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 press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as 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 could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

In a major Washington Post story on the still-emerging coronavirus relief legislation, one sentence caught my eye.

It was this:

“It may take some more time for congressional staff members to draft those agreements into legislative text and prepare the massive bill for votes in the House and Senate.”

The headline in this blog – Small Details – understates one of the major realities as lawmakers in Congress, in Oregon, or in any other state work to craft legislation.

Someone has to translate the action into specific law.  That means words, lots of them.

Under significant time pressure, as is the case with the virus relief bill as citizens around the country try to make ends meet in an unprecedented pandemic, a lot rides on getting the words right. 

I watched all of this happen in Oregon where, as the intro to this blog notes, I worked in and around government for 40 years.

Every time a piece of legislation passed at the State Capitol in Oregon, it was proceeded by preparation of a draft by members of the Legislative Counsel’s Office, a group of lawyers who functioned much like a firm in private practice.

If a client I represented wanted to get a bill drafted, I, the lobbyist, had to stand on my head to get the job done – and, no problem with that flexibility in the reality of lawmaking.  First, I had to get what was called “a note from mother,” a piece of paper from a legislator, with his or her signature, authorizing me to go to the Legislative Counsel office with a bill-drafting request.

Remember, the Counsel Office represented legislators, not me.

Then, a draft was produced and was printed into specific bill form.  On certain occasions, I had a chance to comment on the draft – but only that.  The specific words where those of the assigned lawyer.

If legislators acted on a bill and approved amendments, that revised bill also would have to be re-drafted by the Counsel Office.  And, overall in any Oregon legislative session, more than 5,000 bills are drafted, though a relatively small proportion of them become law.

So, with that brief background, imagine the pressure congressional bill drafters are under at this very moment.  They have to draft specific language:

• To direct hundreds of billions of dollars in aid to jobless Americans, ailing businesses and other critical economic needs that have grown as the pandemic ravages the country and batters the economy.
• To enable stimulus checks to be prepared for millions of Americans of up to $600 per person.  
• To extend federal unemployment benefits of up to $300 per week, which could start as early as Dec. 27.
• To extend the deadline for states and cities to use unspent money approved for them by the Cares Act,
• To extend for one month a moratorium on evictions that is set to expire at the end of the year.
• To provide $325 billion in business relief, including about $275 billion for another round of Paycheck Protection Program funding.
• To protect patients from “surprise” medical bills (and, to use the word “surprise,” a surprise inclusion in the relief bill).

All of helps, I guess, to provide some context for what happened several years ago in the U.S. House of Representatives when even House Speaker Nancy Pelosi admitted that she had not read the bill inaugurating the “Affordable Health Care Act” before she voted to approve it.

It was possible that the draft bill was only circulated a few moments before the vote – not good process, but, at that point and still today, health care coverage is a major issue.

So, finally, just know that when the Oregon Legislature, Congress or other legislative bodies pass their bills, folks behind the scenes are working hard, out of the spotlight, to get the words right.  Given what’s at stake these days, here’s hoping they are successful.

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 press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as 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 could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

I have long argued that compromise is a key part of the definition of good politics.

But, I may be a Pollyanna.  Strike the word “may.”  I am. 

I still believe in the fact that solid solutions to pressing public policy challenges lie somewhere in the middle, not the extreme right or left.

If I didn’t believe middle ground was possible, then I fear for whether we will be able to retain democracy as the form of government in our country.

Ruth Marcus, deputy editorial page editor of the Washington Post, dealt with this subject in a column Saturday, which appeared under this headline:  “Will Biden be able to compromise with Republicans? The glass is three-quarters empty.”

Here are excerpts of what Marcus wrote:

