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 the preamble to this blog says, golf is one of my passions.  I play the game and, despite the inevitable ups and downs of the sport, I love it.  And my wife would likely say that I am addicted to it.

So be it.

Therefore, following this love, it is natural for me to develop a few golf sayings that I go back to time and again.

Here is my list of favorites – favorites because they’re mine:

• If you only swing harder, the ball will go farther

• I pay Callaway to play Callaway golf clubs — and Callaway pays Phil Mickelson to do so

• Jack Nicklaus, Dustin Johnson and I all hit fades off the tee

• I taught my son all I know about golf, then he turned five-years-old

• Let’s play today “for the love of the game,” not for money (which I say to some friends who tend to believe that money exchanges make golf more fun…not me)

• I quit golf today, but I may start again tomorrow

Also, have you ever thought about the phrase “better than most” which is what golf commentator and former PGA player Gary Koch uttered as Tiger Woods made a huge long putt on the 17^th green at TPA Sawgrass in Florida a number of years ago.

The phrase has made Koch famous, but consider this:  What he should have said was —

“Better than anyone else.”

Because it was, not just better than most.

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.

Columnist Peggy Noonan knows what she’s talking about – actually writing about — when she calls for change in the Grand Old Party so it can survive, if not thrive.

She was a long-time Republican.  Note the word “was.”

In a telling phrase, she writes:  “I was a political conservative but not a Republican.”  So, she left the party, as many did in response, at least in part, to Donald Trump’s excesses.

Today’s Republican Party, Noonan says, is in dire need of repair.  And, as an advocate of the two-party system, she hopes the GOP will find a way to be successful.

“No one likes the Republican Party,” she generalizes.  “Pretty much every power center in America is arrayed against it — the media, the academy, the entertainment culture, what remains of our high culture, the corporate suite, the non-profit world.

“The young aren’t drawn to it.

“The party is split, if not shattered.  The opposition has a new presidency, almost a Senate majority, the House, albeit by a hair.  The president nearing his hundred-day mark and deeply committed to showing energy in the Executive Branch, has yet to make masses of voters crazy with rage.  His approval numbers are steady.”

“What would constitute an active civic and political good in America in 2021,” Noonan asks.  “Helping to bring that party back.  It is worth saving, even from itself,” she answers.

“At its best, it has functioned as a friend and protector of liberty, property, speech and religious rights, an encourager of a just and expansive civic life, a defender of the law, without which we are nothing, and the order it brings, so that regular people can feel as protected on the streets as kings.

“At its best, it has been Main Street, not Wall Street, a stay on the hand of government when it demands too much. At its worst, it’s been — worse!  But let’s dwell on the good, which can function as a guide in rebuilding.”

“Some Republicans the past few years have talked of breaking from the two-party system and starting a third.  But that’s not the way to go.  Better to strengthen the system that for more than a century and a half has seen us through a lot of mess.

“In its rough way, the two-party system, even without meaning to, functions as a unifying force:  At the end of the day, for all our differences and arguments, you have to decide if you were a constituency of Team A or Team B.

“The parties, in their rough and inadequate way, had to be alive to your interests.  Things proceeded with a sense, an air, of majority rule.

“Two parties are better for the country, and better for the Democrats. A strong Republican party keeps them on their toes.  One side should stop the other when it goes too far, or boost it when it fails to move.”

But, Noonan adds, the GOP can’t just “keep existing only to own the libs, manipulate the distracted, monetize grievance, and plot revenge against those who spent the past few years on the wrong side.

“As Oscar Hammerstein once said, liberals need conservatives to hold them back and conservatives need liberals to pull them forward.”

Good quote.

My wife, smart person that she is, wishes for a viable third party that would represent her interests, which trend neither right nor left, but hew toward the center.

At the moment, neither party compels her allegiance, nor mine.  And that allegiance would not occur until one existing party or the other appeals to centrists.

