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.

Impressive.

Relational.

Solid advice for new professionals.

Positive for Portland.

Those are phrases I came away with yesterday after attending what was called “A 40 under 40” event in Portland sponsored by the Portland Business Journal.

In what has become a long-standing annual event, forty young professionals in the Portland area were honored for their professional achievements in what is a big-time event.

The hotel room was packed; more than 500 people were in attendance.

I, an old person (wishing for an “80 under 80” event), was there to honor a former lobbying associate of mine, Elizabeth Remley, who went on from my firm to join another major lobbying firm, Thorn Run, where she rose quickly to become a partner in a company with offices in Portland and Washington, D.C.

If I can be a bit immodest for a moment, I think one of the best achievements in my 25-year lobbying career was mentoring several associates to go on to bigger and better things.

Elizabeth Remley is chief among them.

Again, baring modesty, here is what she said about her service with me and our company, in a special edition of the Portland Business Journal, that was provided to all who attended the event.

“Fresh out of college, I was a precocious, opinionated millennial, and my first boss Dave Fiskum was old school in every sense.  Still, Dave included me in his work from the beginning.  He showed me what to do, but he let me figure out how to do it my way.”

Well, I appreciate the accolade, but “old school?”  Not so much, I would say, but rather “middle school.”

Still, providing a way for Elizabeth to learn the craft of lobbying stands as one of my achievements.

After the event, I came away with a few perceptions beyond those words I used to open this blog:

• While Portland has earned a bit of a negative perception in recent years, (including for various mistakes by Portland city government), the awards for “40 under 40” indicate that new professionals are alive and well in the Rose City.

• Will this change Portland for the better?  Who knows?  Only time will tell, but it remains a solid start.

• One of the 40 honorees said the good news about event was that many of the honored 40 know each other and are working together to build a better Portland.  That includes, not just in their own business, but in a variety of charities, some of which they started.

• The honored 40 represented both genders, many nationalities, diversity and age – all under 40.  However, yesterday was Elizabeth’s 40-year birthday, which prompted her to say from the stage as she got her award, “I would no longer qualify for this.”

For me, this event was another example of “trying to look on the bright side.” 

Not with rose-colored glasses, but determination of see new, positive stuff.  As a political junkie, I focus a lot on the current state of politics in this country and that often leaves me feeling uneasy and disjointed.

Yesterday changed my outlook.

Congratulations Elizabeth!

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.

Impressive.

Relational.

Solid advice for new professionals.

Positive for Portland.

Those are phrases I came away with yesterday after attending what was called “A 40 under 40” event in Portland sponsored by the Portland Business Journal.

In what has become a long-standing annual event, forty young professionals in the Portland area were honored for their professional achievements in what is a big-time event.

The hotel room was packed; more than 500 people were in attendance.

I, an old person (wishing for an “80 under 80” event), was there to honor a former lobbying associate of mine, Elizabeth Remley, who went on from my firm to join another major lobbying firm, Thorn Run, where she rose quickly to become a partner in a company with offices in Portland and Washington, D.C.

If I can be a bit immodest for a moment, I think one of the best achievements in my 25-year lobbying career was mentoring several associates to go on to bigger and better things.

Elizabeth Remley is chief among them.

Again, baring modesty, here is what she said about her service with me and our company, in a special edition of the Portland Business Journal, that was provided to all who attended the event.

“Fresh out of college, I was a precocious, opinionated millennial, and my first boss Dave Fiskum was old school in every sense.  Still, Dave included me in his work from the beginning.  He showed me what to do, but he let me figure out how to do it my way.”

Well, I appreciate the accolade, but “old school?”  Not so much, I would say, but rather “middle school.”

Still, providing a way for Elizabeth to learn the craft of lobbying stands as one of my achievements.

After the event, I came away with a few perceptions beyond those words I used to open this blog:

• While Portland has earned a bit of a negative perception in recent years, (including for various mistakes by Portland city government), the awards for “40 under 40” indicate that new professionals are alive and well in the Rose City.

• Will this change Portland for the better?  Who knows?  Only time will tell, but it remains a solid start.

• One of the 40 honorees said the good news about event was that many of the honored 40 know each other and are working together to build a better Portland.  That includes, not just in their own business, but in a variety of charities, some of which they started.

