PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE: This is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf. Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as a Congressional press secretary in Washington, D.C., an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and 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.

The headline is a question many state government-watchers are asking these days as revelations tumble out verifying inaction by the Department of Human Services (DHS) in foster care management.

Managing foster includes both individual placements of kids without homes, as well as group foster home administration.

The fact that DHS managers and staff apparently turned a blind eye to obvious problems in such programs as “Give Us This Day” defies explanation.

That now defunct program allegedly had pocketed upwards of $2 million meant for childcare and provided substandard living conditions at the same time. The litany of care reports – why call them “care reports;” call them “not giving care reports” — was sordid.

Despite knowing of abuse and mismanagement, DHS officials did not revoke Give Us This Day’s license.

The bizarre and obscene character of the reports prompted Governor Kate Brown to order an independent review of DHS foster care management and install a trusted state government manager, Clyde Saiki, as interim director of the agency. For a time, he combined that position with his own as the state’s chief operating officer at the Department of Administrative Services.

Saiki’s background had included a previous stint at DHS where he supervised implementation of the new Medicaid Management Information System, (MMIS), which today works to make it possible to sign up for and manage low income services on-line.

I suspect that Saiki did not want the DHS top job, but, after about two months as interim director, Governor Brown made his job permanent at DHS.

Almost immediately, he took decisive action to fire two agency managers who allegedly had been complicit in allowing Give Us This Day and several other providers to deliver substandard care to foster children over about two years.

Today, Saiki is continuing to oversee the independent review of DHS and it would not be surprising to see him take further personnel actions.

It’s part of a process to put DHS back on sound operational and financial footing. That’s critical because, for one thing, Governor Brown is running for re-election and it is likely her Republican opponents will raise questions about what’s has happened on her watch – or even before she took over as governor.

Those who watch state government have confidence that Saiki, a capable and sound manager, will be able to get a handle on this difficult-to-run agency. Often, management is a combination of experience and common sense. Saiki has both.

There are at least three problems with politics as it is practiced today in the race to be the next U.S. president.

One: Candidates promise the world, but know they cannot deliver and have no intention of doing so in the first place.

Call this duplicity and dishonesty.

Two: Candidates promise the world, but don’t know enough about the realities of getting things done in Washington, D.C. to deliver on promises.

Call this duplicity and ignorance (including Donald Trump’s ignorance that appears intentional and Hillary Clinton’s ignorance that appears contrived).

Three: Candidates pander to the latest public concern even when they know – or should know — that their proposals have no relationship to solving real problems.

Call this duplicity and cynicism.

On this point, consider two of Donald Trump’s proposals. As Holman Jenkins writes in today’s Wall Street Journal, “A trade war with China will not bring back low-skilled, high-wage manufacturing jobs. On the contrary, Chinese workers themselves are being turfed out of their own factories by automation. Building a wall at the southern border won’t hold back cultural changes in America from the fact that Hispanics are a fast-growing economic and cultural bloc. At the risk of putting ideas in his head, Donald Trump would have to increase the white birthrate and even then probably wouldn’t change the emergence of an unfamiliar yet familiarly dynamic new America.”

In an interview on David Feherty’s program this week – yes, Feherty, the golfer, golf commentator and interviewer who has a quick wit and a solid technique for asking good questions – former president George W. Bush saidhe still holds hope for America.

What the country needs, he said, is for citizens of goodwill and good intent to rise, both as candidates for office and as those who vote. He added that democracy, be definition, is often swarthy and unclean, but some form of reason usually prevails.

One hopes Bush is right this time around.

We need candidates for the nation’s highest office who will tell the truth on the campaign and make only promises they intend to work hard to keep, including in the complexity of achieving anything in a democracy.

At the moment, my belief is that neither front-runner, Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton, passes this test. So, I say a pox on both houses.

I intend to vote – some would say throw away my vote – for someone who stands on principle and pledges to lead this country with passion and integrity…someone who will say what he or she means and will do what he or she says.

What it will take to put this country on the right track is smart leaders and smart followers.

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE: This is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf. Out of college, my first job was 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 a Congressional press secretary in Washington, D.C., an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and 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.

It makes sense, at least for a few minutes, to take a break from commenting in the worst presidential race ever to think about something more important: Golf.

Golf is one of my passions, so I thought about several notions that, if followed, would improve the game for all those who play.

Develop a routine

This is something that should be done before every shot, not just on the putting green. If you watch pro golfers – and goodness knows most of us will never be that good – they have a routine before every shot.