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.

Joe Biden was elected, at least in part, because he said he wanted to emphasize bi-partisan action at the federal level.

So far, he has endured almost nothing but criticism from Republicans as he passed a major pandemic relief bill and as he proposed a major “infrastructure” bill – the former with no Republican votes and the latter with no apparent Republican support.

Beneath the surface of the media coverage, several things appear to be true.

• First, Biden is taking initiative to make public policy proposals, which, agree or not, is exactly what the leader of the Executive Branch has the authority to do.
• Second, Congress, especially Republicans are having difficulty responding in ways other than just saying “no,” which, again, is an option for the minority party, but not always the best option.  It would be better if Republicans in Congress recognize the Executive and came up with proposals where middle ground would be possible, assuming, at least initially, that “no” is not always the right answer.  [I add that “no” would be right if the issue boiled down to an ethical or moral prerogative.]
• Third, the Biden Administration is taking the initiative to redefine bi-partisanship.

Put differently, when you get elected as president, you get to make proposals.  I disagreed with many of Donald Trump’s proposals, including the way he talked about them, but he was president and that gave him a platform and a megaphone.

So, now, Biden has the same props.

For the third bullet above, I give credit to the Washington Post and include these excerpts from a story this morning.

“To hear President Biden and his team tell it, a successful bi-partisan bill need not attract a single Republican vote.

“Biden pushed his $1.9 trillion Covid relief bill through the Senate with the support of all 50 Democrats and nary a Republican, yet later declared it a resounding bi-partisan triumph.

“The president and his advisers have also signaled that, while they are planning robust outreach to Republican lawmakers, they are prepared to pass his infrastructure plan on the votes of Democrats alone — and call it a bi-partisan victory.

“’If you looked up ‘bi-partisan’ in the dictionary, I think it would say support from Republicans and Democrats,’ said Anita Dunn, a senior Biden adviser.  ‘It doesn’t say the Republicans have to be in Congress.’

“As the Biden Administration prepares to pursue a broad agenda ranging from infrastructure to immigration to guns, the president and his aides have proffered a definition of bi-partisanship untethered from Washington — pointing to broad public support for many Democratic policies among voters in both parties, as well as Republican governors, mayors and other local officials.

“’Everybody said I had no bi-partisan support,’ Biden said recently in Pittsburgh, referring to the Covid relief package as he unveiled the broad outlines of his infrastructure plan.  ‘The overwhelming bi-partisan support were Republican — registered Republican voters.’”

Now, of course, Congressional Republicans will reject Biden’s definition of bi-partisanship just as they seek to criticize his leadership.

But, for example, on infrastructure, to be taken seriously on the subject, Republicans need a serious response to Biden’s initiative. 

Jennifer Rubin wrote this in the Washington Post last week:

“There is a range of reasonable responses that Republicans could come up with.  But putting forth an unserious, lowball bill with no funding mechanism and without the items Republicans have endorsed in one form or another (e.g., upgrading the electric grids, expanded broadband Internet) will signal that they either cannot produce votes for anything meaningful or that they have not figured out how to be for infrastructure, against deficits and against taxes.

 “…instead of relying on the right-wing talking point that passing the infrastructure package through reconciliation means that Democrats want to stiff the other party, Republicans could also come forward with an alternative that has even minimal support from their party.  While reconciliation would still be needed, they could bring along a handful of Republicans who would have a role in shaping the outcome.  Or do they not even have the votes for that?

“We will know how serious Republicans are when we see a meaningful counteroffer.  Until then, there is no negotiating partner for the White House.”

Presidents get to propose.  Congress gets to dispose.

But the best disposition from Congress – both the majority and minority – is to assess what a president proposes, develop genuine alternatives (not always “no”), and negotiate to find what I like to call the “smart middle ground.”

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 can golf do to sustain interest in the sport as the pandemic eases?