• The honored 40 represented both genders, many nationalities, diversity and age – all under 40.  However, yesterday was Elizabeth’s 40-year birthday, which prompted her to say from the stage as she got her award, “I would no longer qualify for this.”

For me, this event was another example of “trying to look on the bright side.” 

Not with rose-colored glasses, but determination of see new, positive stuff.  As a political junkie, I focus a lot on the current state of politics in this country and that often leaves me feeling uneasy and disjointed.

Yesterday changed my outlook.

Congratulations Elizabeth!

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.

The latest national news reports suggest that President Joe Biden appears to have been successful in shunning those who say he should leave the race.

The situation is volatile enough that things could change, as has occurred several times since the president’s disastrous debate against Donald Trump.

On one day, Biden says there is no way he is leaving the race.  On another day, more Democrat leaders ask him to get out, including one of Oregon’s members of the U.S. House, Earl Blumenauer, a 30-year veteran of that place.

It is not possible to tell if new defections will deter Biden from running.

Meanwhile, the to’ing and fro’ing among Democrats works to the advantage of Trump, the dedicated liar who appears to believe falsehoods will work to his advantage.  I, for one, think he should leave the race, too.  No doubt he disagrees.

If Biden stays in the race, what should he try to do to pull victory from the jaws of defeat?

Well, there is no easy answer, but Washington Post contributing columnist Matt Bai posited an approach in his most recent piece.

Besides being a good writer, Bai used his column to look forward, not backward.  Here is how his effort started under this headline:  “Here’s how Biden should campaign for president now.”

And here are early paragraphs: 

Error! Filename not specified.

“In a letter to congressional Democrats, Biden made clear that, if they wanted to get him off the ticket in the wake of last month’s calamitous debate, they were going to have to build a time machine and go back to the primaries.  For the moment, at least, Biden isn’t going anywhere.

“So what kind of campaign should he run now?

“If I were advising Biden, I’d tell him there’s a persuasive way to embody the future, as all candidates must.  He should run as an elder statesman with one last, critical service to render to his country, aside from keeping Trump out of the White House — which is to turn the government over, at long last, to a cohort of leaders that doesn’t remember the moon landing.

“This time, Biden should offer himself up not as a bridge to the next generation but as an off-ramp, finally, for the boomers.”

“…the smart thing (for Biden) would be to propose a transformational vision of the next four years that doesn’t rely on his ability to work past 8 o’clock at night.

“Biden should start with the convention.  No more doddering lawmakers, no more former presidents gone gray, and — for the love of God — no more Kennedys.  Stack the prime-time lineup with lesser-known governors and mayors, with younger members of Congress and the Cabinet.  Cast yourself as a grandfatherly figure, a ‘presider in chief’ gathering up the best young talent you can find.

“Bring Harris front and center, more like a partner than a subordinate. Reassure people that if you’re not around for some reason, your replacement will be ready to go, whether she’s everyone’s top choice or not.

“Then, instead of waiting for the post-election period to build a Cabinet for the second term, start rolling out major appointments during the fall campaign, with the clear message that these new appointees will operate with unusual independence.

“Why not move Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo to chief of staff, or Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg to secretary of state?   How about bringing in two or three governors — Gretchen Whitmer, Gavin Newsom, Wes Moore — who might run to replace you?”

If this was the approach, no doubt Republicans would howl that Biden was running to be a figure head, not just a real president.

“But I’m guessing,” Bai adds, “that most independent voters would take a kindly figurehead who empowers smart, younger leaders over a volatile narcissist who’s hellbent on delivering retribution.  And they’re not going to believe Biden is fully in charge, anyway, so he might as well get credit for being the one guy in the race who’s telling the truth.

Interesting ideas from Bai, but would they work? 

Who knows?  But better to try something new rather than to stay a very uncertain course that threatens to give the presidency to Trump.

So, to buttress Bai’s argument, I end with this quote attributed years ago to Napoleon, which speaks to Trump’s current strategy (if it ever is appropriate to suggest that Trump has a strategy for anything):

“Never interrupt your enemy while he’s in the process of destroying himself.”

That’s what he is doing, so it’s time for Democrats to get their act together.

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.

New York Times editorial writers got it right yesterday when they said:

“The Democrat Party Must Speak the Plain Truth to the President.”

