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.

What we saw in the last few days from President Joe Biden was a welcome change from the previous administration.

Biden actually conveyed empathy and understanding as he went on national television to deliver an address to the American people on the first-year anniversary of the coronavirus.

He talked “with” Americans, not “to” them.  He didn’t use the “I” word once.  He used “we.”  And he appealed to all Americans to a high standard, just what we have needed in a U.S. president in a time of peril.

Several commentators saw what I saw.

FROM JENNIFER RUBIN IN THE WASHINGTON POST:  “Many Americans have almost forgotten what a normal president and a normal White House address sounds like.

“You might remember:  The president uses his appearances sparingly to highlight the most important events and issues — such as the passage of a landmark rescue plan.  The speech is devoid of insults, slurs and accusations, and it is sparing in its use of “I.”

‘That is what the country got Thursday night during President Biden’s first prime-time address.

“It was reassuring to tune in, not fretting (as so many have for the past four years) about the next outrageous insult or abject lie.  It was a delight to see someone not reading the speech for the first time.”

FROM DAN BALZ, ALSO IN THE WASHINGTON POST:  President Biden’s task Thursday night was daunting as he marked the first anniversary of the week when the coronavirus forced America to shut down.

“He needed to acknowledge the loss of more than 529,000 lives to the coronavirus pandemic and the accompanying economic suffering, while offering a sense of optimism that the future can and will be brighter.

“Leaning against the lectern and looking directly into the camera, he said, ‘I will not relent until we beat this virus. But I need you, the American people. I need you. I need every American to do their part.’

“That contrast in leadership styles underscored what the transition from the 45th president to the 46th has meant.”

AND FROM PAUL WALDMAN IN THE POST:  “Over a career spanning nearly half a century, with more than his share of stumbles and setbacks and outright failures, there were plenty of reasons to believe that Joe Biden would never reach the Oval Office, let alone do great things with it.  But now he might have met his moment.

“After so long, Biden finally has perfect timing.

“The first reason is what we saw on display in his White House speech Thursday night:  Biden works hard to be the most empathetic of politicians, which is exactly what you want at a time of profound national loss.  Well over half a million Americans have died of covid-19, and as someone well acquainted with grief, Biden speaks to the pain of those left behind and the hope that we will reach a future beyond our current hardships.

“That allows him to perform the rituals of national leadership — particularly those that require the president to create an emotional connection with the public — with a sincerity that we so sorely missed over the past four years.”

Now, to be sure, Biden faces huge tests of leadership in the White House, the first of which is to get control of the pandemic, which he has promised to do.  The second is to find a way to work with Republicans who don’t want to work with him, and, then, when bi-partisanship fails, blame Biden for the failure.

For now, whatever judgments eventually will be made about the Biden presidency, it is enough that he has ushered a new tone into the White House.  It is marked by empathy and honesty, a sharp and welcome contrast from the recent past.

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 am the kind of person who likes words.  Better than numbers.  Better than charts and graphs.

Of course, both numbers and charts have their place, but my focus is on words. 

That may be because I grew up as a person interested in journalism and, in fact, got my first job after college as a reporter for a daily newspaper in Astoria, Oregon.

Other jobs after that also focused more on words than on numbers and charts, so much so that, in the lobbying and public relations firm I helped to found with two partners in 1990, I remained a “words person.”

One of my partners also liked words, but, well beyond me, developed a way, in what was then called “desk-top publishing,” to merge words with graphics.  It was to his credit.

All of this is a lead-in to the topic of this blog – new words in politics that may deliver messages, but need to be defined.  So here goes.

CANCEL CULTURE:  The term refers to a modern form of ostracism in which someone is thrust out of social or professional circles – whether it be on-line, on social media, or in person.

My view:  Worth avoiding this new phrase in normal speech – and action.

WOKE:  This is a term that originated in the United States, referring to a perceived awareness of issues that concern social justice and racial justice.  It derives from the African-American Vernacular English expression “stay woke,” whose grammatical aspect refers to a continuing awareness of these issues.