That is a good question as the industry considers this reality:  The pandemic has boosted interest in golf to the highest levels in years, but one of the main reasons, if not the major one, is the pandemic.  As it eases, it will be important to find ways to sustain the momentum.

This is a question that, among other things, will be a topic for the Oregon Golf Association Board of Directors Executive Committee of which I am a member.

In many ways, the challenges are the same ones that have existed for years.  It takes too long to play.  It can be too expensive.  It can appear to be a snooty sport.  Golf rules can be too complicated.  And, many of those who run the sport have not listened well to customers. 

Appearing to ignore customers is a death knell for many businesses.  Or, to put it positively, those who listen well have a better chance to do well.

The Wall Street Journal dealt with this issue in a major story this morning.  Here are selected excerpts under this headline:

People flocked to socially distanced golf courses over the past year. Now the courses are looking for ways to make sure they stay.

“Golf has had a resurgence during the pandemic, with about half a million more players picking up clubs than did in 2019.

“Can it hold on to the growth in a post-pandemic world?

“Golf-course operators are scrambling to make sure it does, as they look for ways to keep the newbies coming back once the country gets closer to normalcy.  They’re aiming to make the game more informal and responsive to newcomers by loosening the dress code, easing some rules of play, and offering shortened rounds.

“They’re also trying to play up the idea of golf as a social occasion or opportunity for exercise rather than just a sport.  And they have to implement all these changes without driving away the longtime golfers they already have.”

The increase in golf interest and playing came at a good time.

The housing collapse and the financial crisis in 2006 adversely affected golf, so much so that the number of rounds played dropped for 13 straight years.

Then came the pandemic.  What the Wall Street Journal calls “cabin fever” prompted many people to consider golf, if only because it involved being outside without many virus restrictions.

More from the Wall Street Journal:

“According to a report put together by the National Golf Foundation, golfers played 502 million rounds last year, the most since 2007. Research firm U.S. Golf Datatech reported a 13.9 per cent increase in rounds played, the largest increase since the company began tracking in 1998.

“Many of new golfers were either new to the game or pulled a dusty old set of clubs out of the closet to start up again.  And the number of non-golfers who say they’re very interested in playing golf has risen to 17 million, up 1.5 million from 2019, the National Golf Foundation says.”

The current question is how to sustain the momentum.  The most important commitment is for industry leaders to pay closer attention than in the past to what customers want.   That has often been a missing ingredient as many veteran leaders come across as if ”they always know best.”

Other options:

• Offer such events as “Nine and Wine,” which means playing a small number of holes, then gathering for wine after the shorter round.

The course where I play most of the time, Illahe Hills Golf and Country Club in Salem, Oregon, has offered a deal where, with friends, you play nine holes, stopping every third hole for food and drink. 

• Give new or returning golfers an informal and friendly chance to get golf instruction, such as, in one case, according to the Wall Street Journal, some new golfers learned half-swings with wedges early on — which naturally pops the ball into the air — so they can succeed at getting the ball off the ground when they play.

More from the Wall Street Journal: 

Tim Schantz, president and CEO of Troon Golf, which manages more than 500 golf properties world-wide, says this:

“We’ve been trying to break down the barriers to entry.  Dress codes, things that come across as more formal or stilted, can be relaxed in a way that’s better for all involved.  At the same time, you don’t want to push people away. There’s a medium in between there, and we want to take the right kinds of steps.”

“For instance, he says, ‘there’s nothing wrong with someone playing six holes carrying their bag and throwing the ball out of the trap instead of hitting it, rather than a traditional style of play, or playing rounds with just one club instead of a whole bagful.”

• Speeding up the game and not making a round take half of a day could also entice more golfers, especially when people are going back to work in their offices and don’t have as much leisure time.
• Another strategy that some courses are adopting:  Appealing to golfers who want exercise,  but don’t want to be encumbered by a heavy bag of clubs.  In some cases, they’re using technology to help implement the idea. During the pandemic, the Tempo Walk, a Roomba-like device that follows along behind golfers and carries their clubs and other gear, has gained popularity.

