect an employer’s intellectual property and investment in worker development.”

Beyond broadcasting, just think for a minute about technology or medical device companies.  They make huge investments in what quickly become “intellectual property.”  So, understandably, they move to protect those investments.

Khan doesn’t care.

Acting at the apparent behest of unions, she torpedoed the ability to put such agreements in place.

She said:  “…such agreements ‘restrict the freedom of American workers and suppress wages’ and ‘stifle new businesses and new ideas.’”

Disregarding reams of evidence to the contrary, Khan led her agency to bar employers from enforcing existing non-compete agreements for workers who aren’t “senior executives.”

The rule also forbids employers from entering future non-compete agreements with “senior executives” in a “policy-making position” who earn more than $151,164 a year.  By the FTC’s estimate, some 30 million workers are currently covered by non-compete agreements, which will now be rendered void.

More from the Journal:

“The fact is that non-compete agreements may frustrate some workers, but they are rarely iron-clad.  Employers usually are willing to negotiate less restrictive covenants to protect their trade secrets and training investments.  They also usually offer more pay and perks in exchange for workers agreeing to a non-compete.

“According to a U.S. Chamber of Commerce survey, 78 per cent of responding employers said they provide additional compensation that spans the duration of an agreement or longer.”

So, the basic impact of Khan’s ruling will mean that workers will earn less, and companies will invest less in them, if workers can easily take the skills they acquire on the job elsewhere.

The Journal also contends, properly, that Khan proceeded without Congressional authority and, so far at least, Congress, which could also restrict non-compete agreements, has not done so.

This is an issue that could benefit from negotiation to find the smart middle ground.  Which means that banning non-compete agreements does not make sense.  Nor does simply allowing all of them.

If there were smart operators in the Legislative or Executive Branches, they’d get their act together and find a workable solution that protects companies and workers.

PROTESTS: WHAT DO THEY ACHIEVE? NOT MUCH

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 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.

If I am an expert, “protests” is not one of the categories.

For these reasons:

• Over 40 years involved in public policy in the State of Oregon, I saw many protests on the steps of the State Capitol.
• I had no idea what they achieved, other than, I guess, a sense of satisfaction for those protesting who sometimes got media coverage.
• I don’t remember a public policy issue where protests served a function of bringing parties together to solve a problem.

So it is that I am concerned lately with what’s happening on many college campuses around the country, even though what I know is from a remote location.

Protestors are roiling – there’s one of my favorite words again – as they contend higher ed administrators are favoring the Israeli side in the current Middle East war.

Here’s the way the Wall Street Journal described the situation at the current fulcrum of the debate, Columbia University.

“Columbia Faces a Day That Lays Out Its Troubles:  Protesters, who stayed in their encampment, continue to negotiate with administrators.  

“Columbia University awoke Wednesday to a calendar that lays bare the breadth of its troubles.

“House Speaker Mike Johnson was expected on campus to visit with Jewish students.  The university president, Nemat Shafik, was preparing to confer with the university Senate, which could censure her as soon as Friday.  

“And protesters and university officials were negotiating over the possible dismantling of an encampment that is dominating a swath of the campus lawn.  Overnight, the university and protesters narrowly avoided another confrontation that could have involved the police.”

Administrators at campuses across the nation have been struggling to balance two competing interests — free speech rights, including anti-Israel speech, versus the need to protect Jewish students.

The Washington Post reports that some demonstrations have included hate speech, threats or support for Hamas, the armed group based in Gaza that led attacks on Israel on October 7, sparking the war.

Also, this from Washington Post commentator Meagan McArdle:

“Why campus protests against Israel probably won’t be effective:

Error! Filename not specified.

“An alien who landed on our planet during the current news cycle could be forgiven for concluding that the biggest foreign policy issue facing America today is what the U.S. government should do about Columbia University’s occupation of the Palestinian territories.  Otherwise, why would throngs of protesters be crowding the campus to protest actions more than 5,000 miles away?

