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 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.

Now that I have been retired for a couple years from a 25-year lobbying career in Oregon, I have thought a lot about that career, often because friends and family asked me questions about what I did and why I did it.

Perhaps it’s a bit immodest to focus on this subject, but I think it’s worthwhile to correct some misinformation about lobbyists, what they do and why they do it.

Lobbying often gets a bad name because of local, regional and national publicity over practitioners who commit misdeeds or don’t practice sound ethics.

But, like all professions, lobbying is a positive endeavor if practitioners work hard and honestly to represent diverse interests before the Legislative or Executive Branches.

To clarify my own record as a lobbyist, I am borrowing a tactic from retired late-night host David Letterman and providing a “Top 10 List” – the top questions I am often asked and the answers I provide.

QUESTION #1: What is it that you did?

ANSWER: This question often came from my late mother who wasn’t sure about lobbying. My answer to her often resorted to using two analogies. One was to an attorney – I was like an attorney, I had a client and my courtroom was the Capitol. The second analogy related to a trader on a busy commodity-trading floor. Like such a trader, I would, figuratively speaking, have to yell to get the attention of buyers.

Both analogies fail to indicate the full scope of my role as a lobbyist, but they are helpful.

QUESTION#2: Did you carry money around to influence a result

ANSWER: No. Contrary to the popular stereotype, I never carried money. My focus was on maintaining relationships with members of the Legislative and Executive Branches so they would trust what I said on behalf of a client, even if they happened to disagree. Public policy results were the objective; not payment in return for such a result.

It was important to trade on a “your word is your bond” ethic, not money.

QUESTION #3: Why did you become a lobbyist?

ANSWER: It seemed like a national progression from four previous positions – as a reporter for a daily newspaper in Oregon, as a press secretary for an Oregon Congressman, as a press secretary for an Oregon Governor, and as a state agency official.

In each of those positions, I dealt with high-level elected and appointed officials, so it was not hard to transfer to being a lobbyist trying to influence the decisions of those officials.

QUESTION #4: Did you have to agree with all your clients?

ANSWER: No. The issue was not my position on an issue. It didn’t matter. The issue was the client’s position and my ability to represent that position regardless of my personal views.

QUESTION #5: Did you ever represent a client about whose issues you had misgivings?

ANSWER: Yes. Once. The client wanted to install a bail bonds system in Oregon. I had misgivings, but our firm represented the client anyway.

QUESTION #6: Were there clients you chose not to represent?

ANSWER: Yes. During my 25-years in the business, our firm did not represent tobacco companies, organizations interested in promoting elective abortions, clients on the pro-gun side of the gun rights issue, and clients advocating special homosexual rights.

QUESTION #7: What are examples of your favorite clients?

ANSWER: I’ll mention two – Providence Health System, Oregon’s largest system, and the Port of Portland, an economic development engine that serves the region. Providence has operations spread throughout the state and handles health care issues with distinction and a commitment to ethical and honest behavior. It always was a privilege to be identified with Providence.

The Port is managed by executives with Oregon’s economic interests at heart in both its aviation and marine operations.

QUESTION #8: Of what achievements are you most proud?

ANSWER: I’ll just mention one. It was the work on behalf of the Port of Portland to gain state money to finance Oregon’s share of costs to deepen the Columbia River channel to allow bigger ships to make the transit east on the Columbia. It took a major, multi-session effort to gain the funds and the result stands for itself – a major contribution to the economic health of the region.

QUESTION #9: Which political party did you represent or favor?

ANSWER: Neither.

I and colleagues in my firm worked the middle ground. We worked with both Republicans and Democrats to find the smart middle, which is where pressing public policy problems are solved anyway. Our clients were open to that kind of advocacy – no yelling on the street corner to advance a cause, but doing the hard work, sometimes behind the scenes, to solve problems.

QUESTION #10: If you could have your way, what one result would you impose on the public policy development process?

ANSWER: It would be a deeper commitment to finding middle ground in the public policy process. That’s where best solutions lie. In Congress, it appears that the aim is for one party to one-up the other. And that unseemly trait seems headed to Oregon, if it is not already here.

A factor in this is that elected officials seem always to be running for re-election. And the skills to run campaigns do not necessarily translate to the skills necessary to develop public policy.