As with any industry challenge these days, there is no magic answer.  One way to put it:  Find the right balance that keeps the new and returning golfers, while, at the same time, not turning away the established veterans.

To achieve that right balance, it will probably be trial and error for a time.  But the effort is worth it.

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 can golf do to sustain interest in the sport as the pandemic eases?

That is a good question as the industry considers this reality:  The pandemic has boosted interest in golf to the highest levels in years, but one of the main reasons, if not the major one, is the pandemic.  As it eases, it will be important to find ways to sustain the momentum.

This is a question that, among other things, will be a topic for the Oregon Golf Association Board of Directors Executive Committee of which I am a member.

In many ways, the challenges are the same ones that have existed for years.  It takes too long to play.  It can be too expensive.  It can appear to be a snooty sport.  Golf rules can be too complicated.  And, many of those who run the sport have not listened well to customers. 

Appearing to ignore customers is a death knell for many businesses.  Or, to put it positively, those who listen well have a better chance to do well.

The Wall Street Journal dealt with this issue in a major story this morning.  Here are selected excerpts under this headline:

People flocked to socially distanced golf courses over the past year. Now the courses are looking for ways to make sure they stay.

“Golf has had a resurgence during the pandemic, with about half a million more players picking up clubs than did in 2019.

“Can it hold on to the growth in a post-pandemic world?

“Golf-course operators are scrambling to make sure it does, as they look for ways to keep the newbies coming back once the country gets closer to normalcy.  They’re aiming to make the game more informal and responsive to newcomers by loosening the dress code, easing some rules of play, and offering shortened rounds.

“They’re also trying to play up the idea of golf as a social occasion or opportunity for exercise rather than just a sport.  And they have to implement all these changes without driving away the longtime golfers they already have.”

The increase in golf interest and playing came at a good time.

The housing collapse and the financial crisis in 2006 adversely affected golf, so much so that the number of rounds played dropped for 13 straight years.

Then came the pandemic.  What the Wall Street Journal calls “cabin fever” prompted many people to consider golf, if only because it involved being outside without many virus restrictions.

More from the Wall Street Journal:

“According to a report put together by the National Golf Foundation, golfers played 502 million rounds last year, the most since 2007. Research firm U.S. Golf Datatech reported a 13.9 per cent increase in rounds played, the largest increase since the company began tracking in 1998.

“Many of new golfers were either new to the game or pulled a dusty old set of clubs out of the closet to start up again.  And the number of non-golfers who say they’re very interested in playing golf has risen to 17 million, up 1.5 million from 2019, the National Golf Foundation says.”

The current question is how to sustain the momentum.  The most important commitment is for industry leaders to pay closer attention than in the past to what customers want.   That has often been a missing ingredient as many veteran leaders come across as if ”they always know best.”

Other options:

• Offer such events as “Nine and Wine,” which means playing a small number of holes, then gathering for wine after the shorter round.

The course where I play most of the time, Illahe Hills Golf and Country Club in Salem, Oregon, has offered a deal where, with friends, you play nine holes, stopping every third hole for food and drink. 

• Give new or returning golfers an informal and friendly chance to get golf instruction, such as, in one case, according to the Wall Street Journal, some new golfers learned half-swings with wedges early on — which naturally pops the ball into the air — so they can succeed at getting the ball off the ground when they play.

More from the Wall Street Journal: 

Tim Schantz, president and CEO of Troon Golf, which manages more than 500 golf properties world-wide, says this:

“We’ve been trying to break down the barriers to entry.  Dress codes, things that come across as more formal or stilted, can be relaxed in a way that’s better for all involved.  At the same time, you don’t want to push people away. There’s a medium in between there, and we want to take the right kinds of steps.”