“The short answer is that they are advocating for a cease-fire in Gaza, for an academic boycott of Israeli universities, and for the administration to divest all of Columbia’s finances, including the endowment, from companies and institutions that profit from Israeli apartheid, genocide and occupation in Palestine.”

Divestment, McArdle adds, has become a popular idea on campus, meant to wound companies that offend protesters in various ways, from running private prisons, to manufacturing firearms, to producing fossil fuels.  

She adds that “it’s not clear what effect this has had on anything other than the returns of the endowments.”

Also, this in the Washington Post regarding the latest move by Texas Greg Abbott to mold his political image:

“As word got out that pro-Palestinian protesters were planning to occupy a lawn on the University of Texas campus, Governor Greg Abbott made a dramatic move:  Calling in more than 100 state troopers with orders to clear them out.

“With that decision, which led to dozens of arrests amid video of riot-clad troopers on campus, Abbott sought to reassure his party — and the rest of the country — that Texas would not countenance a replay of the extended protester camp at New York’s Columbia University.

“It was the latest move by Abbott to position himself as one of the most assertive red-state governors in America, eager for a fight with the political left under the national spotlight.”

Back to my ideas and concerns about protests.

Based on my experience in Oregon – admittedly not in international affairs – I repeat that I do not think protests don’t do any good. 

Better for those who favor protests as a way to express themselves to cultivate relationships with those in power or influence and use those relationships to seek results, even if those results produce solutions in the middle, not on either the right or left extremes.

I fear college administrators will continue to face these protests, which, for me, also recall the Vietnam War era when I was in college.  The school I attended, a relatively small one in Seattle, did not have many protests.  But protests roiled campuses around the country as America fought its way through, by hindsight, what was a stupid war, if any war can be other than stupid.

WE ARE SEEING TWO GREAT GOLFERS – SCOTTIE SCHEFFLER AND NELLY KORDA

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 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.

Based on the last few weeks on the men’s and women’s professional golf tours, this blog headline states the obvious.

So, who is best – Scottie Scheffler or Nelly Korda?

For me, the best answer is both.

Each of these to top pro golfers has done something special over the last few weeks.  No need to pick one over the other.

Here is a quick summary, according to information compiled by The Athletic, published by the New York Times:

• In their last 10 starts, Scheffler and Korda have beaten 1,163 golfers — if you rely on entry lists for the PGA and LPGA Tours.

• For Korda, it’s the first time anyone has won five straight starts since Annika Sorenstam performed the feat in 2004 and 2005.

• Scheffler’s run is the just fifth streak of being first or second in five straight tournaments over the last 30 years – and, in the one where he finished second, he almost won it, too.

• Scheffler also is the first golfer since Bernhard Langer to follow-up a Master’s win with another win at the next tournament — the Heritage Classic at Hilton Head.

• Just think of this – in the last 42 days, Scheffler has earned more than $16 million.

• I don’t mean to leave Korda out of this; it’s just that the women’s tour has a ways to go to catch up with money on the PGA Tour.

• And, one final interesting stat:  Scheffler’s caddy, Ted Scott, has earned more money carrying Scheffler’s bag over the last few weeks than almost any PGA player, including Rory McIlroy.

Achievements by Scheffler and Korda are just the latest step in a never-ending debate about the best pro golfers.

On the men’s side, two usually are mentioned – Jack Nicklaus and Tiger Woods.  Sometimes Arnold Palmer joins that twosome.  And, while it is early, TV commentators say Scheffler is on his way to becoming part of the conversation.  He’ll have to continue performing over a few more years to win that accolade.

On the women’s side, again two usually are mentioned – Annika Sorenstam and Nancy Lopez.  Others sometimes join the list.  And Korda could be named, as well, if she continues playing top-level golf.

Frankly, I often tire of such debates about who is best, if, for no other reason, than that it is subjective, not objective.

I say mention all of the great players, then relish their accomplishments.  Enjoy golf as it was meant to be played.

Of course, none of us as amateurs will reach their level of pro greatness.