When they are under substantial pressure, they rely on the routine to move forward.

Golf teacher Hank Haney wrote in Golf Digest recently that one good routine before every shot from the tee or the fairway is to stand behind your golf ball and develop an idea about where you want it to go. The shot might go where you intend, but the discipline to imagine it is a good thing.

So, develop a routine. It doesn’t matter what it is – just develop it.

The “next shot”

There is an old question in golf: What’s the most important shot? The next one.

That is an axiom that, if followed, would allow golfers to avoid dwelling on a recent bad shot, but to focus on the next one.

Call this being “appropriately forgetful.”

It’s a solid ambition, but difficult to follow, as I attest from personal experience.

Perseverance

This is a word that involves focusing on the next shot and persevering to have that view – the next shot view — over an 18-hole round.

I have found that, if you focus on each shot, you’ll play better and have more fun.

So, using these admonitions and others you find helpful, go out to the golf course and have fun.

If nothing else, it will take your mind off the current presidential campaign, which is one worth forgetting.

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE: This is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf. Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon and I went on from there to practice writing in all of my professional positions, including as a Congressional press secretary in Washington, D.C., an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and 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.

That phrase – bemoaning the loss of civility — sticks in my mind, given the current state of politics in this country.

In my hearing, it was first uttered by General Colin Powell as he said he would not be running for president back about 10 years ago or so.

I wonder what he would say today.

It would be possible to indict all of the current presidential candidates on the loss of civility, which must be a foreign term to them.

Hillary Clinton dispenses favors to insiders when she holds government positions, then uses a personal e-mail system to avoid public disclosure. Bernie Sanders rails against government as he campaigns for socialism. Donald Trump spews rhetoric and bombast on almost any subject – no any subject – including ones you never thought you would hear in public. Ted Cruz wants everyone to adopt his brand of far right-wing conservatism. Marco Rubio tries to translate his inexperienced junior senator status into a credential.

But, for this post, I prefer to focus only on one, Donald Trump, who has stooped to new lows in political discourse.

Consider these positions he has advocated on the campaign trail:

• He says he will throw out all immigrants to the United States even as he demands that Mexico build a wall to keep immigrants out. Throwing out all immigrants includes children who were born in the U.S. and, as for Mexico, leaders say Trump can go to h_ _ _.

• He admires Vladimir Putin, even as the Russian leader kills those who oppose him, including journalists.

• He praises North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un as a credible leader by saying, “you’ve got to give him credit. He goes in, he takes over, he is the boss. It’s incredible. He wiped out the uncle, he wiped out this one, that one.”

• He ridicules a person with disabilities at one of his early campaign events.

• He appears to detest women, ridiculing a female journalist at one of the early debates and treating women as objects.

• He focuses in public on the size of his genitalia.

• He goes into bankruptcy several times, actions which give the lie to his so-called business acumen.

• He fails for several days to repudiate an endorsement from Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke.

• He says he will negotiate new trade agreements with such countries as China, even though the word “negotiate” should not be in this sentence because Trump says he would impose his will on other world leaders.

Civility? Far from it!

Further, it seems that, no matter what vulgarity Trump utters, his popularity among parts of the electorate continues to grow. The more vulgar he is the more supporters he gains.

If Trump wins the Republican nomination for President and Clinton wins the Democrat fight, many voters are likely to feel that Clinton is the lesser of two evils and thus will cast ballots for her.

For my part, as one American, I wish that we had better choices, which may mean that I will cast my vote for neither Trump nor Clinton come November. At least that way I’ll be true to my civility in politics.

*********

As a footnote, here is a list of the over-the-top quotes from Trump, all of which illustrate how he lacks the civility – read, honesty – to run for or be elected President of the United States:
“He referred to my hands, if they’re small, something else must be small. I guarantee you there’s no problem. I guarantee it.” – Donald Trump, bragging about his penis size in reference to a joke by Republican rival Marco Rubio, GOP presidential debate, March 3, 2016

“Just so you understand, I don’t know anything about David Duke, OK? I don’t know anything about what you’re even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists. So I don’t know. I don’t know — did he endorse me, or what’s going on? Because I know nothing about David Duke; I know nothing about white supremacists.” –Donald Trump, refusing to condemn former Ku Klux Klan grand wizard and noted white supremacist David Duke, who endorsed Trump for president, February 28, 2016

“It is better to live one day as a lion than 100 years as a sheep.” –Donald Trump in a tweet quoting fascist Italian dictator Benito Mussolini, February 28, 2016