My view:  No problem with this word, though I am never sure what it means despite the definition I supplied above.  I probably won’t use it much, preferring instead to speak directly about social and racial justice.

QANON:  This is a right-wing, pro-Trump conspiracy theory born in a dark corner of the Internet that has crept into mainstream politics.  The theory, promoted by extremists, is based on cryptic postings by the anonymous “Q,” who purported to be a government insider with access to classified information.  The first Q posting appeared in October 2017.

QAnon followers contend that a group of Satan-worshiping pedophiles — that includes Hollywood actors and Democrat politicians — is running a global child sex-trafficking ring and plotting against Trump.  They also believe thousands of “deep state” operatives and top Democrats will eventually be rounded up and sent to Guantanamo Bay during a reckoning dubbed “The Storm.”

My view:  I intend to avoid using about this term, or even thinking about it, given its utter depravity.

PROGRESSIVE:  This word has been co-opted by those on the far left who contend it is a political philosophy in support of social reform – and that counts for progress. 

They define the term, more specifically, as “a social or political movement that aims to represent the interests of ordinary people through political change and the support of government actions.”

My view:  I intend to use the word progressive to define government actions that truly represent progress – and that usually stems from actions that some from the center, not either the right or the left. If there is a message here, it is that, when we use new words in the political lexicon, we ought to know what they mean – or at least what listeners believe they mean.  That will lead to careful use of the words of they are used at all.

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.

Think of the term in the headline “herd immunity.”

Before the coronarivus took over our lives more than a year ago, most of us never had heard of the term.

Now, we know something it. 

Here is what the term means:

“Herd immunity occurs when enough people become immune to a disease to make its spread unlikely.  As a result, the entire community is protected, even those who are not themselves immune.  Herd immunity is usually achieved through vaccination, but it can also occur through natural infection and recovery from it.”

According to a recent story in the New York Times:

“Amid the dire Covid warnings, one crucial fact has been largely ignored:  Cases are down 77 per cent over the past six weeks.  If a medication slashed cases by 77 per cent, we’d call it a miracle pill.  Why is the number of cases plummeting much faster than experts predicted?

“In large part because natural immunity from prior infection is far more common than can be measured by testing.  Testing has been capturing only from 10 to 25 per cent of infections, depending on when during the pandemic someone got the virus.”

Now add people getting vaccinated and you begin to see herd immunity coming into view.

Again from the New York Times this morning:

“Public discussion of ‘herd immunity’ often treats it like an on-off switch:  When the U.S. reaches herd immunity, the crisis will be over; until then, the country has little immunity from Covid-19.

“Herd immunity is more like a light dimmer. The more people develop immunity — either from having been infected or from being vaccinated — the less easily the virus will spread.

“Nearly 30 per cent of Americans have now had the virus, and about 18 per cent  have received at least one vaccine shot. There is some overlap between these two groups, which means that about 40 per cent of Americans now have some protection from Covid.

The Washington Post puts it this way:   “After millions of infections and the start of a vaccination campaign, the virus is finally, slowly, starting to run out of new people to infect.” So, to all of these perceptions, I add my own.  Stay the course.  Continue using masks regardless of whether you have had the virus or have received the vaccine.  Avoid big crowds.  Practice social distancing. We may be seeing the light at the end of the virus tunnel, but this is no time to obscure the vision. And, we still need government help, both what the Biden Administration is doing to create more vaccines (including the Johnson & Johnson “one shot” option) and what state and local governments around the country should be doing, which is to make vaccines more readily available to the general population.

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.

We were subjected again this week to an example of government not working very well.

The case occurred when Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson held up the U.S. Senate by demanding that clerks read every word in a 618-page bill on the new virus relief package.

He had the right to make such a request.  But it was stupid.  He was not going to win in the end anyway.

The poor reading clerks on the Senate floor had to stumble through more than 10 hours of reading a complex bill.