So what?  Fun to watch!

THE DEPARTMENT OF WORDS MATTER 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 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.

First, this is a respite from focusing on Donald Trump and all he means – all bad – for our country, as he sits as the defendant in a News York criminal trial.

Enough about Trump, at leasts for one day.

The Department of Words Matter is one of five I run with a free hand to manage as I see fit.

• No one needs to be around to help me because I am a brilliant manager.

• No oversight board needs to be appointed because I don’t need that distraction.

• Nothing…just me.

The other departments are the Department of Pet Peeves, the Department of Good Quotes Worth Remember, the Department of Inquiring Minds Want to know, and the Department of “Just Saying.”

So, here goes with words matter and, this time, it will just be a list words that roll easily off the tongue and contain useful meaning.

LURKS:  This word can apply to many subjects.  A golfer lurks just around the corner as he or she tries to overtake a leader.  A political figure – think Donald Trump – lurks in the foreground or background as he or she tries to win election.

The definition:  “To remain hidden so as to wait in ambush for someone or something.”

ROILS:   I use this word mostly these days as a way to describe what is happening in politics in this country.  No longer is there a quest for the smart middle ground.  The penchant these days is to roil, as illustrated by this dictionary definition. 

The definition:  “To disturb or disquiet; irritate; vex.”

TO’ING AND FRO’ING:  This is a word series – actually it is my own made-up word series – that I often use to describe what is happening in politics.  Everyone is going this way and that way, either to try to find a solution or block someone else’s solution. 

The definition:   The dictionary contains no definition.

DISCOMFIT:   I have come across this word – one I had not used before – in several stories about Trump.  If you read the definition below, it fits Trump – simple and direct.

The definition:  To confuse.

EGO:  This word has come to my mind again with respect to Trump, though it fits many others, including, in a way, for all of us who have some amount of ego.  Trump has far too much, which relates, also, to the word below, narcissist.

The definition:  “A person’s sense of self-esteem or self-importance.”

NARCISSIST:  That’s what Trump is — someone who focuses on himself to the exclusion of others.  It’s always about him.

The definition:  “A person who has an excessive interest in or admiration of themselves.”

DONALD TRUMP HAS NO POWER IN COURT

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 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.

The New York Times wrote a “political memo” this last weekend that ran under this headline:  Trump’s Trial Challenge: Being Stripped of Control

It was a good piece of journalism. 

The story started this way:

“Everything about the circumstances in which the former president comes to court every day to sit as the defendant in the People v. Donald J. Trump at 100 Centre Street is repellent to him.  The trapped-in-amber surroundings that evoke New York City’s more crime-ridden past.  The lack of control.  The details of a case in which he is accused of falsifying business records to conceal a payoff to a porn star to keep her claims of an affair with him from emerging in the 2016 election.”

Of the four criminal cases Trump is facing, the current case is the most acutely personal.  People close to him are blunt when privately discussing his reaction:  He looks around each day and cannot believe he has to be there.

More from the Times:

“For the first few minutes of each day during jury selection, a small pool of still photographers was ushered into Part 59 on the 15th floor of the courthouse.  Trump, obsessed with being seen as strong and being seen generally, prepared for them to rush in front of him by adjusting his suit jacket and contorting his face into a jut-jawed scowl.  But, by day’s end on Friday, Trump appeared haggard and rumpled, his gait off-center, his eyes blank.”

Of course, at one point, he also fell asleep.

He has often seemed to fade into the background in a light wood-paneled room with harsh neon lighting and a perpetual smell of sour, coffee-laced breath wafting throughout.

It is hard to recall any other time when Trump had to sit and listen to insults without turning to social media or a news conference to punch back.  And it is just as hard to recall any other time he has been forced to be bored for so long.

Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin said the process in court makes Trump look like a “shrinking man.”

“For months, the news coverage of Trump’s legal ordeal eagerly amplified the four-times-indicted former president’s narcissistic spin:  He would use his trials to his benefit, dominating the 2024 campaign.