“We won with poorly educated. I love the poorly educated.” –Donald Trump on his performance with poorly educated voters who helped him win the Nevada Caucus, Feb. 23, 2016

“I love the old days, you know? You know what I hate? There’s a guy totally disruptive, throwing punches, we’re not allowed punch back anymore. … I’d like to punch him in the face, I’ll tell ya.” –Donald Trump on how he would handle a protester in Nevada, sparking roaring applause from the audience, February 22, 2016

“There may be somebody with tomatoes in the audience. If you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously. Okay? Just knock the hell — I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees.” –Donald Trump, encouraging violence at his rallies, Cedar Rapids, Iowa, February, 1, 2016

“For a religious leader to question a person’s faith is disgraceful. I am proud to be a Christian. … If and when the Vatican is attacked by ISIS, which as everyone knows is ISIS’ ultimate trophy, I can promise you that the Pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been President because this would not have happened.” –Donald Trump, in response to remarks by Pope Francis saying that “a person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian.” February 18, 2016

“That was so great. Who was the person who did that? Put up your hand, put up your hand. Bring that person up here. I love that.” –Donald Trump, praising two audience members who tackled a protester at his rally in South Carolina, February, 16, 2016

“I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn’t lose any voters, okay? It’s, like, incredible.” –Donald Trump, speaking at a rally in Sioux Center, Iowa as the audience laughed, January 23, 2016

“Even a race to Obama, [Hillary Clinton] was gonna beat Obama. I don’t know who would be worse, I don’t know, how could it be worse? But she was going to beat – she was favored to win – and she got schlonged, she lost, I mean she lost.” – Donald Trump, using a vulgar Yiddish word in reference to Clinton

“I know where she went – it’s disgusting, I don’t want to talk about it. No, it’s too disgusting. Don’t say it, it’s disgusting.” – Donald Trump on Hillary Clinton taking a bathroom break during a Democratic presidential debate

“I think our country does plenty of killing also, Joe.” –Donald Trump, seemingly unconcerned that Russian President Vladimir Putin kills journalists who disagree with him, when pressed to condemn such actions in an interview with MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough

“There were people that were cheering on the other side of New Jersey, where you have large Arab populations. They were cheering as the World Trade Center came down.” – Donald Trump, making an unfounded accusation regarding the 9/11 attacks

“Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.” – Donald Trump campaign statement

“You could see there was blood coming out of her eyes. Blood coming out of her wherever.” – Donald Trump, insulting Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly over questions she asked during the first Republican primary debate

“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re sending people that have lots of problems…they’re bringing drugs, they’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.” – Donald Trump

“He’s not a war hero. He’s a war hero because he was captured. I like people that weren’t captured.” – Donald Trump on John McCain

“The beauty of me is that I’m very rich.” – Donald Trump

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE: This is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf. Out of college, my first job was 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 a Congressional press secretary in Washington, D.C., an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and 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.

New York Times columnist Charles Blow performs an excellent service in a recent column. He rates the current top five choices for president – Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders – and gives all of them failing marks.

I agree.

Using a combination of Mr. Blow’s writing and my own views, here is how I would describe the choices — in no particular order of priority:

Donald Trump: Here we have a blowhard who appeals to the public’s worst instincts and doesn’t give a rip about whom he insults along the way, even as he conjures up images of Hitler and Fascism.

Hillary Clinton: Here we have an alleged criminal (see below) who risked the safety of the United States when, as Secretary of State, she used her own personal e-mail system to avoid public scrutiny of her activities, including for sending and receiving highly classified communications. In her key role in the Clinton Foundation, she also is alleged to have sold her influence to a number of high bidders.

[Columnist Ruth Marcus performed another service the other day when she wrote about Clinton’s e-mail activities, suggesting that “political idiocy is not criminal,” even as she detailed the various federal statutes that Clinton could have violated. Well, perhaps not criminal, but Ms. Marcus’ label – political idiocy – is apt.]

Bernie Sanders: Here we have an avowed socialist who wants to drive America to the same end – socialism. He would impose huge tax increases to achieve his objective, with no commitment to the private enterprise which has helped to make America great – with flaws, yes, but great in the sense that personal drive and commitment can be rewarded.

Ted Cruz: Here we have, using Mr. Blow’s phrase, a “political arsonist” who doesn’t care about anyone but those who share his brand of arch-conservatism.

Marco Rubio: Here we have a junior senator – Mr. Blow calls him an “empty suit,” which may be a bit harsh, but still more or less on point as to inexperience — who is competing for the highest political office in the world. And that’s as if we haven’t already had enough of the harm junior senators can do to this country.

