Perspective from the 19^th Hole 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.

One of my favorite golf magazines – Links – came up this month with a good story, citing 10 golf rules that it said should be changed.

I didn’t agree with all its recommendations, but, for one, a solid yes.

This:  “Relief from Divots/The Rules of Golf grant relief from many kinds of abnormal ground conditions — including by way of Rule 13.1c(2), which allows a player to repair ball marks and spike marks on putting surfaces.

From Links:  “The rules look to strike a balance between the longstanding tradition of playing the ball ‘as it lies’ and fairness, and in the case of this rule, they indicate that on greens, such relief is warranted.  But no such relief is offered in the case of a ball coming to rest in a divot, which is manifestly inconsistent.”

My vote – again a solid yes.

It is a condition – the unlucky bounce that, even for a good drive, ends up in a divot – always strikes me as patently unfair.  So change it.

One other major rule change for me is this:  Re-write Rule 12, which makes a number of ill-conceived comments about permitted actions in bunkers.  One of these, incredibly, says it is “allowable to strike the sand in anger and frustration.”

Say what? 

If a golfer did this in Oregon Golf Association sponsored events where I often volunteer, he or she would get a “code of conduct” penalty.

There is absolutely no reason for this to be included in the Rules of Golf.

Drawing on the Links Magazine article, I list below all the rules it advocates changing – but just by title without all the detail.  And, then I add my agreement or disagreement.

1. Limit of 14 Clubs/the magazine wants to allow as many or as few as a player wants:  Disagree. 

2. Relief from Divots:  Agree.

3. Relief in Bunkers…if your golf ball is in areas not previously raked:  Agree.

4. Stroke and Distance Penalty for Loss of Ball or Ball Hit Out of Bounds:  Disagree.

5. Three-Minute Time Limit to Find a Lost Ball…by adding more time:  Disagree.

6. Ball Embedded by Someone Stepping on It:  Agree.

7. Interference from Boundary Objects…if your ball comes to rest in bounds but in a position where the boundary fence interferes with your stance or swing, there is no relief, but it should be granted:  Agree.

8. Use of Distance-Measuring Devices – allow them:  Agree (though I don’t know that allowing such devices would necessarily speed up play).

9. Rules for Relief from Penalty Areas…to provide consistency:  Agree

10. Pace of Play Rule:  Either throw this out or enforce it…I vote for the latter.

There it is.  Enough.  With that, I am heading out to play golf…again.