“For instance, he says, ‘there’s nothing wrong with someone playing six holes carrying their bag and throwing the ball out of the trap instead of hitting it, rather than a traditional style of play, or playing rounds with just one club instead of a whole bagful.”

• Speeding up the game and not making a round take half of a day could also entice more golfers, especially when people are going back to work in their offices and don’t have as much leisure time.
• Another strategy that some courses are adopting:  Appealing to golfers who want exercise,  but don’t want to be encumbered by a heavy bag of clubs.  In some cases, they’re using technology to help implement the idea. During the pandemic, the Tempo Walk, a Roomba-like device that follows along behind golfers and carries their clubs and other gear, has gained popularity.

As with any industry challenge these days, there is no magic answer.  One way to put it:  Find the right balance that keeps the new and returning golfers, while, at the same time, not turning away the established veterans.

To achieve that right balance, it will probably be trial and error for a time.  But the effort is worth it.

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 question in this blog headline has arisen recently over the Biden Administration’s proposal to spend trillions on “infrastructure.”

Why would I, from the cheap seats out West, choose to write about this subject?  Well, the simple answer is that I find it to be an interesting example of what the federal government is doing as we know it today.  So, for me, that is enough.

I have no argument with the idea of investing more in the country’s roads, rail and bridges.  Too many of those pieces of infrastructure are failing.  Plus, investing in the subject will provide jobs for many Americans — and that also is enough for me. 

The “jobs message” has been an emphasis for Biden and his staff.

But, since the Administration announced its infrastructure investment (or is it a “spending” plan), trouble has cropped up around several corners. 

Enough so that it may be difficult for the Administration to find its way toward a bi-partisan solution, even though in the Washington Post today, Biden said this:

“He was open to compromise with Republicans on how to pay for the approximately $2 trillion jobs and infrastructure package, even as he insisted that inaction was untenable.”

As an aside, that quote is a solid testament to the idea of bi-partisan action.  It is up to any president to propose actions.  It is then up to Congress to dispose of those actions.  But, too often, disposing of executive actions means doing nothing.

In this case, what Republicans ought to do is take Biden at his word.  Move forward on infrastructure development.  Find middle ground on the idea, including how to finance it.  And recognize that infrastructure investments could play well with Republican voters around the country.

But, today, infrastructure is a term that means different things to different people.

For my part, the term would apply to “bricks and mortar” developments such as roads, bridges and the like. 

Not so according to the Biden Administration.  The term covers a huge list of what I would call non-infrastructure proposals, such as:

• A stipulation that none of the $350 million Biden proposed for state governments can be used to finance tax cuts.  In a way, that may make sense, but Washington Post columnist George Will calls it:   “The essence of progressivism’s agenda is to create a government-centered society by increasing government’s control of society’s resources, then distributing those resources in ways that increase the dependency of individuals and social groups on government.”

Perhaps, though it may make no sense for me to counter Will’s perspective because he ranks today as the one of the best analysts of government processes.

• Investments in broadband, energy, manufacturing, wastewater systems, electric cars, housing, school buildings and more also are part of infrastructure.
• An estimated $400 billion would go to expand Medicaid payments for home healthcare – also part of infrastructure.

At base, I have no problem with investments in in-home and personal care because many elderly individuals prefer to stay in their homes for as long as possible.  It’s just that such investments may not be part of infrastructure, so should stand on their own.

Still, in any infrastructure plan, I believe there is room for Democrats and Republicans to find something to like.

It’s just that, at the moment:

• The price tag may be too high.
• The proposed tax increases may be too high.
• The definition of infrastructure may be too broad.

But, if officials of good will and good intent – yes, I believe there be some left – will decide against inaction, there should be a way to find middle ground.

Allow the president to propose and allow Congress to dispose – in the best sense of the definition of both words.  And find something that will benefit all Americans.

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 the realm of often-arcane golf rules, there was another case a week or so ago that underlined how difficult the subject can be.