According to the Washington Post, it included this unintelligible paragraph:

““subsection (a)(1) of such section 314 shall be applied by substituting ‘91 per cent’ for ‘89 per cent’” and “without regard to requirements in sections 658E(c)(3)(E) or 658G of such Act (42 U.S.C. 9858c(c)(3), 9858e).”

In proposed laws, such words are always a part of adding new legal language to the law books.  Makes no sense to the untrained eye, but, still, valid.

Call what Johnson did a “stunt” because it was exactly that.

The same stupid procedure has been used on occasion at the State Capitol in Salem, Oregon.  It usually occurred when the minority party wanted to slow things down on a bill it considered controversial.  So, party leaders told the clerks, read a bill line for line.

Washington Post columnist Paul Waldman wrote the D.C. stunt this way:

“Being a United States senator comes with all kinds of privileges not afforded to lowly House members.  One is that in many instances you can force the entire chamber to submit to your idiotic whims.

“So it was that Senator Ron Johnson used his power to force Senate clerks to read every word of the 628-page Covid relief bill out loud.   As he said in a tweet, “If they’re going to add nearly $2 trillion to the national debt, at least we should know what’s in the bill.”

Like anyone else, however, Johnson was more than free to read the bill on his own time rather than forcing the clerks to perform this ritual.

Waldman went on with his trenchant, forward-looking insight:

“There’s a context for this stunt, which was meant to delay debate on the bill in a particularly exasperating way:  Republicans see it in their interest to make the legislative process appear as convoluted and ridiculous as possible.

“That’s because an inevitable part of their message for the 2022 mid-term elections — as it almost always is — will be that ‘Washington Doesn’t Work.’  It’s a bunch of squabbling, partisanship and arcane procedural nonsense that does nothing to help you and your family, so what we need to do is toss out the people in charge and put in some folks with common sense, i.e., Republicans.

“And the idea that legislation is too long is a regular Republican refrain, as though a bill’s page count proves that there must be something wrong with it.

“This (sowing government discord) will be one of the most important grounds on which politics is fought for the next few years.  Republicans will argue that under Democrats the legislative process is a mess, their bills are full of frivolous and wasteful boondoggles, and the Biden administration is mishandling implementation of everything. “

In the face of all this, my wish is that those who represent us would get back to the business of:

• Making government work better, not pulling stupid stunts like Johnson.
• Continuing to ask tough questions about the role of government, whether there should be role in the cases of some public policy issues, and, if there is a role, how should it be designed to endure solid performance – a return-on-investment to use a private business phrase.

If steps like these occurred, we’d be better off as citizens and, in fact, government would be better.  So, I’d tell Senator Johnson and his ilk to get with the “better government” program.

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 headline on this blog uses the word “interesting.”   But, if there was more room, I also could add the phrase, “tough to get to.”  Or, perhaps, one trip there is enough.

That’s Rams Hill.

It is a renowned course in Borrego Springs, about an hour and a half south and west of La Quinta, California.

I joined three friends to head to Rams Hill earlier this week and found the experience to illustrate this:  Fun to go there once; not necessarily worth the trip again.  Plus, for what it’s worth, I didn’t see any rams on the way or at the destination.

That’s nothing against the course.

It is an excellent track designed by eminent designer Tom Fazio.  It is composed of interesting holes that test all elements of your game, to fairly short, but penal, par 3s; to par 4s, without huge distance requirements; to par 5s which require various shots required to get into the best place to go for the greens.

In other words, playable.

When I was at Rams Hill, it was not in the best shape because, the superintendent told me, the over-seeding earlier in the fall did not work exactly as planned.  So, there were splotches of sand and dirt in the fairways.

But, that unfortunate fact did not deter from the enjoyment of golf.

Getting to Rams Hills is tough.

Tough in the sense that a substantial portion of the roads to Borrego Springs, the town where Rams Hills is located, were paved once, but not recently.  Rutts.  Hills and bumps.  Deep holes.

At one point, the SUV in which I was rounding bounced off the ground – and so did I…at least off my seat up to the ceiling of the vehicle.

