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.

This – the Just Saying Department — is a new one I run because I am doing well with the others which gives me enough time to create a new enterprise.  The others are the Department of Pet Peeves, the Department of Good Quotes Worth Remembering, and the Department of Bits and Pieces.  I am the director of each, with full and complete authority to do what I think needs to be done, without regard to the perspectives of others, though it is important to add that I benefit from the well-written perspectives of my favorite newspaper columnists.

In the case of the new department, I will point out what, for me, are basic questions swirling around life these days.  The cases will begin with the phrase “there ought to be a law,” then will end with a usual post-script  – “Just saying.”

CASE #1: There ought to be a law against using the word PROGRESSIVE when it does not deserve to be used, such as in relating to persons, who, on a political spectrum, new to the left, often the far left.

The word conveys contains far more positive impressions than the left deserves.

You are a progressive – so that means you want to move forward, to progress. But, when the term is used to describe politicians on the left, moving forward is one of the last things they want to do.

Let’s limit the use of the word progressive to instances where it is deserved.

Just saying.

CASE #2: There ought to be a law about what words you can use in the TITLES OF PIECES OF LEGISLATION as they being moving through the process in Salem or Washington. D.C.

If you are an elected representative intent on passing a piece of legislation, you want to attach a name that will achieve at least two objectives: First, it will roll off the tongue in order to be memorable, and, second, it will convey a positive image.

Consider one example – the “Affordable Care Act,” which came to be known, perhaps a bit derisively, as ObamaCare.

To put a point on it – whatever else it was, it was not and is not affordable.

Just saying.

CASE #3: There ought to be a law against using the word NEGATIVE when you get a call from your medical provider reporting results of your recent test.

Here’s the likely sentence: “Hello, Mr. Fiskum, I want to report to you that your test was negative.”

When I hear that, I flinch.

There are at least two meanings for the word negative. One, in medical parlance, is that the tests do not show anything negative, thus the report that “they were negative.”

In everyday usage, however, the word negative can mean something else. It can mean that there is something bad or foreboding to report to you about your test.

I know the medical professionals mean well and are just doing their job. But perhaps a better phrase, if there is nothing bad to report, would be:  “I have good news about your recent test.  There is nothing wrong.”

Just saying.