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.

FACT #1: The Washington Post Fact-Checker – imagine, just for a minute, having that job – reports that President Donald Trump has told his 10,000^th lie.

FACT #2: Senator Mazie Hirona, D-Hawaii, went on a tirade in a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, calling Attorney General William Barr a liar (call it slander) multiple times over four minutes of what she no doubt thought was her glory.

For Trump, he lies as a basic nature. He doesn’t think twice about it. In fact, he probably thinks that, because he says something, it is true.

As a citizen in this country, you cannot believe a thing he says, which is a sad commentary on the state of the presidency.

A few weeks ago, my wife and I traveled to Woodinville, Washington to see my daughter and two grandchildren. At one point, we attended my granddaughter Kate’s class where she gave a report on President Rutherford B. Hayes.

She said historians usually rate him as the worst president in U.S. history.

Well, Hayes may now be the second worst.

As for Hirona, in the Judiciary Committee hearing, she earned the nickname Senate Republicans have given her – Crazy Mazie.

In addition to a blistering monologue in the hearing – no surprise that she won instant plaudits from the left for her harangue and gave AG Barr no chance to respond – Crazy Mazie told Barr he should resign.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Lindsey Graham (Republican-South Carolina) accused Hirona of slandering Barr “from top to bottom,” and told her to stop talking.

She did, barely.

As a public official, Barr has no standing to sue Hirona for slander, but I wish he could. He was slandered.

What do these two incidents show?

Unfortunately, they show that politics in this country has dipped to new lows. And the fault lies with many, if not most, public officials on both sides of the aisle.  They want to advance themselves and slander those who don’t agree with them.

I say a pox on both sides and it’s time for us, as voters, to elect centrist officials who can lead this country with skill and distinction, not to mention the ability work together to solve pressing public policy problems.

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.

I spent a portion of one morning this week watching U.S. Attorney General William Barr appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Why do I feel a sense of, well, duty, to write again about Barr? Isn’t there already enough to-ing and fro-ing about him and his conduct? Probably. But I like to add my notions to the mix if only because I do not have much else to do in retirement.

To summarize, Democrats on the Judiciary Committee were out to trap Barr. Republicans tended to treat him with at least a bit of respect.

But, for me, this was the bottom line: Barr is a consummate Executive Branch official. He is smart. He is savvy. He is schooled in the law.

But does he believe too much in “executive authority” as contended today in a column by Michael Gerson in the Washington Post?

I don’t think so.

The fact is that Barr does not work for Congress. He relates to Congress.

And that is a key distinction, one not accepted by most Democrats who want Barr to follow their orders.

Do I say this in some misguided notion to protect President Donald Trump?

I answer with a resounding NO.

However it happens – through impeachment, then conviction, or through the ballot box in 2020 – I want Trump out of the White House. He has no respect for the office and tries to lie his way out of any situation, a further indication that, for Trump, being president is more about an infomercial for his brand, whatever that is, than respect for the Oval Office.

Meanwhile, I hold Barr in high regard.

So does the Wall Street Journal. No surprise there. And, also, no surprise that the Washington Post disputes that notion, suggesting that Barr destroyed his reputation this week.

Gary Conkling, a partner in the firm I retired from, CFM Strategic Communications, does not agree with me. I have not asked if I could cite his reasoning, but, because his blog on this subject is on the record, I have no problem with including his language, as long as there is attribution – so I attribute this.

Conkling writes:

“The sharp backlash to the press conference held by Attorney General William Barr prior to the public release of the Mueller report is evidence of the serious peril of spinning a story.

“Whether you agree or disagree with the findings of the special counsel’s investigation in Russian election meddling and potential collusion by the Trump campaign, it is hard to disagree that Barr’s summary of the report didn’t square with language in the report. That dissonance led to instantaneous criticism that Barr tried to spin the report’s findings in a positive light before anyone had a chance to read it.

“The result was a day-long drip of media reports and blogs detailing the gap between Barr’s summary and Robert Mueller’s findings. Critics said Barr acted more like Donald Trump’s defense attorney than the US attorney general. House Judiciary Chair Jerry Nadler issued a subpoena to obtain the full, un-redacted Mueller report. Calls for Trump’s impeachment grew louder.”

Conkling is wrong.

All Barr did was write a quick description of what he saw in the Mueller report. He tried to check it in advance with Mueller declined to review it perhaps so he could criticize it afterwards.

Barr took this approach, he told the Senate Judiciary Committee this morning, release of the full report could take weeks, given the need to redact portions of it for four reasons – to protect grand jury reports (under the law), to protect intelligence sources, to protect the vigor on ongoing prosecutions, and to protect the reputation what he called “un-charged third parties.”

The fact is that Barr did his job. Did he, as Conkling suggests, engage in “spin.”

Yes, everyone in public life does, if the definition of spin is saying something which is better than saying nothing or trying to say everything.

A certain kind of spin is detestable – providing only certain facts that support your cause and putting those who disagree with you on the defensive. Look only so far as Congress to find the best (read, worst) spinners.

Don’t look at Barr.

What you see when you see or hear him is a consummate public official who has a clear understanding of the public interest.

Barr, as a public official, is not subject to regular slander laws. But, if he was, he ought to sue Senator Mazie Hirona, D-Hawaii. At the Judiciary Committee hearing, she treated Barr with contempt, calling him a liar and scoundrel without giving him any chance to respond.