“Last August, the New York Times insisted that Trump’s trials display ‘an upside-down reality where criminal charges act as political assets — at least for the purpose of winning the Republican nomination.’”

And this final thought from the Times:

“Many in Trump’s orbit are pessimistic about the case ending in a hung jury or a mistrial, and they see an outright acquittal as virtually impossible.  They are bracing for him to be convicted, not because they cede the legal grounds, but because they think jurors in overwhelmingly Democrat Manhattan will be against the polarizing former president.

“But the shared sense among many of his advisers is that the process may damage him as much as a guilty verdict.  The process, they believe, is its own punishment.”

So, from me, punishment, either by process or result, is what Trump deserves as he has catered over the years to his own whims and caprice, no matter the damage done to others or, for that matter, to America.

Now, he wants the country’s highest political office.  Perish the thought.

PROPOSED NEW RULES FOR JOURNALISM

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 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.

Atlantic Magazine came up this week with a few new thoughts for journalists as they continue to deal with the unprecedented challenges of covering the current presidential campaign.

I paid attention to this for a couple reasons:

• First, as a former journalist, I still have newspaper blood in my veins.  While journalism these days encompasses social media, newspaper journalists still face stiff challenges to get what they write right.
• Second, the candidacy of the scofflaw Donald Trump who wants to be dictator lends special credibility to the work of reporters.

So, more from the Atlantic:

The writer, Charles Sykes, indicated he had participated in a panel discussion at the International Symposium on Online Journalism where several journalists, he reported, discussed the question: 

“Are we going to get it right this time?   Has the media learned its lessons, and are journalists ready for the slog of the 2024 campaign?”

His answer:  Only if journalists realize how profoundly the rules of the game have changed.

“Lest we need reminding, this year’s election features a candidate who incited an insurrection, called for terminating sections of the Constitution, was found liable for what a federal judge says was ‘rape’ as it is commonly understood, faces 88 felony charges, and — I’m tempted to add ‘etcetera’ here, but that’s the problem, isn’t it?  The volume and enormity of it all is impossible to take in.”

“The man,” Donald Trump, “is neither a riddle nor an enigma,” Sykes writes.  “He lays it all out there:  His fawning over the world’s authoritarians, his threats to abandon our allies, his contempt for the rule of law, his intention to use the federal government as an instrument of retribution.  Journalists must be careful not to give in to the ‘Banality of Crazy.’  There have been so many outrages and so many assaults on decency that it’s easy to become numbed by the cascade of awfulness.”

In a recent newsletter, former White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer added to the context by pointing out a recent example:  “On a radio show earlier this month, Donald Trump bizarrely suggested that Joe Biden was high on cocaine when he delivered his energetic State of the Union address.  It was a startling moment, yet several major national media outlets did not cover the story.”

Further, when Trump called for the execution of General Mark Milley, the miliary Chief of Staff, Pfeiffer says the over-the-top, criminal comment didn’t have nearly the explosive effect it should have.

“I had expected every website and all the cable news shows to lead with a story about Trump demanding the execution of the highest military officer in the country.  If Barack Obama or George W. Bush had said the same, the news media would have been all over it.”

So, what’s to be done?

Sykes says he doesn’t have easy answers “because I don’t think they exist.” 

But, he adds:

• First, we should redefine newsworthy.  Journalists need to emphasize the magnitude rather than simply the novelty of political events.  Trump’s ongoing attacks on democracy may not be new, but they define the stakes of 2024.  So, although live coverage of Trump rallies without any accompanying analysis remains a spectacularly bad idea, it’s important neither to ignore nor mute the dark message that Trump delivers at every event.
• Why not relentlessly emphasize the truth, and publish more fact-checked transcripts that highlight his wilder and more unhinged rants?  Emphasizing magnitude is, of course, a tremendous challenge for journalists when the amplification mechanisms of the modern web — that is, social-media algorithms — are set by companies that have proved to be hostile to the distribution of information from reputable news outlets.
• The media challenge should be to emphasize the abnormality of Trump without succumbing to a reactionary ideological tribalism, which would simply drive audiences further into their silos.  Put another way:  Media outlets will need all the credibility they can muster when they try to sound the alarm that none of this is normal.
• It is far more important to get it right than to get it fast, because every lapse will be weaponized.
• The commitment to “fairness” should not, however, mean creating false equivalencies or fake balance.  An exaggerated report about Biden’s memory lapses, for example, should not be a bigger story than Trump’s invitation to Vladimir Putin to invade European countries.
• In the age of Trump, it is also important that members of the media not be distracted by theatrics. The stakes are simply too high to wallow in vibes, memes, or an obsessive focus on within-the-margin-of-error polls.