As I write this, it appears that Trump and Clinton are on the way to face off against each other in the general election.

Bad choice? That’s an understatement.

For my part, I will choose neither because neither is worthy of the Office of President. I may vote again for former Oregon Senator Mark Hatfield, the late, great public official who operated from a place of principle as he served Oregonians and Americans.

True, he is deceased, but, for me, that is better vote than the terrible choice we may face otherwise.

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE: This is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf. Out of college, my first job was 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 a Congressional press secretary in Washington, D.C., an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and 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.

To Donald Trump, we are learning that size matters.

But the size comment he made in the most recent Republican debate may apply – um – to his ego. He appears eager to indicate, by what he says and by what he does, that his ego is bigger than anything else.

His route to what looks like the nomination for Republican presidential candidate has turned politics on its head. He says whatever he wants to say, facts be damned. And, at least some of the people love it no matter what.

It used to matter that candidates might, on occasion, at least hew to the truth. For Trump, there is no truth. Truth is what he says it is.

It also used to be that candidates that would be careful what they said about prisoners of war, the opposite sex or the races. Not Trump. He criticizes all in the most insulting terms possible. And, then his poll numbers go up.

Consider these recent comments by political columnists who appear “trumped” by what they are seeing on the campaign trail:

From David Ignatius, Washington Post:

“The Trump brand is big and bold. It seeks to convey wealth and status. It’s boastful about itself and disdainful of rival products. It’s eclectic and scattershot (bottled water, furniture, ties, cuff links, golf courses). When it fails (three bankrupt casinos, a botched airline deal, an unsuccessful professional football team), it ignores or denies the negative facts and keeps on rolling.

“Nothing should be surprising about Trump at this point. For nine months, he has been saying the unsayable — and not just getting away with it, but becoming more popular. He’s a man with a talent for falling uphill, it seems.”

From Rich Lowry, National Journal:

“Almost as soon as Donald Trump is the presumptive GOP nominee — which may be as early as March 15 — Democrats will surely start to churn out their negative ads.

“They will attack Trump’s credentials as a tribune of the little guy by focusing on a money-grubbing venture like Trump University, designed to extract as much cash as possible from people who thought they would learn something from the shell of a school.

“They will dissect his business record. They will fasten on his failed casinos and the bankruptcies he used to stiff creditors while maintaining a lavish lifestyle.

“They will fry him for hypocrisy on immigration by pointing out that Trump Tower was built by illegal Polish immigrants worked to the bone and that, according to news reports, illegal immigrants are helping build his new hotel in Washington.

“They will make the cheap threats he throws at anyone who crosses him a character and temperament issue. They will hound him about his unreleased tax returns. And, of course, they will use decades-worth of controversial statements to portray him as racist and sexist.”

From George Will, Washington Post:

“Donald Trump’s distinctive rhetorical style — think of a drunk with a bullhorn reading aloud James Joyce’s “Finnegans Wake” under water — poses an almost insuperable challenge to people whose painful duty is to try to extract clarity from his effusions. For example, on Friday, during a long stream of semi-consciousness in Fort Worth, this man who as president would nominate members of the federal judiciary vowed to open up libel laws to make it easier to sue — to intimidate and punish — people who write “negative” things. Well.

“Trump, the thin-skinned tough guy, resembles a campus crybaby who has wandered out of his ‘safe space.’ It is not news that he has neither respect for nor knowledge of the Constitution, and he probably is unaware that he would have to “open up” many Supreme Court First Amendment rulings in order to achieve his aim. His obvious aim is to chill free speech, for the comfort of the political class, of which he is now a gaudy ornament.”

As these sample quotes illustrate, the best result for Hillary Clinton and the Democrats is for Trump to win the Republican nomination. That means they will go after him with a vengeance and it is clear that he has given the Ds a lot of ammunition for their guns.

Look at it this way. About 40 per cent of Americans can expected to vote automatically for Clinton. Another 40 per cent, incredibly, can be expected to vote for Trump.

That leaves the 20 per cent in the middle, a group that decides most elections in this country.

I cannot imagine many in this middle siding with Trump. Some will hold their noses and vote for Clinton as the lesser of two evils. After all, at least she does not conjure up images of Hitler in Germany as Trump does.

As for me, it won’t matter, but I will not stoop for casting my ballot for either Trump or Clinton. I’ll find someone else to vote for – and that person won’t be president, but at least I can live with myself.