• When it comes to the question of whether President-Elect Joe Biden will find areas of productive compromise with Republicans, the best way to think about the issue may be to ask:  Is the glass one-quarter full or three-quarters empty? In other words, is there a sliver of hope, if not for bi-partisan legislating, then for tamping down the worst of the partisan animosity? And if, as I have reluctantly come to believe, that sliver is thin to the point of invisibility, and should Biden nonetheless proceed as though he holds out hope?
• …Biden took a hopeful tone with CBS’s Stephen Colbert.  “I think I can work with Republican leadership in the House and the Senate,” Biden said.  “I think we can get things done.  And I think, once this president is no longer in office, you’re going to see his impact on the body politic fade and a lot of these Republicans are going to feel they have much more room to run and cooperate.” “I don’t think I’m kidding myself. I got criticized in the beginning for saying this — I think the nation’s looking for us to be united.  Politics has become so sort of dirty and vicious and personal and mean, a clenched fist instead of an open hand, and I think people are looking for us to come together.”
• It is good for Biden to call for unity; leadership has to be aspirational to be effective.  And Biden is no inexperienced Pollyanna.  Barack Obama, in his new autobiography, relates Biden’s sour story of trying to persuade Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) to support a bill he was sponsoring. “You must be under the mistaken impression that I care,” McConnell responded.  Biden knows who he is dealing with on the other side.
• I (Marcus) come to this conclusion as someone who has been an advocate for compromise both as a means to an end and a value in itself.  Who believes the most extreme achievable result — on either side — is not necessarily, indeed probably not, the best outcome?  Who thinks individual Republicans, many of them, are decent people who love their country and have good-faith beliefs about the best way to improve it?
• Republicans have a robust history of prioritizing obstructionism and defeating Democrats over solving the nation’s problems.  Long before Trump’s election, McConnell proclaimed that “the single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president.”  There can be no doubt that his goal remains the same with Biden, and that he is determined that a Republican replace Biden.

So, who is to blame for the failure to find middle ground solutions – Republicans or Democrats?  I say both.

In a spirit of compromise – not to mention the good of the country we love – I say the time has arrived for both parties to work to find the smart middle.

I hope Biden will lead toward it and I hope he will find followers.  And, I also hope that we, as voters, will reward compromise and pragmatism, not extremism. 

Too much is at stake for any other outcome to prevail.

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 press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as 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 could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

I have said many times that one of my favorite columnists these days is Michael Gerson, who writes for the Washington Post.

Nearly everything he writes prompts me to think – and that, for any writer, is a high compliment.

Plus, he uses words very well, which is another high compliment.

Gerson’s work is nationally syndicated and appears twice weekly in the Post.  He is the author of “Heroic Conservatism” (Harper One, 2007) and co-author of “City of Man: Religion and Politics in a New Era” (Moody, 2010).

He appears regularly on the “PBS NewsHour,” “Face the Nation” and other programs.  Gerson serves as senior adviser at One, a bi-partisan organization dedicated to the fight against extreme poverty and preventable diseases.

Until 2006, he was a top aide to President George W. Bush as assistant to the president for policy and strategic planning.  Prior to that appointment, he served in the White House as deputy assistant to the president and director of presidential speechwriting and assistant to the president for speechwriting and policy adviser.

So, to provide a rationale for my “like,” here is a selection of quotes from recent Gerson columns:

• Under this headline, “Prominent evangelicals are directing Trump’s sinking ship. That feeds doubts about religion,” Gerson wrote this:

“President Trump’s naked attempt to overturn a fair election — with key elements of Joe Biden’s victory vouchsafed by Republican state officials, Republican-appointed judges and even the Justice Department — has driven some Trump evangelicals to the edge of blasphemous lunacy.”

• Under this headline, “Evangelicals need to follow Christianity’s morals, not Trump’s,” Gerson wrote:

“It is in this context that the recent commentary by Mark Galli in Christianity Today calling for President Trump’s removal from office should be read.  Here, in contrast to Fox News, is an institution trying to use a specifically Christian lens to examine the president’s conduct in office.  

“Galli argues that cheating to influence a presidential election is not merely a threat to the Constitution but also ‘profoundly immoral.’ Trump’s lies and slanders on Twitter are ‘a near perfect example of a human being who is morally lost and confused.’   The corruption and cruelty of the president and those around him have ‘rendered this administration morally unable to lead.’”

• Under this headline, “This is a massive failure of character among Republicans — with evangelicals out in front,” Gerson wrote:

“One of the better speeches I helped produce for George W. Bush was never given.  On election night 2000 — standing outside in the rain, at an Austin victory rally that never happened — I had the copy of a concession speech in my pocket.  As I remember it, the first lines were:  “I have just talked to my opponent, who is no longer my opponent. He is the president-elect of the United States.”

“I had no doubt that then-Governor George W. Bush would have delivered that speech if necessary.  The 2000 presidential election was far closer than the one we just experienced — a slight electoral wind could have blown it either way.  But Bush, had he lost, would have played by the rules and accepted the outcome, just as Vice President Al Gore eventually did.  And how do I know that Bush would have done this?  Because he is a man of character who would have put the good of the country ahead of his own interests when the moment called for it.