By plain truth, the writers indicated that they thought President Biden should get out of the race for the good of the country.

Though my position won’t matter one whit, it’s the same:  It is time for Biden to exit the office in what I would call an act of statesmanship if he were to do it.

Truth be told, if he runs, I will vote for him because I refuse to vote for Donald Trump for anything.  But, however I vote, I think Biden will lose. 

Here is how the NY Times editorial began:

“For voters who held out hope that President Biden’s failure to communicate during last month’s debate was an aberration, the intervening days have offered little comfort.

“Donald Trump’s candidacy for a second term poses a grave threat to American democracy.  Biden, instead of campaigning vigorously to disprove doubts and demonstrate that he can beat Trump, has maintained a scripted and controlled schedule of public appearances.

“He has largely avoided taking questions from voters or journalists — the kinds of interactions that reveal his limitations and caused him so much trouble on the debate stage.  And when he has cast aside his teleprompter, most notably during a 22-minute interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos on Friday, he has continued to appear as a man in decline.”

The Times put it very forcefully:

“The president, elected in 2020 as an antidote to Trump’s malfeasance and mendacity, is now trying to defy reality.”

So, the Times joins other credible journalism outfits – the Washington Post, for one – in advocating that Biden step aside.

Further, he list of Biden failures is growing, no matter what he tries to do each day.

As the Times analyses the situation:

“Since his feeble debate performance, multiple polls have shown that both Biden’s approval rating and his chance of beating Trump have markedly dropped from their already shaky levels.

“In response, he has adopted a favorite theme of the floundering politician, insisting that the polls are wrong in showing that his presidency is historically unpopular.  Even if the polls were off by historic amounts, they would still show overwhelming skepticism about his fitness.”

Biden has denied that age is diminishing his abilities, not even bringing up the subject in a lengthy letter to congressional Democrats.  In that letter, The Times added, “he insisted that he is the candidate best equipped to defeat Trump in November — thereby dismissing the potential candidacy of Vice President Kamala Harris or any other younger, more vigorous Democrat, and in effect asking the American people to trust him instead of their own lying eyes.”

The Times posits that those who lead the Democrat party should meet with Biden “as one group” and demand that he resign.

My sense is that such a ploy won’t work.  It will just solidify Biden’s intent to stay in office.

I think the only person who can convince Biden to step down is his wife, Jill. So far, she has been leading charge to convince him to stay.

I’ll give columnist William Galston from the Wall Street Journal the last word this morning.

“It’s not hard to understand why Biden is resisting leaving. He sought the presidency for more than three decades before finally attaining it.  Giving it up would be hard for any president, let alone one with his history.  

“It would also mean accepting a reality that no one his age wants to face — that he’s no longer capable of doing the job he loves.  He’s proud of his record, but what matters most is the next four years, not the past four.

“For the good of the country, those Joe Biden trusts most must persuade him to look squarely at the evidence — the medical indications and the political facts.

“The point of the debate with Donald Trump was to dispel doubts about the president’s fitness to serve and turn public opinion against his opponent.  The reverse happened.  Trump gets to stand on the sidelines while the public watches the president and his party flail.”

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.

It’s hard to read news articles these days without seeing more information about whether President Joe Biden should run again or not.

Every day, it seems more political figures among Democrats are saying “he shouldn’t run again,” even as he vows strongly to stay in the race come what may.

Still, in the midst of all this, I appreciated the chance to read a new column by New York Times writer Frank Bruni.  He asked a good question as he pondered the fact of voting for president this time around:

• One is a convicted felon who doesn’t respect the rule of law who won’t step back for the good of the country.
• The other is a doddering old man who won’t depart the race for the good of the country.

Bruni saves his most vehement ardor for the felon, Donald Trump.  His column appeared under this headline:  “Impeachments, bankruptcies, fraud judgments, felonies.  Nothing sticks.”

Here is how Bruni started his column:

“We tell children — or at least we used to — that actions have consequences.  What goes around comes around.  Watch your behavior.  You’ll answer for it someday.

“Donald Trump is the living, lying contradiction of that.

“He answers for nothing.  He’s accountable to no one.

“You thought that changed with a Manhattan jury’s verdict five weeks ago?  With ‘guilty’ on all 34 counts?  How adorable.  That only bound most of his supporters even closer to him.  Only amplified the theatrical ardor with which Republican politicians pledged their devotion.  Only increased donations to his presidential campaign.”