One of my friends, if read this point, will no doubt ask my why I focus on such a subject.  There is no good answer just as they is no good answer for the question about why Sir Edmund Hillary decided to climb Mt. Everest so many years ago.

His answer:  “Because it’s there.”

That’s my answer, too:  I focus on golf rules “because they are there.”

The new rules issue arose in the World Golf Championship Dell Technologies Match Play tournament for professional golfers, which was held at Austin Country Club in Texas a week or so ago.

There was a match between two players – Dustin Johnson and Kevin Na – who now will no doubt remember the rules issue that arose for a long time, though both have said they hold no grudges.

What happened was this:

• Johnson had about a 10-foot for par on the 12^th hole, but missed by inches.

• Then, he quickly raked the putt,“apparently” not waiting for Na formally to concede the short one.

• Na called him on it, saying that the putt had to be conceded audibly with such words as “it’s good” before Johnson could pick it up.

• Johnson said he thought Na had done so.

The produced a tense exchange at the end of the hole, with both caddies listening intently as Johnson insisted that the putt was so short — the Shot-Link system had it at 13 inches, but it looked even closer — it never crossed his mind that it wouldn’t be conceded by Na.

Still, Johnson tersely apologized and began walking to the next tee.  Na then affirmed that they had halved the whole — or, in other words, that he would not enforce any sort of penalty on Johnson for the quick-rake before a concession.

Of course, that wasn’t the end of it.

After the round, tournament rules officials met with both players and asked them to recount what happened.

Put simply, the officials’ concern was this:  If Johnson picked up the short putt without the concession and, if Na had then said he would not call the penalty, both players could have been disqualified for violating the rules.

Golf rule 3-2(b) specifies that “a concession is only made when it is clearly communicated.”  If the audible concession had not occurred, Johnson would have been at fault.  And, if Na had decided not to try to enforce the penalty, he would have been at fault.

In talking with rules officials, Johnson maintained that he had heard Na concede the putt, and it turned out that officials chose to believe him.  That meant the incident was over; no penalties and no disqualifications.

The headline on the blog calls golf rules arcane.  I even had trouble above recounting what happened.

But, the situation called to my mind what has happened when I have served as a starter at Oregon Golf Association match play tournaments.  On the first tee, after giving general instructions to the players, I always call on a rules official to add to my comments..

Invariably, one of the statements is this:

If you are going to concede a putt (which is within match play rules, not stroke play rules), make sure you do so audibly so everyone can hear it, especially the other player and any referee supervising the match.

If that had occurred in the Johnson-Na case, there would have been no controversy.

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.

As I awoke this morning, the sun was shining here in Southern California.

It was – and is – a fitting way to celebrate Easter morning!

The sun was out. 

The son is risen!

Easter is more than a holiday when there is a scramble, at least among children, to find Easter eggs.  It is more than traditional Easter candy in the store.  It is more than Easter brunches across the land.

Easter is a time to reflect on what God has done to give us a way to have a relationship with Him.  It is time to reflect on the fact that, at a specific time in history, Jesus, God’s son, went to the cross to die an excruciating death, the purpose for which was to pay the penalty for our sins and to give us a way to have a relationship with God and Jesus.

I found these words on-line this morning:

“Today, Christians look back on these events (the death and resurrection of Jesus), not to relive the grief, sadness and morbidity, but to renew our commitment to living on a higher plane, the one Jesus challenged us to live on.

“We recognize the cross as a symbol of God’s love, but historically it was an instrument of torture devised by the Greeks and Romans to prolong the death of those deemed guilty of crimes against the state. “Since Jesus was guilty of no such thing, the cross had to have a higher meaning — one that could hold the hope of humanity.