“What America is now experiencing is a massive failure of character — a nationwide blackout of integrity — among elected Republicans. From the president, a graceless and deceptive insistence on victory after a loss that was not even close.  From congressional Republicans, a broad willingness to conspire in President Trump’s lies and to slander the electoral system without consideration of the public good. Only a few have stood up against Republican peer pressure of contempt for the constitutional order.”

• Under this headline, “Trump’s handling of race is the single most important issue in this election,” Gerson wrote:

“There is one particular way that Trump has made this a directional, perhaps a definitional, election:  He has purposely brought the issue of race to the center stage of American politics.  His re-election would mean, in part, the public vindication of his approach to racial matters.

“He probably views this as one issue among many — just another way to rile and rally his base.  That is the measure of his historical ignorance.  The struggle for racial equality is the defining American struggle.  Much of our history has been spent dealing with the moral contradiction of America’s founding — how a bold experiment in liberty could also be a prison for millions of enslaved people.  That hypocrisy and its ramifications have been our scandal.  Our burden. Our sin.”

• Under this headline, “The election is over, but there’s no end to Republican bad faith,” Gerson wrote:

“The presidential election is certainly over, and the result was not particularly close.  President-elect Joe Biden won a decisive majority of the popular vote and likely a considerable electoral college victory. Claims of widespread electoral fraud would be spurious even if they weren’t made by a prating fool in front of a Philadelphia landscaping firm.  The 2020 election is done.  Concluded.  Finished.

“What has not ended — what seems endless — is Republican bad faith and poltroonery.”

• Under this headline, “This election was a reflection of who we are as a country,” Gerson wrote:

“Trumpians feel confirmed in their belief that a hostile establishment and hidden “deep state” are conspiring against their dignity and influence.  Democrat progressives feel confirmed in their belief that the politics of compromise has gained liberalism nothing.  Democrat centrists feel confirmed in their belief that they are saving liberalism from political oblivion.  No large group of voters came away chastened or sobered.”

• Under this headline, “Trump and his party are threatening our constitutional order,” Gerson wrote:

“President Trump’s coup attempt has failed in every place but his fevered mind.

“The president’s claim of comprehensive electoral fraud has been distinguished by a complete lack of supportive evidence.  Legal representation by swaggering, bungling windbags has done little to advance the president’s cause.  And Trump’s diversion into deranged conspiracy thinking while national challenges mount is a fitting end to this sad, shabby chapter in the American story.  One imagines the other 43 presidents in Walt Disney World’s Hall of Presidents pointing and laughing at their most embarrassing successor.

“… the challenge has been a relatively weak one.  Trump combines the ambitions of a despot with the strategic planning and operational competence of a hamster.  He is an evil mastermind without the mastermind part.  Would our system have held firm in a closer election against a more talented authoritarian plotter?  We have no idea.  

“And the openness of the question should terrify us. Democracies tend to end not by revolt from below, but by erosion from above.  They are less vulnerable to revolutionaries than they are to demagogues.  While we have not lost our republic, we have glimpsed how it might eventually be lost.”

Enough, at least for now.  All of this shows Gerson’s fluid attempts to prod thought and reflection, as will, I suspect, future columns.  Clearly worth reading.

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 press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as 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 could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

My wife and I drove east up the Santiam Canyon the other day.

It was a familiar drive for us, having taken it many times to visit Central Oregon. 

But, it was different this time.  Our purpose was to take a first-hand look at the result of wildfires that ravaged the area earlier this year.  We delayed this trip for a number of weeks because we did not want to get in the way of residents who were heading back to see whether their homes and other belongings had survived.

What follows are some of the on-site perceptions we formed during and after the visit – and, if I was better at posting a blog, I might include photos of the “new canyon.”  But, since I’m not, you might consider taking the trip yourself.

• It definitely was not pleasant to look at the devastation.  We could only imagine what it was like for residents to try to escape the fire and, after doing so, to go back to survey the damage.

• As we got to the area of the first fire damage, we literally could still smell the burn.  Not smoke.  The burn.