Sykes concludes his trenchant article by saying this:

“And, finally, the Prime Directive of 2024:  Never, ever become numbed by the endless drumbeat of outrages.” 

Most of which, inevitably, will be from Trump who will come across as wounded whenever his abhorrent conduct is called into question.

Kudos to Sykes for tackling a tough subject when, literally, the future of America as we know it is at stake.

GOLF IS BOOMING. BUT CAN THE GOOD TIMES LAST?

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 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 raises a good question:  Golf is on the rise in the U.S. and the world, but its future is murky, at least at the professional level.

More regular people are playing the game, thanks in part to off-course facilities such as driving ranges and Topgolf.  There are reasons to believe the upswing might last.

But reasons do not mean assurance.

Here is how the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) put it:

“The saying goes that golf is a great game but a lousy business.  It makes sense if you consider how the golf industry is like family farming:  Weather-dependent, labor-intensive, taking up vast real estate that could be used for other things, and dependent upon the market choices of consumers who often have more loyalty to price than to brand.

‘But, today, golf is in the middle of a rare boom.  The number of rounds played has been growing nationwide.  There’s an uptick in new golf-course development after more than a decade of shrinking inventory.  And private clubs have waiting lists for memberships — something many haven’t seen in two decades.

“The way people experience golf has changed in recent years, thanks to a combination of technology, the flexibility of golf-course managers, and lessons learned during the early phases of the Covid pandemic in 2020 and 2021. 

“How flush is the industry?  According to the National Golf Foundation, an independent data-gathering and consulting firm in Jupiter, Florida, the number of golf rounds played in the U.S. reached a record 531 million last year, a 10 per cent increase from 2020 and surpassing the 518 million rounds played during the heyday of the Tiger Woods boom years of 1999-2000.

“Course participation (measured in terms of anyone who plays a round of golf) has more than bounced back after declining 9 per cent in the seven years after the 2007-09 recession.  Since 2017, participation has grown 12 per cent, reaching 26.3 million people in 2023.  The U.S. golf population is also more diverse than ever demographically, thanks to gains by women, people of color and junior golfers in the overall share of the golfing populace.

“Demand for tee times has surged, partly because the overall inventory of tee times nationally has shrunk.  Fifteen years ago, there were too many courses and uneven demand for golf rounds; the industry has since shed 12 per cent of its supply of golf courses.  Shrinking supply and increased demand have enhanced competition for tee times, which in some markets has translated into higher green fees.”

The bad news is that professional golf is still marked by dissension and disagreement, a reality that, most of the time, has resulted in declining TV viewership. 

The upstart LIV Golf Tour and the long-standing PGA Tour were supposed to have reached agreement by now about how to work together.  But tough issues remain, one of which is how golfers who defected to the LIV Tour could play again the PGA Tour – or at least what the penalties would be to do so.

Lurking in the background of all are a few general issues.

Among them, the WSJ reports:  The overall state of the economy, inflation, the cost of borrowing, the cost and availability of labor, continued access to water (especially in the U.S. West and Southwest), weather patterns and climate change, and the rapidly escalating cost of maintenance.

So, all in all, golf is in the midst of uncertainty.  On one hand, good news is that golf participation is growing by members of the general public.  The uncertain news is that it will be tough to maintain the trajectory unless pro golf gets its act together.