From La Quinta, you travel first on decent roads heading south through farmland with a variety of crops – carrots, lettuce, citrus and the ever-present palm trees.  The latter is a crop, too. 

Soon, you get to the Salton Sea, which, as the name implies, is full of salt, so full that the major fish type there, tilapia, are dying off.  There are a few resorts on the Sea, but based on a past trip there, you would not want to stay for along, if only because of the acrid salt smell.

From the Sea, you then head mostly west through a barren landscape marked by hills and valleys, the sort that attract off-roaders.  I saw hundreds of RVs camped out in the sand, often dragging off-road vehicle trailers behind them. 

On the day of our trip, it was about 70 degrees, but I cannot imagine what it would be like in the summer when temps climb to and above 100.  No trees.  No shade.  No nothing, except sand and dunes.  But, I suspect the RVs might still be there, though not in the same numbers as I saw this week.

We turned off before we got to Borrego Springs, which we saw in the distance.  It’s a small town, though the trip veterans I was with said there are good restaurants there, along with lodging, one of which is a 5-star venue.

I have a friend from Salem, Oregon who has a place in Borrego and, though I did not see him on this trip, I can imagine that what he has told me about the place is true.  It, he says, is dying because, as is the case even with other more-populated places in Palm Springs, it has difficulty attracting a younger crowd.  So, it is “aging out.”

Still, if you want privacy, if you want great hiking trails and if you want off-roading sites, Borrego Springs could be a place for you.  And, if don’t want to drive there, just take a small jets and or a helicopter if fit the category of the “rich and famous.”

Back to Rams Hill golf.

Golf Advisor Magazine raters called the course the “Best in the Country” in 2016.

Perhaps a bit of a stretch these days, but here’s a quote from the club’s website:

“A scenic Tom Fazio layout resurrected with the help of one of the industry’s hottest up-and-coming design teams.  Eighteen holes that inspire shot-making creativity.  Immaculate course conditions and comfortable pace of play.  Luxury overnight accommodations both on property and with our partner resort.  Tantalizing meals, cold beer, rich wine and hearty spirits.

“Enjoy pleasant fall and warm winter weather.  Colorful, expansive outdoor spaces.  After-golf fun and games, including a simulator loaded with America’s other best courses.  Acres of surrounding terrain to explore.  Even high-flying helicopter service.

“Most importantly, fill yourself an indelible sense of place and hospitality that turns any visit into a vacation.  Stay and play for a day, a week or a lifetime.  Bring your spirit of adventure. We’ll provide the fun.”

There is a reader of this blog, who keeps track of all the courses he has played in his “golf career.”  So do I – my golf career, that is — and now I have a new one to add to my list – Rams Hill.

And, if my friend wants to duplicate my feat, I’ll take him there despite the tough trip, so he, too, can play the course and add it to his list.

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 headline in this blog means at least one thing: I am getting older.

Because, when you look back at how a profession in which you were involved for 25 years is changing, you have to be old to do so.

Two major changes are occurring.

• The first is lobbying in a virtual sense.

Lobbyists these days are reporting that it is far more difficult than in the past to make contact with individual legislators.  Instead of meeting them – even briefly – at the Capitol, in their offices or on the way to committee hearings, lobbyists are reduced to trying to book Zoom appointments.

For me, that would be tough because, to convey perspectives from my clients when I was working, I would rely on individual contact with lawmakers.  Often, that involved meeting legislators in their offices or waiting for them to leave for committee hearings because you knew the route they would take on a walk.

Remember that lobbyists like me were not out to convey their own viewpoints.  They were representing those with an interest in the prospect of new laws in Oregon.  Such viewpoints ought at least to be pointed out to legislators and, like attorneys in court, lobbyists work the process in Capitol hallways, offices and hearings – in other words, “their court.”

I have been retired for a few years, but, if I was back at the Capitol, not sure I’d be effective.

• The second change for lobbying is that at least some legislators are reconsidering tough-to-enforce rules on what could be labeled “gifts” from lobbyists to legislators.

This is occurring about a decade after new gift rules were imposed.