While voters turned down Trump the last time around, he simply pretended it hadn’t happened.  Remember, he won the last election and asked his supporters to spread violence to make his convoluted and dishonest case.

More from Bruni:

“Trump invented dark conspiracies and embroidered wild fantasies to turn defeat — by seven million votes, no less — into supposed victory.  Into full-blown martyrdom.  He cried ‘rigged,’ he cried stolen,’ he stood by as a mob stormed the Capitol and stood mute as it chanted for his vice president to be hanged.

“For that ethical savagery the members of his political party lined up dutifully behind him once again.  David Koresh never knew loyalty like this.”  [Remember Koresh?  He was the fake prophet who led others to defeat at the Waco Compound.]

Of Trump, Bruni says he has made a career of evasion.

“No, he has made a legend of it.  And while there’s a kind of smarts and a sort of skill in that, it owes more to luck than to brilliance.  It owes the most to the perverse freedom that comes with a total lack of conscience — with the readiness to stoke people’s darkest fears and cruelest impulses, to shrug at the damage done, to bilk charities, to run a sham university, to tell little lies, to tell big ones, to place self-promotion and self-preservation so far above everything else that they’re not so much his guiding values as his only ones.”

Bruni worries that Trump will win the election, especially as Biden continues to falter.  So do I.

If Trump wins, the America we know could very well disappear.

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.

Those who know me know the fact in this blog headline:

Royal Dornoch in the north of Scotland is one of my favorite golf courses in the world. 

An overstatement, perhaps, because I have played all the courses in the world, but there is broad agreement that Royal Dornoch ranks near the top.

On the wall near my desk, is a flag from the course, given to me by a great friend who knows where Royal Dornoch stands in my mind and heart.

So it was that I read a story in Links Magazine that appeared under this headline:    Great Courses of Britain & Ireland: Royal Dornoch Golf Club.

The story by Nick Edmund recounts what he called “the history and mystique distinguish the most natural links in the world.”

I reprint it here as an ode to Royal Dornoch where I have had the privilege of playing three times in my life and would do so again if I had the chance.

*********

Dornoch is a supernatural place.  It was here in the 18th century that Janet Horne, “the last witch in Scotland,” was summarily executed.  Ever since, Royal Dornoch has cast a spell over golfers.

Situated in the far north of Scotland, Dornoch is 600 miles from London and, at 58 degrees north, a similar latitude as Hudson Bay in Canada. Remote it may be, but this didn’t deter Messrs Vardon, Braid, and Taylor from traveling there in the early years of the 20th century, nor the great Joyce Wethered, who made regular trips from the south of England.

In more recent times, Jack Nicklaus, Tom Watson, Greg Norman, and Ben Crenshaw have all embarked on this irresistible pilgrimage.

So, what is it that makes Royal Dornoch so alluring?

First, there is the sublime setting.  Bordered by the Dornoch Firth and, for its entire length, by a beautiful sweep of pristine white sand, mountains and hills fill the horizon and create the illusion that golf is being performed on a giant stage.  

Much of the links is blanketed in gorse, which, when it flowers in late spring, turns the golf canvas from green to gold, a glorious sight.

Then there is Dornoch’s rich history.  It is the third oldest links in the world, with records suggesting the game has been played here since 1616.

The first formal club was established in 1877 when a rudimentary 9-hole course existed.  In 1886, Old Tom Morris was invited to lay out “nine proper golf holes” and, three years later, a full 18.  Old Tom brilliantly used the wealth of natural features and, notwithstanding subsequent revisions, it is he who deserves the acclaim for discovering the links’ infinite possibilities.

Another famous local figure was Donald Ross.  Born in Dornoch in 1872, as a young man he moved to St. Andrews to become one of Old Tom’s assistants.  In 1895, Ross returned to Dornoch to serve as head greenkeeper; yet, in less than four years he was off again, this time to conquer America.  Pinehurst No. 2 is often cited as Ross’s architectural masterpiece, and his memories of Dornoch were its prime inspiration.

A third compelling, never mind captivating, attraction is the quality and character of the golf itself.