• One major perception was this:  Fire proceeds in a random way.  What do I mean by this?  Well, for one illustration, the Cedars Restaurant at the beginning of the Detroit community was burned to the ground.  About 20 or 30 feet away, the Mile-High Grocery Store was still standing (though, given the ongoing effects of fire, was closed).

• Another example of randomness occurred as we looked at the stands of timber.  One swath was burned by fire.  An adjoining stand escaped and was still green.

• As I recounted this aspect of our trip up the canyon, one of my friends told me that he understood that fire behaves much like cyclones in the Midwest.  One side of a street might be demolished by a cyclone.  The other side would escape.  As we saw first-hand, fire behaves in a similar fashion.

• Downed timber?  It was everywhere including by the side of the road.  One of my friends who works for the Oregon Department of Transportation told me this week that log trucks and crews will be spending the next two weeks collecting downed timber.  Some of what is collected, once the burned bark is off, might even have market value.

As a final point in this blog, we met recently a couple who had to evacuate in the region around Elkhorn as the fire lurked only feet from a home they had built over the previous two years.  They made it out, but, then, a few days later, had to return to see that, in fact, the home had been leveled. 

It was an emotional experience for them.

And that is a point to remember as we reflect back on the fire season, in Oregon, Washington and California:  What happened is more than damage to buildings and belongings; it represents torn emotions and a changed way of life.

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 press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as 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 could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

Is it too early to propound a series of New Year’s resolutions?

Perhaps.  But, I do so anyway.

And, what appears below are not typical resolutions in the sense that they do not express intent to change my own behavior.  Rather, they express my wishes for my country as we enter a new year.

So, therefore, I wish:

…Donald Trump would go away quietly now that he is a loser.  [And, to point a recent point on it based on news accounts today, residents of Mar-A-Lago, where he may choose to live, don’t want him there.]

…Joe Biden would be given room by Senate Republicans to form his Administration similar to what has been done traditionally as new presidents take over…in other words, make Senate confirmation processes based on substance and credentials, not politics.

…Biden’s Cabinet level and other significant appointments would be judged first on their experience and credentials and, then if at all, on the basis of their ethnicity.

…Members of Congress would find a way to land in the middle on complex public policy questions rather than prattle away on their own side of the agenda.

…Members of Congress would realize the true definition of politics – compromise.

…The Biden Administration would place a huge initial priority on undoing one of the Trump Administration most egregious acts, the kidnapping of children from immigrant parents.  [Hard to imagine a more tragic policy!]

…The Oregon Legislature, as is the aspiration for Congress, would find middle ground on tough issues.

…Those who lead the Legislature – all Democrats – would find a way to listen to and respect the views of the minority…all Republicans.

…Republicans in Salem would find a way to express their minority views without walking out to avoid quorums.

…Both sides in Salem would find ways to restrict or at least contain the “two-Oregon’s” issue…the reality that, in the past, urban legislators appear not to care about rural issues and rural legislators appear not to care about urban issues, so they fight.

…Journalists in and around Salem would follow the example of the Salem Reporter, which means they would focus more genuinely on “news” of interest to area residents.

…And this conclusion:  The pandemic would recede as millions of Americans – as well as Oregonians – take one of the vaccines, with thanks to those who have provided it, including pharmaceutical companies working with the federal government, scientists in those companies working against long odds, and the huge distribution network required to get vaccines throughout the country in short order.

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 press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as 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 could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

I bumped into a new word this morning – risible.  At least a new word for me.

It came in this paragraph IN column written by Washington Post writer Max Boot:

“In all, 64 per cent of the House Republican caucus showed that defeating Democrats matters more to them than preserving U.S. democracy.  What made this suit all the more RISIBLE is that some of these lawmakers hail from the very states whose votes they were trying to overturn.  None of them, needless to say, claimed that their own victories were tainted by fraud.

What does the word mean?

The dictionary says this:

“Inclined to laugh, or laughable.”

And the context illustrates the point.  U.S. Republicans have been laughable in their inability to accept the fact that “their” candidate, Donald Trump, has been confirmed to be a loser by the Electoral College vote yesterday to confirm the presidency of Joe Biden.

So, again for me, words matter as commentators write about politics – and the word “risible” matters, which means I will know how to use word from now on. 

The conduct of many public officials – led by Republican Members of Congress – is risible.

There are other words to describe Republican conduct.  Abhorrent.  Treasonous or nearly so.  Anti-democracy.  Lunacy.  Cowardly.  To name just a few.