Here is the way the Oregonian newspaper wrote about the development:

“Oregon lawmakers are considering whether to allow lobbyists to wine and dine them without limits, more than a decade after they clamped down on the practice with a broad ethics law.

“The Legislature passed Senate Bill 10 in 2007 after members were embarrassed by reports in The Oregonian/OregonLive on how beer and wine distributors paid for legislators to travel to Hawaii.

“Currently, Oregon law bars legislators and other public officials from accepting more than $50 per year from any entity that wants to influence a government decision.  The limit applies to ‘any single source,’ which means a lobbyist who represents multiple clients could have each of those clients pay for up to $50 of food and beverages for a single lawmaker, according to Ron Bersin, executive director of the Oregon Government Ethics Commission.”

The change is being proposed by Stayton Senator Fred Girod and has been referred to the Senate Rules Committee, one of the most reasonable committees in Salem.

At a February 23 public hearing, Girod’s proposal got a warm welcome from his Democrat colleagues on the committee.  For one, Senator Ginny Burdick thanked Girod for bringing the idea forward, noting “it’s not always a popular matter to bring forward bills like this but it’s really important.”  Burdick noted that “draconian changes” in Senate Bill 10, the 2007 ethics law, were unpopular with many local public officials at the time.

To the Oregonian, Burdick said:  “There were some egregious circumstances we were trying to address with Senate Bill 10 but it went too far.  We are a culture of relationships.  We achieve what we achieve by reaching out to people who are not like us and finding common ground and finding policies that work for all Oregonians. And if there is food and drink involved in some of those interactions, we shouldn’t be interfering with that.”

I suspect the new legislation won’t pass in Salem, or at least, if a change is made, limits won’t be “unlimited.”

It is likely the Oregonian’s headline – using the term “wining and dining” – will illustrate arguments against the bill.  When I engaged in “wining and dining” as a lobbyist – I didn’t call it that – I never expected anything specific in return from a legislator. 

Not a vote.  Not assurance of support.

What I did hope for was consideration of the perspectives I offered on behalf of clients.

Further, back in 2007 when the limits were first proposed, some organizations raised questions about how the limits would affect trade missions when the method of doing business in a foreign country often involves the exchange of gifts. 

Those who raised questions included my client, the Port of Portland, which sponsored and organized overseas trade missions.

The concern didn’t matter back in 2007 and I don’t know that it would matter much if it were to be raised today, though there is a case to be made that trade missions deserve individual treatment when it comes to “gifts.”

Still, there might be room for middle ground here.

Senate Majority Leader Rob Wagner told the Oregonian “sometimes very unintended consequences result from broad legislation.  I think it might be … time to look at all these laws with a little bit more of a fine-tooth comb and see what’s working and what’s not.”

Good point. 

Draconian limits don’t work well. 

Well-designed limits would work.

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 recent days, those of us who label ourselves “political junkies” have had a chance to see one of the worst presidential chiefs of staff in history at the same time as we anticipate one who could become one of the best.

We have just been through a Trump presidency when the occupant of the Oval Office, a buffoon and tyrant, cycled through chiefs of staff like they weren’t even there.

If they did not do his bidding, they were gone.

One of the worst was the person who went out of office with Trump, Mark Meadows.

Chris Whipple, the author of a book about presidential chiefs of staff, wrote a piece for the Wall Street Journal contending that Meadows “earned the title of the worst chief of staff in history.”

Here is how Whipple put it:

 “In a secure tent on the Ellipse, as President Trump prepared to incite an angry mob ahead of its assault on the U.S. Capitol, White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, smiling from ear to ear, mugged for a video with Donald Trump Jr., as Laura Branigan’s 1982 hit ‘Gloria’ blared in the background.

“For Trump’s glad-handing chief of staff, it was just another day of dutifully holding the president’s coat while the boss took a hammer to democracy. This will be the defining image of Meadows, for which he has earned the title of worst chief of staff in history.”

