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 three departments I run with a free hand to manage as I see fit.  No one tells me what to do.

So, here goes.

FROM THE WALL STREET JOURNAL:  Editorial writer Allysia Finley wrote about California under this headline:  “Can Michael Shellenberger Beat Gavin Newsom?  The Democrat turned independent candidate for California governor thinks a little common sense can go a long way in the Golden State.”

Here is how she started her piece:

“California Governor Gavin Newsom handily survived a recall election last fall by smearing his Republican opponents as Donald Trump toadies. While the recall didn’t defeat Mr. Newsom, it also didn’t make him politically stronger.

“Frustration with Covid lockdowns has receded, but anger over the state’s myriad other problems—crime, homelessness, lousy schools, high energy and housing costs, and electricity blackouts, among other things—hasn’t waned. Disapproval of Newsom’s job performance, especially among independents, has risen since the recall.

“Enter Michael Shellenberger, 50, a former Democrat running for governor as an independent.  His political evolution resembles the cartoon recently tweeted by Elon Musk —a stationary guy in the center left of the political spectrum finds himself being pulled to the center right as his fellow liberals sprint the other way.

“A self-described ‘eco-modernist,’ Shellenberger has plenty of company in the Golden State.  Most Californians aren’t nearly as liberal as the state’s political class, but Republicans have struggled to win statewide in part because their anti-immigrant rhetoric and cultural conservatism have turned off Hispanics and young people.  Shellenberger is testing whether a political moderate running on quality-of-life issues can break the progressive stranglehold on Sacramento.

“He’s also a bona fide environmentalist.  In 2004, he rose to prominence by co-authoring an essay criticizing the green movement as arrogant and politically insular.  ‘Environmentalism is just another special interest,’ he wrote.  ‘Environmentalists ask not what we can do for non-environmental constituencies but what non-environmental constituencies can do for environmentalists.’”

Comment:  Shellenberger is a breath of fresh air in California, which needs it desperately. 

Newsom and his cronies are driving businesses away, despite the tax revenue they provide to fund government.

It will be interesting to see if an Independent can rise in California and, as different as California and Oregon are from each other, though they share a south border, the race down south could have implications in Oregon.  An Independent is running for governor here, too…Betsy Johnson, who will go directly to the November general election.

ALSO FROM THE WALL STREET JOURNAL:  Republican Senator Rick Scott from Florida asks a good question this week as he writes about abortion:  “Democrats: When Do You Think Life Begins?

He adds:

“Politicians dodge the question, but the scientific answer is clear:  At the moment of conception.

“The Republican position on abortion is based on a fundamental belief that life begins at conception.  It’s a conclusion grounded in faith and values, but also in science.

“We know that unborn babies can feel pain very early.  We know that after six weeks a baby’s heartbeat can be heard in the womb.  Modern sonograms show unborn babies smiling, yawning and sucking their thumbs.

“Put simply, science has revealed that an unborn baby is a human being, and voters agree.  According to recent polling conducted by the National Republican Senatorial Committee, 73 per cent of voters agree that an unborn baby is a human being.”

Comment:  I have tried to avoid commenting on the abortion debate now roiling the country because I don’t think I have much to add.  But this question from Scott strikes me as a good one.  The answer won’t stop the debate, nor does it deal with the intricacies of the subject.  But it is, at least, thought-provoking.

FROM THE WASHINGTON POST:  Editorial writers went on record this week opposing abortion pickets going to the homes of U.S. Supreme Court justices to express their opposition to the possibility of overturning Roe v. Wade.

“To picket a judge’s home is especially problematic.  It tries to bring direct public pressure to bear on a decision-making process that must be controlled, evidence-based and rational if there is to be any hope of an independent judiciary.

“Critics of reversing Roe maintain, defensibly, that to overturn such a long-standing precedent would itself violate core judicial principles.  Yet, if basic social consensus and the rule of law are to be sustained — and if protesters wish to maximize their own persuasiveness — demonstrations against even what many might regard as illegitimate rulings must respect the rights of others.  And they must be lawful.

“A Montgomery County ordinance permits protest marches in residential areas, but bars stationary gatherings, arguably such as those in front of the Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh residences.  A federal law — 18 U.S.C. Section 1507 — prohibits ‘pickets or parades’ at any judge’s residence, ‘with the intent of influencing’ a jurist ‘in the discharge of his duty.’

“These are limited and justifiable restraints on where and how people exercise the right to assembly.  Citizens should voluntarily abide by them, in letter and spirit.  If not, the relevant governments should take appropriate action.”

Comment:  Well, guess what?  The Washington Post agrees with me.  Or, perhaps better said, I agree with the Post. 

There is a time and a place for protests and demonstrations and the place never occurs at the homes of public officials – be then judges on a court, legislators, or Executive Branch officials involved in the reasons the protests. 

Homes and families ought to be sacrosanct.