And, while risible is a term of derision, the actions of many Republicans these days makes me want to cry, not laugh.  One recent example struck closer to home than Washingto, D.C.  It occurred a few days ago when some Republican members of the Oregon Senate made the risible decision to sign on to a legal brief supporting the State of Texas appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court to throw out votes in four other states.

If the Oregon Rs would have waited only a few more minutes before acting on the brief, they would have seen that the Court threw out the Texas case as being – well – risible.

Washington Post writer Catherin Rampell also dealt with Republican intransigence in her column this morning:

“Over the years, Republican politicians seemed many times to be on the cusp of a reckoning — a realization that a lunatic fringe had seized control of the party’s more pragmatic center and that conspiracy-theorizing, race-baiting, science-denigrating demagogues had transformed the GOP base into ungovernable paranoiacs.  The situation seemed untenable; the fever had to break eventually.

“Yet, the party’s radicalization continued, and the reckoning never came.  Today, U.S. democracy is paying the price as millions of Americans refuse to acknowledge the results of a legitimate election, and their leaders appear too cowardly or too powerless to disrupt the collective delusion.”

A few months ago, a former partner of mine in CFM Advocates contended that ALL Republicans were complicit in Trump’s efforts to become a dictator, thus trampling on democracy values.

I demurred, saying that not “all” Republicans were bowing at the Trump altar.  I still believe that to be the case, but so-called “Republican leaders” in Congress risk giving the entire party a bad name by their failure to stand up for America.

To repeat, their conduct is risible.

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 press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as 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 could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

As we head toward the end of one year and the start of another, various journalism outlets will be trying to characterize what we have been through during the last 12 months.

PEW Research beat many others to the challenge last week by summarizing what it called “20 striking findings” from 2020.

PEW Research knows that it is doing.

It is is a non-partisan “fact tank” that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world.  It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, content analysis and other data-driven social science research. 

And a key distinction:  It does not take policy positions, a fact that helps to give its information credibility.

I receive frequent newsletters from PEW and the information I receive has helped in various ways, including by forming judgments in my recent role as a volunteer member of a committee formed by Common Cause to propose ways to increases a commitment to ethics in public life.

So, with that background, here is a list of the 20 striking trends from 2020:

#1/  Since the very beginning of the U.S. coronavirus outbreak, Democrats have been far more likely than Republicans to see COVID-19 as a “major threat” to public health.

#2/ The pandemic had a dramatic effect on international travel: By April, around nine-tenths of the world’s population (91%) was living in a country with partially or fully closed borders.

#3/  For the first time since at least the Great Depression, a majority of young adults in the U.S. were living with their parents this year.

#4/  Following the UK’s exit from the European Union, the share of British adults with a favorable view of the EU rose to its highest level on record.

#5/  International views of China turned much more negative in 2020, with many people criticizing its handling of COVID-19. 

#6/  Around eight-in-ten registered voters in the U.S. (83%) said in the summer that it “really mattered” who won this year’s presidential election, the highest share in any presidential election year since at least 2000.

#7/  Trump’s approval rating has been more sharply divided along partisan lines than that of any president in the modern era of polling.

#8/  Amid widespread economic hardship caused by COVID-19, around four-in-ten U.S. adults said in August that they or someone in their household had been laid off, lost their job or taken a pay cut.

#9/  More than half of Americans personally know someone who has been hospitalized or died due to COVID-19.

#10/ A large majority of U.S. adults (86%) say there is some kind of lesson or set of lessons for mankind to learn from the coronavirus outbreak, a ]nd about a third (35%) say these lessons were sent by God.

#11/ In several countries, the share of people with a favorable view of the U.S. fell in 2020 to its lowest point on record. 

#12/ Biden and Trump supporters say they fundamentally disagree with each other not just on political priorities, but on core American values.

#13/ Across a range of measures, Republicans are far more negative than Democrats in their assessments of the news media.

#14/ A small share of highly active Twitter users – most of whom are Democrats – produce the vast majority of tweets from U.S. adults.

#15/ Only around a quarter of U.S. Hispanics (23%) have heard of the term “Latinx,” and just 3% say they use it to describe themselves.

#16/ Around half of Americans (49%) say the Bible should have a great deal or some influence on the laws of the U.S., including 28% who say it should take precedence when it conflicts with the will of the people.

