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 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 a long-time reader of newspapers – I guess I like to get ink on my hands – I rue the day some time ago that the Oregonian newspaper quit writing editorials, at least most of time.

Not because I always agreed with the viewpoints of those who wrote the editorials.  But, rather, because they got me to think.

Last weekend, the Oregonian showed up with an editorial that appeared under this headline:  Legislators’ compromise a win for Oregon.

I agree with the basic thrust of the editorial as it commended a compromise between Democrats and Republicans that allowed the Oregon Senate to get back to business with only a few more days to go until the required end of the session, June 25.

Here is the way the editorial started:

“The agreements that ended the Republican-led walkout at the Oregon Legislature won’t please the ideological purists or the one-issue voters who equate compromise with betrayal.

“But for the millions of Oregonians who live with compromise as a reality of daily life, the re-start of the legislative session is an enormous relief. Oregonians need legislation that helps provide more housing and removes barriers to construction.  They need behavioral health investments that answer the urgency of the mental health and addiction crises playing out across the state.  They need reforms to Oregon’s broken public defense system to ensure representation for those charged with crimes.  And they need the Legislature to act this session ­– not wait for next year’s.”

Democrats, the writers said, made the right call to compromise on abortion and gun-safety bills to allow time address numerous emergencies facing Oregonians.

“Oregon is already among the most liberal states in the country on ensuring abortion access and has adopted several laws in recent years that help reduce gun violence.  And, while Democrats hold majorities in both chambers of the Legislature, they need enough Republican or Independent legislators to attend Senate floor sessions to meet the constitutionally required two-thirds minimum of legislators to vote on bills.”

The editorial contended that legislators cannot keep playing “a game of chicken,” where Oregonians are the ones who end up caught in the collision of agendas, left and right.

So, the newspaper suggested that the best option was reducing the minimum for a quorum in the House or the Senate.

That may sound good, but it would require another vote by the people to achieve the objective.

So, how about this?  My view is that the best ways to avoid further legislative walkouts are to:

• Expect Democrats and Republicans to find a way to work together rather than hew only to the left or the right.  That’s why we elected them – to represent us in Salem.
• Expect them to accept that compromise is a useful vehicle to achieve results because the best solutions often lie in the middle, not either extreme.
• Expect Democrats who are now in charge and are likely to remain so in the near future to find a way to deal directly and authentically with Republicans.  That will require two things:  First, finding out more about rural Oregon (because Republicans represent that area of the state) and, second, once they find out, care about rural perspectives.
• Expect Republicans to play the role of a genuine minority, recognizing that they are not in charge and, therefore, will have to settle on occasion for what the majority wants.

Easier said than done.

Unfortunately, it’s unclear whether some legislators in Salem will ever get behind the idea of compromise.  Several Republican and Independent senators failed to show up for the floor session last Friday.  While they may already be disqualified from running for re-election under Measure 113, it is possible that a few of them don’t care.

Or, they intend to rely on courts to overturn the voter-passed “walkout prevention” law on the basis that, if nothing else, it is confusing.

The Oregonian continues:

“Oregon used to pride itself on leaders’ ability to find solutions through bi-partisan pragmatism.  But we’ve moved away from the ‘Oregon Way’ to a legislative philosophy that might makes right.  

“Certainly, the majority – whether Democratic or Republican – has the power to do as it pleases.  But Oregon’s civic health, frayed from divisive national politics, disinformation campaigns and mistrust among fellow Oregonians, needs a more magnanimous strategy that seeks to pull people into the circle rather than pummel an agenda through.”

Agreed.

As a retired lobbyist who held that title for about 40 years, I am just glad I am no longer involved in the legislative process. 

I hope it improves – or, perhaps better put – goes back to the old way of doing things when compromise was not a dirty word.