Smartly, when Hirona was done with her harangue, Barr held his tongue. There was no need to say anything, given how Hirona had impugned what was left of her own integrity, if there was anything left at all.

For me, all of this involving Barr and the Mueller report is an illustration of a tension all the time these days – the one between the Executive Branch on one hand and the Legislative Branch on the other.

Legislators, both in Washington, D.C. and, for me, in Salem, act as if they want to manage programs and, when they don’t get their way, they chastise executives, often in public.

Am I biased? Yes. I worked in the Executive Branch in Oregon for many years and always believed that we ran programs and related to the Legislature, not reported to legislators in some kind of management sense.

Barr is an excellent representative of the Executive Branch, one of the best appointments President Donald Trump has made – which is, I guess, not saying much because Trump has made a slew of bad appointments.

Now, two footnotes:

1. Imagine this. What if Matthew Whitaker, the former acting AG, was sitting on the witness stand this week. It would have been far different. He would not have known what to say or how to behave.
2. I may have made this point previously, but, in the hearing this week, Barr answered some questions with one word answers – often just “no” or “yes.” That must have frustrated some questioners who wanted him to go on at some length, to fall into traps. His conduct reminded me of the late Montana U.S. Senator Mike Mansfield who was famous for one-word answers – often “nope” or “yup.”

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.

For the life of me, I cannot figure out why so many elected officials want to impose new taxes BEFORE taking reasonable and intentional steps to force current government programs to produce results.

• We see the trend in Congress where Democrats in the House and Senate want you and me to pay more, with no heed to a return on current investments.
• We see the trend in the City of Portland where Commissioner Chloe Eudaly is researching ways to raise an additional $50 million for city programs, by raising taxes. [To that end, according to the Oregonian newspaper, the city’s top revenue official provided Eudaly with an analysis of seven possible tax increases, including a personal income tax on Portland’s top earners, a soda tax and higher property taxes.]
• And, we see the trend in the Oregon Legislature, as evidenced by the list below.

Four big tax increases are likely to pass in Salem in the next couple months.

1. Gutting mortgage deductions (HB 3349)
2. Imposing 16-cent gas tax (HB 2020)
3. Abolishing “kicker” tax refunds (SJR 23)
4. Imposing a $2 billion business sales tax (HB 3427)

Tax #4 got a big boost this week when the Oregon Business & Industry organization signed up for the tax after weeks of negotiations. The new money is supposed to flow to K-12 schools in Oregon, which could be one reason why some business interests, but not all, have signed up for it – and those that have not may be preparing for a public vote if the legislature passes the tax. [Nike already has put $100,000 in a political action committee to prepare to fight any anti-tax initiative.]

My notion is that one key step should precede any new, higher taxes. It should be an intentional effort by elected officials to demand better performance from current programs.

One way to achieve this would be to enact sections in all state program laws that impose performance measurements on the programs. As is the case in golf – forgive the analogy, but I am a golfer — if the programs don’t meet the measurements, they would be given one warning, and then, if failing a second time, they would be terminated.

As a lobbyist back in 2011, I tried this on behalf of one of our firm’s major clients, Youth Villages. The section in Senate Bill 964, which became ORS 418, pertained to private sector foster care programs, including those operated by Youth Villages.

Either they would perform or be gone.

Here’s the section of law.

“Requires a program to demonstrate successful child-drive outcomes when compared to alternative placement options and long-term cost savings. Bases termination or renewal of a contract on demonstration of the factors described above.”

What happened?

Nothing.

Legislators ignored the performance clause in the law as if it didn’t exist. So did members of the Executive Branch agency that was involved, the Department of Human Services. Now, eight years after passage of the bill, it stands as just words on paper.

The clause should have been implemented, not as a magic answer to Oregon’s foster care crisis, but as one step to improve situations for Oregon’s children.

This is just one of several examples I could cite of a law being on the books, but not enforced – or, probably, not even recognized.

So, to repeat, one of my reform proposals for the Legislature would be to enact specific performance language for all government programs before trying to convince the public – including me and other centrists — that new taxes are warranted.

Such performance measurements make sense at the federal level, too, but, given the huge sense of dislocation and distrust there, better to use this reform in Oregon.

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 incredible to write the phrase in the headline.

We have a president who lies as a matter of instinct. It doesn’t matter what the subject is. Donald Trump lies about it.

Lying is second nature to him.

So, the lies are so frequent that no one – not those on the right or left – can trust him for truth and honesty.

Here’s the way Washington Post editorial writers put it this week:

“As President Trump zoomed past a lowly personal milestone — his 10,000th false or misleading statement in his 27-month-old presidency, according to The Post Fact Checker — he let fly a series of whoppers on a subject that logic would suggest he’d be better off leaving unremarked: Family separation.

“The president, whose own administration imposed and then rescinded a systematic policy of wrenching migrant children from their parents, with no protocol in place to reunite them, now poses as a paragon of compassion that ended cruel laws in place before he took office. This is false.”

Ten thousand lies!

These days, as he faces a re-election fight, Trump will be taking credit for the positive state of the country’s economy.

But he deserves almost no credit for the result. Economic growth has happened despite his absolutely unconventional approach to the nation’s highest political office. Or, according to a recent Washington Post poll – if polls matter at all these days – many in this country believe a positive economy only benefits those at the top, not middle or low-income America.

For me, character matters in public officials.

Trump has none.

I hope someone will rise up for the 2020 election and appeal to those in the middle who want productive, honest action from government officials at all levels.

And that includes a continuing focus on building a strong economy