“Jesus shared its meaning when he said: ‘This is how much God loved the world:  He gave his Son, his one and only Son.  And this is why:  So that no one need be destroyed; by believing in him, anyone can have a whole and lasting life.  God didn’t go to all the trouble of sending his Son merely to point an accusing finger, telling the world how bad it was.  He came to help, to put the world right again.’ (John 3:16-17—The Message Bible).

“Today, the cross is still a symbol of God’s forgiveness. The penalty of our countless sins against God — all kinds of sins — is death … eternal death.  As Jesus hung on the cross, our debt to God was being satisfied.  The cross was God’s way of picking up our tab.  It was His way of saying:  ‘I forgive you.’ The cross was a bridge to God’s forgiveness, and we have been invited to freely walk across it.”

Reflecting on this reality morning, the words of one of my favorite hymns come back to me – and I cite them this morning, just as I did yesterday in a previous blog.

Trying to fathom the distance
Looking out ‘cross the canyon carved by my hands
God is gracious
Sin would still separate us
Were it not for the bridge His grace has made us
His love will carry me

There’s a bridge to cross the great divide
A way was made to reach the other side
The mercy of the Father, cost His son His life
His love is deep, His love is wide
There’s a cross to bridge the great divide
God is faithful
On my own I’m unable
He found me hopeless, alone and sent a Savior
He’s provided a path and promised to guide us
Safely past all the sin that would divide us
His love delivers me

The cross that cost my Lord His life
Has given me mine
There’s a bridge to cross the great divide
There’s a cross to bridge the great divide

Good words, well-used – including the words “bridge,” and “cross.” 

“God provides a bridge across the great divide.  God provides a cross to bridge the great divide.”

On this Easter morning, I hope all of us can go beyond the trappings of another holiday on the calendar and reflect on the true meaning of the day.

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.

Those who know me know that I cannot sing a lick.  I remember the time my late mother-in-law heard me try to sing and she dissolved into gales of laughter.

No wonder.  But that’s not the primary point of this blog.

This next paragraph is.

For me, one of the best ways to focus on the true meaning of Easter – commemorating the fact that Christ rose from the dead – is to think of words from great songs we sing at this time of year.  Not just to think about the lyrics, but also to focus on the true meaning of what Christ accomplished for all of us – and remember those words as you live life.

Easter is more than eggs, candy, and brunch.  It is a time for remembrance and reflection.  The words of the songs below do a far better job than I could of capturing the real meaning of Easter.

Easter would not be complete for me unless this first song was performed in a powerful, upbeat way. This year, however, I’ll be sitting at home for the Easter service on-line as all of us deal with the coronavirus pandemic.  But the words are good enough that they will ring loud and true anyway.

UP FROM THE GRAVE HE AROSE

Low in the grave He lay,
Jesus, my Savior,
Waiting the coming day,
Jesus, my Lord!

Refrain:
Up from the grave He arose,
With a mighty triumph o’er His foes,
He arose a Victor from the dark domain,
And He lives forever, with His saints to reign.
He arose! He arose!
Hallelujah! Christ arose!

Vainly they watch His bed,
Jesus, my Savior;
Vainly they seal the dead,
Jesus, my Lord!

Death cannot keep his Prey,
Jesus, my Savior;
He tore the bars away,
Jesus, my Lord!

As a person who likes words, the next song uses two words “cross” and “bridge” interchangeably, with different definitions, to make the point about what Christ has done for us.

A BRIDGE ACROSS THE GREAT DIVIDE; A CROSS TO BRIDGE THE GREAT DIVIDE

Trying to fathom the distance
Looking out ‘cross the canyon carved by my hands
God is gracious
Sin would still separate us
Were it not for the bridge His grace has made us
His love will carry me

There’s a bridge to cross the great divide
A way was made to reach the other side
The mercy of the Father, cost His son His life
His love is deep, His love is wide
There’s a cross to bridge the great divide

God is faithful
On my own I’m unable
He found me hopeless, alone and sent a Savior
He’s provided a path and promised to guide us
Safely past all the sin that would divide us
His love delivers me

The cross that cost my Lord His life
Has given me mine
There’s a bridge to cross the great divide
There’s a cross to bridge the great divide

Celebrations at Easter are good for the soul and life, especially during this difficult time in our history.  Reflecting on the good words above is one way to focus your mind and remember what Christ did for all of us as he arose, thus confirming a way for us to have a relationship with God if we choose to do so.

