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.

It’s always dangerous in politics to predict the future in the immediate aftermath of a specific result. Better, I suppose, to let the details settle at least for a few days.

But, discretion aside, my sense is that it is not an exaggeration to contend that America’s two-party system of democracy is in dire jeopardy.

When Democrats were in charge in Washington, D.C., they produced one-side only results, which failed, much of the time, to garner any Republican votes. When President Barack Obama came to town he suggested that he intended to run a different kind of government, one that worked from the middle. He didn’t. His signal domestic achievement, ObamaCare, was not an example of solid two-party democracy, no matter how much the Ds lauded their effort.

With Republicans in charge now, they also could not garner any votes from the other side, even as they watched their own supposed governing coalition dissolve in acrimony over what they called health care reform.

Republican leaders, including President Donald Trump and House Speaker Paul Ryan, were compromised by their own party, especially the so-called “House Freedom Caucus,” which wanted something that would never happen, full repeal of ObamaCare. But Democrats also played the role of opponents, and not always the loyal opposition.

Now, some of my friends suggest that Ryan should have involved Democrats in an effort to reform ObamaCare.  Perhaps, but there was no real chance for success there because, for one thing, Republican conservatives on the far right wanted only repeal.  Plus, Democrats were never going to tinker with ObamaCare with Republicans in charge.

Who knows what will happen as Congress and the Trump Administration turn next to something else such as overall tax reform, which some say should have been the first issue undertaken by the current Congress? Or, what about a deal to increase the debt limit and keep the federal government operating?  That was the issue that brought down former speaker John Boehner and it could have the same result for Speaker Ryan – if he lasts that long.

Here are a few perceptions relating to questions about the future of the two-party system:

• Neither Democrats nor Republicans can see their way clear to work with the other side. Developing middle ground solutions to pressing public policy problems is a lost art.

• When Democrats were in charge, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid conducted themselves with an elitist attitude, suggesting that they always knew what was best for the country. The new Majority Leader, Senator Chuck Senator Schumer, illustrates the same kind of hubris. [If there is good news here, it is that Reid is gone. His idea of process in the Senate was to do nothing.]

• For Republicans, House Speaker Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell talk a better line than their Democrat counterparts. Ryan, in particular, comes across as articulate and smart, qualities that get left behind in a Congress that functions more on smear and opposition than on policy. McConnell wants to return the Senate to being a deliberative body, with perspectives from all sides welcome, a far cry from Reid’s closed-door style.

• Still, the prominent motive in D.C. appears to be that a slight by one party deserves a slight by the other party. Consider the current Supreme Court nomination process involving a clearly qualified nominee, Neil Gorsuch. Because Republicans wouldn’t consider President Barack Obama’s last nominee, Merrick Garland, in the lame duck Obama Administration, many Democrats now say they won’t consider voting for Gorsuch.

In a piece in the Wall Street Journal, Republican Senator Orrin Hatch wrote about this issue:

“What sort of civics lesson were the American people treated to last week? Judge Gorsuch’s performance was outstanding. Enduring more than 20 hours of questioning over two days, he displayed an impressive command of the law and an intellect befitting someone with his stellar credentials. He showed that he understands the proper role of a judge in our system: to apply, not make, the law. Throughout, his demeanor was serious, thoughtful and humble. These qualities have defined his judicial service for the past decade and will serve him well on the Supreme Court.

“In stark contrast was the astonishing treatment Judge Gorsuch received from many of my Democratic colleagues. Whatever their motivation—be it the outcome of President Obama’s lame-duck nomination during last year’s election, an unwillingness to accept the November results, or the desire for judges to push a liberal political agenda—they have apparently decided to wage a desperate, scorched-earth campaign to derail this nomination, no matter the damage they inflict along the way. We are now watching the confirmation process through the funhouse mirror.”

• Continuing fights of this sort don’t bode well for the ability of Congress and the president to get anything done. It’s always one-upmanship.

For these and other reasons, the prospects for workable two-party democracy seem to be disappearing fast. Time for third party? One that emphasizes policies from the middle, which is supposed to be the art of politics – compromise – in the first place.

Until now, it has been hard for a third party movement to gain any viable traction. If Congress and the president continue to illustrate that two-party democracy can’t work, a third party movement might gain more momentum.