Now, with President Joe Biden, there is a chief of staff, Ron Klain, who has a breadth of government experience and tenacity that leaves all of the Trump comparators far in his wake, including Meadows.  Among other things, Klain lead the Obama Administration effort deal with the Ebola virus, which puts him in a good position to deal with the coronavirus response, the top issue for the Biden Administration.

That’s probably why congressional Republicans are going after Klain by using such descriptions as “the guy behind the curtain” and “Prime Minister Klain.”  They are trying to push back on someone they see as formidable opponent in the battle over President Biden’s agenda.

Specifically, a Washington Post report says the GOP blames Klain for Biden’s refusal to negotiate the price down on his $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief package, an approach they say conflicts with Biden’s campaign pledges.

Now, many miles from the scene of the action in Washington, D.C., why do I offer my perspective on the chief of staff issue?  Well, two reasons,

First, I gleaned perspectives on the chief of staff position in Oregon as I watched – and worked for – several persons who held the position in past gubernatorial administrations.  To be sure, Oregon is not as big or complicated as D.C., but experience here offers helpful perspectives on what a chief of staff does – or should do.

Second, I did spend time reading the book by Whipple, the title of which was “The Gatekeepers: How the White House Chiefs of Staff Define Every Presidency.”  A very good read. 

So, from my perch in the cheap seats out West, I have spent a bit of time thinking about credentials for the chief of staff position, in Oregon or in Washington, D.C.  I do so because, in many ways, chiefs of staff are the most important appointed positions under an elected chief executive. 

On an organizational chart, it may not appear to be so on, but clout and authority go with the title.  Thus, here are a few credentials.

• The ability to rely on experience, which means, to state the obvious, that a chief of staff has to have experience to fall back on.  When I was hiring persons to work in state agencies I managed or in my private firm, experience always was the first credential I looked for.

 [The last chief of staff I worked for in Oregon, Gerry Thompson, had a wealth of experience, both in the public and private sectors. That made her an excellent chief for the last Republican governor in Oregon, Vic Atiyeh.  Full disclosure:  I worked for Gerry and she is still a good friend.]

• The ability, not just to tolerate dissent, but to welcome it, for welcoming competing points of view holds the potential to make final decisions better.
• The ability to handle multiple issues at the same time, a credential for any high-level manager. 
• The ability to lead the effort to deal fairly and ethically with members of the public who may not fully understand the inner-workings of government.
• The ability to know when to advance an administration’s policies and when to go slower to provide more time for others to catch up, or for middle ground to be found. 
• The ability to exhibit political leadership — a credential easier to see in action than to define in words.

So, as we anticipate the continuation of the Biden Administration, it will be interesting to watch Ron Klain.  I suspect that, in the future, he will be included in a chapter in a new Whipple book as a chief of staff with solid credentials who performed well in the job.

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 currently run three departments – the Department of Pet Peeves, the Department of Good Quotes Worth Remembering, and the Department of “Just Saying.”

Now, due to my supreme management skills, I am adding a fourth.

It is the Department of Inquiring Minds Want to Know.

It is a department which allows me to pose questions for which I have no answer.  One reason is that, in retirement, I have a lot of time on my hands.  Other than golf, I have time think about dumb stuff, including when I drive long distances, such as south to California and north back to Oregon.

So, as the new department opens for the first time, here is a list of my most recent dumb questions with no answers.

• Why do big semi-trucks at rest areas leave the area, then stop so often on the side of ramps entering the freeway?

• Who drives big trucks for Amazon?  On the drives south and north along I-5, we see more Amazon trucks than any other brand.  Are these contracted rigs or Amazon employees doing the driving?

• How do train companies keep track of their cars around the country?  And, if technology is involved in that enterprise now, how was keeping track done before technology?

• How do train companies form long trains, as well as build double-decker chains?  [No doubt major train yards are involved, but the process for putting a long train together still escapes me, even in a major yard.]

• Or, this from golf.  Why do some folks criticize my putting style – using a “claw grip” – when even Hall of Fame player Phil Mickelson has adopted my approach?