So, sing — or think — about the good words of Easter songs as we anticipate Easter tomorrow.

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.

This is one of four departments I run as director with full and complete authority to manage them as I see fit.

There are no employees in any of the departments – the Department of Bits and Pieces (which is open today), the Department of Pet Peeves, the Department of Good Quotes Worth Remembering, and the Department of “Just Saying,” so my authority is individual and unbridled.

So, I now decide that the Department of Bits and Pieces is  open.

 Item #1:  BIDEN VS. TRUMP

It has been tempting for me to be so glad Donald Trump is out of office as president that I give Joe Biden too much room for operating.  There is no question that he has returned a semblance of order and normalcy to the nation’s highest political office.

But he still makes mistakes.

So, it’s good that the Washington Post Fact Checker column is alive and well.

Today, the column points out three consistent Biden mistakes:

• He messes up a comparison of war deaths to pandemic deaths, suggesting that the latter has resulted in more deaths than in
  World War I, World War II, and the Vietnam War combined.  Not true.
• He continues making a misleading claim Trump’s tax cut bill, contending that the benefits of the cut always end up in the pockets of the top 1 per cent of taxpayers.  Not true.
• He critiques Georgia’s new election, contending that it automatically shortens voting place hours to make it harder for persons to vote.  For all of the faults of the Georgia law – there are many – this is not one of them.

Item #2:  BIDEN’S BIG BET

We are just learning what’s contained in Biden’s big “infrastructure and etc.” plan.  It clearly goes beyond infrastructure and, in fact, may only go forward with huge tax increases.

Those tax increases are intended, supposedly, to fall on high wage earners, but it is hard to make that happen for at least two reasons.  First, not all high wage earners are rich folks who fall into the so-called 1 per cent category; in fact, they may be two-wage-earner families.  Second, if tax increases fall on business, it is consumers – you and me – who will pay them.

The Washington’s Post Greg Sargent wrote this about what he called “Biden’s Big Bet:”

“If you read the official summary of President Biden’s new $2 trillion infrastructure package, what’s striking is its air of what you might call forward-looking nostalgia.

“It’s nostalgic in its emphasis on boosting public investment to levels not seen since the prosperous 1960s, and in its faith that vast brick-and-mortar public works will restore national greatness.

“”But it’s forward-looking in its vow to direct such spending toward challenges such as climate change, racial inequities and the needs of the new, multiracial, care-economy-oriented working class.

This points to the big bet embedded in the new plan:  That in this combination lies a kind of kryptonite that will further weaken Trumpism, that amalgam of plutocracy and reactionary authoritarian nationalism, fueled by hallucinatory anti-leftism, that continues to hold large swaths of the opposition in its thrall.”

Not sure if Sargent’s notion is what motivates Biden, but it is an interesting idea as Biden navigates the shoals of a huge public policy debate.

Item #3:  SKEPTICISM VS. CYNICISM

I toyed with writing a separate blog on this issue, but decided to make the point more quickly – a point I adhered to when I worked as a daily newspaper reporter and a lobbyist.

Skepticism works well if you want to listen to perspectives, then form your own opinion without making harsh judgments about someone else’s point of view or motivation.

Cynicism, by contrast, is not as healthy because you tend to believe everyone is just out for self-interest and you don’t give any weight to careful consideration of opposing points of view.

Put simply:  Skepticism is good and productive.  Cynicism is bad and destructive.

When I worked many years ago in state government, one of my bosses frequently told me that cynicism is easy and skepticism is hard.

He was right.