TRUMP FALLS ASLEEP AS COURT DEBATES HIS FUTURE

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 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.

With all that has gone on over the years, it was hard to imagine “something else” with Donald Trump.

Well, that “something else” occurred the other day during Trump’s criminal trial in New York.

In court, he fell asleep.

Yes, he fell asleep!

His head nodded off and nearly touched the table in front of him.

This happened while the attorneys on both sides, with the judge, were trying to come up with a jury of 12 citizens.  In the end, they did, needing only to identify six alternates.

In the Washington Post, columnist Jennifer Rubin said falling asleep represented the least of Trump’s misconduct in court.

“His continued belligerence — juror intimidation, anti-trial screeds on his social network — thus presenting Justice Juan Merchan (who has already issued a gag order) with a dilemma:  ‘Jail Trump, allowing him to play the martyr, or permit him to bully witnesses and perhaps others associated with the trial?’”

Rubin posited her own idea of what to do.  Just levy huge fines against Trump on the theory that he responds, if nothing else, to money.

I also thought of another word this week as we watched the Trump unfold.  The judge issues a gag order that Trump continued to violate.

The term “gag order” is appropriate for me because, when it comes to Trump, that’s what I do – gag!

LOOKING AGAIN AT IMMIGRATION IN THE U.S.: TWO VIEWS

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 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

Two opinions on immigration crossed my transom in the last few days.

And both caught my attention; thus, they are worth a second look.

They deal with an issue – immigration – that is roiling this country as Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump runs against non-white persons who are trying find a better life in this country.

Of course, in a way, all of us are immigrants if you consider that our ancestors came from other countries to the United States.  And that includes Trump’s ancestors.

He would never admit this fact.

I have written about immigration before to make a couple points:

• First, there is no excuse for policymakers in this country who have failed – sometimes intentionally – to solve the illegal immigrant issue.  And that applies strongly today as the U.S. Senate decided not to conduct an impeachment trial of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, a fact that prompted some Republicans to say they would go after Democrats who supported Mayorkas.
• Second, legal immigrants are an important part of this country’s economic fabric – and should be considered so.

For the second point, look no farther than an opinion piece by León Krauze, Global Opinions contributing columnist for the Washington Post.  Here is what he wrote. 

“After the Francis Scott Key Bridge fell in the middle of the night in Baltimore, journalists rightly focused on the victims.  One element of the story stood out for me:  The eight men who had been working tirelessly to repair potholes overnight were all immigrants from Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, and Mexico.  Quietly, in the wee hours of the morning, they performed a task no one else would.  Of the eight, only two survived.”

Krauze goes on to write that, “after decades of living and working in the area, immigrants had become a part of Baltimore.  They are also the engine of America’s economy.  The immigrant workforce has long been a crucial driver of various industries.

“For example, without immigrants, the construction industry would grind to a halt.  Immigrants work in it at great personal risk.”

Yet, given this reality, there goes Trump again railing against immigrants because they don’t give him what he wants, which is a “white America where he can be a king or a dictator.”

“Violent nativist rhetoric has featured prominently in U.S. politics for almost a decade now,” Krauze writes.  “In 2015, early in his presidential campaign, Trump labeled Mexicans — who constitute most immigrants, and their descendants, in the United States — as criminals.  Since then, he hasn’t let up.  On his path to the 2024 election, Trump has stated that immigrants are ‘poisoning the blood of the country.’”

Now, for the second post that captured my attention.

It came from Jeff Schultz, the co-lead pastor of Faith Church in Indianapolis, who commented on a disjointed reality – Trump selling Bibles, though it is likely that he has not read one word of it, or, at least, doesn’t hew to its teaching, which is that all – yes, ALL – people matter.

Immigration, Schultz is a significant theme throughout the Bible.  “In the Old Testament, the Hebrew word ‘ger’ is best translated as ‘immigrant,’ and it appears 92 times.  And we’re not just to welcome immigrants but to also love and care for them, as well as seek justice on their behalf.