#17/ The Black Lives Matter movement drew widespread public support and online engagement following the police killing of George Floyd in May.

#18/ Amid calls to “defund the police,” only a quarter of Americans said in June that they favor a reduction in spending on policing in their area.

#19/ A growing share of Americans have heard of the group of conspiracy theories known as QAnon, and a substantial portion of Republicans who are aware of it say it is a good thing for the country.

#20/ In a year in which big tech companies faced growing scrutiny, nine-in-ten Republicans – and around six-in-ten Democrats (59%) – said it’s likely that social media sites intentionally censor political viewpoints.

What does all this mean?  Well, perhaps obviously, the perceptions are in the eye of the beholder.  Mine are two-fold:

• The range of issues PEW Research deals with is, in and of itself, “striking.” From politics, to religion, to racism, PEW provides a lot of food for thought.

• That range also prompts many of us to reassess biases we have formed over months, if not years.  And that’s good for all of us to be challenged in that way.

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 press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as 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 could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

The easiest answer to the question in the headline is that there isn’t one.

Consider these facts:

• Democrats strengthened their hold on power in Oregon, winning the only statewide office – Secretary of State — that Republicans – had held previously.  The Ds also confirmed super-majorities in the Oregon House and Senate.
• Oregon Republicans took only a small bit of solace as they were able to avoid the Ds winning “walk-out proof” majorities in both chambers. 
• Republicans also retained the one representative they had in Congress from Oregon, the Eastern Oregon seat occupied by retiring Greg Walden and now held by former state senator Cliff Bentz.

These results tend to confirm that the “two Oregons” issue – urban versus rural and the reverse – is still alive and well in our state.

It has been contended that urban Democrats who run the Legislature don’t understand rural Oregon.  And, on the other side, it is has been contended that rural Republicans don’t understand urban issues.

Never the twain shall meet?

The reality is that the best solutions to pressing public policy problems lie somewhere in the middle.  Finding those solutions will require lawmakers who are willing to give and get in the formation of compromise, which, don’t forget, is the definition of politics.  It has has been lost in recent years.

If you wonder about whether there are examples where finding the middle ground worked, here is one that may not be the best to cite, but does illustrate the give-and-take of working for the center.

When, as a lobbyist, I represented the Port of Portland, one of my assignments was to convince the governor and the legislature to make money available to deepen the Columbia River channel to allow deeper-draft cargo ships to ply their way up and down the river off the Pacific Ocean.

A further complexity was that the deal would require money from both the State of Washington (which shares ports along the river with Oregon) and the U.S. government.  Further, the cost of the project likely would require allocations over more than just one two-year biennium in Oregon.

To make a long story short, I was able to convince key legislators to begin appropriating channel deepening money.  In return, I had to accept amendments from three legislators who wanted the state to fund projects in their districts.  Call it “port barrel” if you will, but it was worth it for me to accept the additional allocations in order to get channel deepening started in Oregon.  Economic benefits would result for the region – both urban and rural Oregon.

It was a compromise, an example of where the center could exist in Oregon politics.

Many political observers – including me — hold out little hope that centrist politics will work in Washington, D.C., especially as Donald Trump makes a messy, forced exit from his performance as, easily, the worst president in U.S. history – and as various Republicans buttress his challenges against U.S. democracy.

But, I also am unwilling to throw out an aspiration that middle ground can be found in Oregon.

As the 2022 legislature starts in a couple months, I hope out home that controlling Democrats can be smart about how they lead without rendering minority viewpoints to the scrap heap.  I also hold out hope that Republicans, in the minority, can be smart about how to play the follower role without sacrificing core principles.

If the goal is to produce what’s best for urban AND rural Oregon, the two sides can meet in the middle.

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.

Now that the election is over – make sure someone tells Donald Trump – lawmakers in Oregon are planning to trek to Salem for their long legislative session, which lasts essentially from January through June.

In this blog, I repeat a summary of four major questions legislators should ask as they consider any aspect of the State of Oregon budget or any proposed new piece of legislation.  The four questions usually go unasked or unanswered, so I repeat them here.

First, however, this context for the coming legislative session.

Democrats are in charge everywhere in Salem – in the House, in the Senate, in the Governor’s Office and in all other statewide offices.

In the House and the Senate, they enjoy super-majority margins of control, which means they can pass new taxes without any Republican votes.  They do not enjoy what have come to be called “quorum-proof” margins of control, which means Republicans can walk out if they view no other alternative to oppose legislation they believe imperils rural Oregon.