“Many of the heroes in the Bible were immigrants.  Abraham left his homeland on a divine promise then crossed borders again, fleeing famine.  Moses fled Egypt to live in Midian and named his first son Gershom, which means ‘a foreigner there.’

“Ruth, a Moabite immigrant in Israel, became part of the lineage of King David and, ultimately, Jesus.

“Jesus, of course, was the most important immigrant in history.  Carried by Joseph and Mary, He escaped violence in his homeland and found refuge in Egypt, an experience similar to that of more than 35 million refugees around the world today who have fled their homes because of persecution.”

As I wrote earlier, Trump knows nothing of the Bible even as he pedals it to help fund his political campaign.

If he did, he would not rail against immigrants.

And this final thought from Schultz:  “As Jesus’ followers, we are called to see ourselves as strangers who’ve been welcomed by God’s kindness.”

Good words!

But Trump, for one, will never learn them.

THE CRAZY SWING THAT MADE SCOTTIE SCHEFFLER A TWO-TIME MASTERS CHAMPION

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 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.

If you watched the Masters Golf Tournament last week, as I did, you could not help but be impressed by the now two-time champion, Scottie Scheffler.

As he thought about his wife at home awaiting the birth of their first child, Scheffler dispatched all other players in the 88^th Masters, winning by four shots.

In the process, he verified his rank as the best player in the world.

But, anyone who watched Scheffler swing, should not try to duplicate the “one and only swing.”

The Wall Street Journal came to the same conclusion in a story by Andrew Beaton that appeared under this headline:

“The world No. 1 just clinched his second major in three years.  He did it thanks to a technique that violates the basic fundamentals of how you’re supposed to swing a golf club.”

Here is how the article started:

“Scottie Scheffler smashes his drives off the tee and pounds his iron shots off the fairway with astonishing accuracy.  It’s why he spent Sunday evening slipping on a green jacket as a Masters champion for the second time in three years. 

“He’s so extraordinarily skilled that anyone who has ever picked up a club wishes they could hit a golf ball like him.  But the funny thing is that no one should actually try to hit a golf ball like him. 

“Scheffler has risen to the top of the game despite footwork that would make golf purists choke on their pimento cheese sandwiches. 

“There’s no questioning its effectiveness.  The 27-year-old American is the No. 1 ranked player in the world and just ran away with another Masters, winning by four strokes at 11-under par.  

“There’s also no questioning the fact his odd technique flagrantly violates some of the basic fundamentals of golf.  When he drives the ball, Scheffler moves his feet more than any golfer since Happy Gilmore.” 

Typically, the article continues, golfers generate power during their swing by transferring their weight forward, releasing pressure from the back foot and shifting it toward the front foot with their toes pointed in the general direction of the fairway.

But as Scheffler swings, especially on his drives, his back foot completely abandons its position, sliding right behind his body and toward his front foot.

More from the Wall Street Journal:

“Coaches who have worked with him say the Scheffler Shuffle isn’t a flaw in his swing.  It’s actually a strength.  They would never teach anyone else to slide their feet like Scheffler, but then again, they would never change something that works so undeniably well.

“’I feel like we’re like that doctor that takes the Hippocratic oath,’ says John Fields, who coached Scheffler at the University of Texas. ‘The number one thing you’re supposed to do is do no harm.’”

It has been fun to watch Scheffler over the last couple years.  And, I first remember him when his team, the University of Texas, played the University of Oregon in the NCAA finals which were held in Eugene at Eugene Country Club.

In the final match, Scheffler took on Aaron Wise, who was Oregon’s #1 player. Scheffler dispatched him 3 and 2, even though, overall, Oregon won the NCAA crown at the home course of Oregon’s coach, Casey Martin.

I was there and I watched the Scheffler-Wise match, assuming Wise would win.  He didn’t.

Scheffler had a crowd with him that day, a crowd that included members of his family. 

Now, he has a bigger crowd following his exploits on the golf course, footwork and all.