In other words, the “two-Oregons” issue – urban versus rural and the reverse – is alive and well in our state.

Against this backdrop, Governor Kate Brown released her “Recommended Budget for 2021-23,” on December 1, which will set the stage for months of to’ing and fro’ing over how to spend taxpayer dollars.  At the moment, she has pinned her budget on receipt of more federal anti-virus money, which is under consideration in Congress with no optimism about whether a bill will pass or not.

As is the case with start of any legislative session, I believe the time is right to emphasize again questions legislators should ask:

1.  What is the problem for which a proposed policy or action is deemed to be the solution?  This question is seldom raised or discussed.

2.  Is there an appropriate role for government to play?  The answer, if the question is even raised, is rarely no.

3.  If there is a role for government, what does the state expect to get for the money it is spending — in other words, what is the expected return on investment?  This is an usually a foreign concept.

4.  How will state government action affect the private sector, especially individual and corporate taxpayers on whom the state depends for money to fund its operations?  This is seldom discussed, unless raised by those lobbying for Oregon businesses or for individual taxpayers.

If legislators would ask and answer these questions with a constructively critical eye, we’d have a better legislature and better results.

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 press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as 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 could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

Almost every commentator is writing these days about President-Elect Joe Biden’s attempts to form his Administration more than a month before he takes over on January 20, 2021.

I add my voice to the mix, though I have no inside information on any of this from my post in the cheap seats out West.  I just have a few observations.

The good news so far:

• The nominees represent diversity of thought, opinion and ethnicity.

• The nominees are committed to the success of the Biden-Harris Administration rather than just their own standing, thus evoking trust which is necessary between a president and those who for him or her.  Nor will the nominees be expected to bow at the altar of the President as was the case with Donald Trump’s appointees.

• The nominees have experience in their areas of responsibility, which, it seems to me, should be a major credential given what is at stake for our country.

In each of these ways, Biden’s nominations illustrate a stark change from Trump who nominated many persons unqualified for the jobs they accepted.  And, if those he hired did not express fealty to Trump, he fired them, sometimes, incredibly, by a tweet, as was the case a few weeks ago when Defense Department Director Mark Esper departed.

None of this suggests that it will be clear sailing for Biden’s nominees when the time comes for Senate confirmation in what is likely to be a chamber controlled by Republicans.

In some cases, Republicans may hold grudges for how they believed Democrats opposed Trump’s nominees.

In other cases, there will be more genuine issues, including those related to Biden’s nomination of retired General Lloyd Austin to be Secretary of the Department of Defense.  Some senators contend that the department should be led by an experienced civilian, not a retired military leader.  The theory is that military should not have such great influence over its own future.

To get Austin over the confirmation hurdle, Biden will first have to get Congress to pass a waiver to allow a recently-retired military leader to take the helm at Defense.  Such a waiver was granted to retired General Jim Mattis when he first served as Defense Department director under Trump.  It may be a challenge to get a waiver approved a second time so soon after the first.

But that procedural hurdle should not blur Austin’s credentials – his vast experience, his knowledge of the inner-workings of Defense Department, the value of his long-standing service to the country, and the fact that he happens to be Black, which will make him the first person of his ethnicity to hold the Defense Department job if he is confirmed.

Sounds like I know Austin.  I don’t.  So, to support him, I rely on the judgment of one of my friends, retired Colonel Ricky Love who served along side Austin in the Middle East and knows the retired general to be, as they say in military jargon, “squared away.”

On a different point, given my health care lobbying background, I also have paid attention to the nomination of Xavier Becerra, current attorney general in California and a former Member of Congress, to direct the Department of Health and Human Services.

He is a staunch defender of the Affordable Care Act, sometimes called ObamaCare, having opposed various Trump Administration efforts to tear down the law.  That, frankly, is a solid credential, though it will be the exact reason why some Senate Republicans will oppose him.

His task will be lead efforts to build on the Affordable Care Act, not tear it down.

In part, Republicans who oppose Becerra will do so at the peril of irritating the Latino community, which will wholeheartedly support Becerra as one of their own.

In all of this, I wish that Biden would receive from Congress what most new presidents do, which is give him a chance to govern by forming his administration without throwing up partisan obstacles to nominees for Cabinet jobs.