Royal Dornoch is widely regarded as the most natural links in the world. Renowned for its large, ingeniously contoured greens, many of which sit on natural plateaus, the course flows seamlessly from tee to green to tee.

On first impression, it appears to have a traditional out-and-back layout, but, in fact, the routing is more S-shaped and, unusually, occupies two distinct levels.  In broad terms, you head out along, and occasionally in the lee of, an upper level and return on a lower level adjacent to the shore.

The visually dramatic run of holes between the 3rd and 6th is often hailed as one of golf’s finest sequences, and yet it is the back nine that includes a collection that truly identifies Dornoch.  

Between the 9th and 15th, you rarely move far from the shoreline as you weave in and out of the dunes, the direction and strength of the wind invariably determining your strategy.  Each hole is a classic, although the best known is probably “Foxy,” the bunkerless, extraordinarily double-doglegging, par-four 14th.

The uphill 16th is perhaps the only pedestrian hole at Dornoch, but then comes the wonderfully cavalier down-and-up 17th, with its mischievous bunker set into a heathery ridge 50 yards short of a wildly undulating green.

Finally, a formidable two-shotter leads you back to the clubhouse, where yet more enchantment warmly awaits.

*********

So, another trip to Dornoch for me?  Perhaps not.  But it always helps to dream.

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.

Should Joe Biden get out as he runs for president?

Given his terrible performance in the recent debate, many are saying the answer should be “yes.”

I say that, too, though, today Biden is facing several tests as he works to sustain his election.  For one thing, he’ll be interviewed by George Stephanopoulos from ABC News and, for the interview, Biden will have to proceed without notes.

But, if Biden fails this and other tests, just as did in the debate against Trunmp, then what?

If Biden leaves, the only person who might be able to run against Donald Trump is Kamala Harris, Biden’s vice president, and her polling is almost as low as Biden’s.

It strikes me, from my post far from the action here in the West, that here is no real option other than Harris, in part because other contenders probably would not risk trying to run a national campaign in only a few months, with no foundation leading up to running. 

Plus, many of the so-called contenders would not want to risk losing, thus tainting their future ambitions.

So, consider this editorial from the Washington Post.  Writers there pretended to be Biden as he delivered a July 4^th speech, among other things, to get out of the race as he touted America.

It would be statesmanlike act that would reflect positively on his legacy.

Here is the full text of the Post’s editorial.

**********

What if Biden spoke these words?

A Fourth of July speech on kings, independence and American resilience.

My Fellow Americans,

Today, we celebrate not just the birth of our nation but the life it has lived.

How have we lasted this long?  How have we endured, grown, prospered?  Our extraordinary framers were steered by a revolutionary premise:  Our union would never be perfect.  We would not be governed by an all-powerful king or sovereign.  We would always be a work in progress as a nation and as individuals.  Each generation would build on the efforts of its predecessors.  This was essential for an enduring republic.

The framers were shaped by hardship — they carried out a revolution at the edge of a wild frontier.  They knew there are seasons to a life — and seasons of service.  They knew, too, that relying on a single individual, a king, might create the illusion of strength but would be at its core fragile.

Over the past few days, I have been reflecting on all this.  My season of service is nearing its close.  This was a hard truth to face.  But it is the natural course of things — as evident as the progression from spring to summer, from fall to winter.

This is why I have decided to withdraw from the campaign for president of the United States.

This moment echoes one George Washington faced as he approached the end of his second term.  Fear of instability and of the unknown, of who would come next, counseled against risking a premature departure.  John Adams was pugnacious.  Thomas Jefferson was radical.  But Washington stood aside, though the Constitution at the time did not require it.

He looked past ambition and self-regard to what the nation needed most at that moment, declaring through his actions that the United States would not depend on one indispensable man.  Power would be transferred regularly and peacefully.

A large part of me still wants to stay in the fight.  But, at this moment, the nation needs something I cannot provide:  A leader with the energy to run a vigorous campaign and then to work for America, at all hours, for the next four years.

I’ve often spoken about how I began my career in public service as a senator at age 30.  During this time, I have seen the end of the Cold War, the invention of the internet and more; in so many ways, unimaginable scientific and social breakthroughs have become real.  

I have also witnessed the sharpening of partisan divisions and the coarsening of our nation’s politics.

These regrettable trends did not start with Donald Trump.  But the former president has exploited and exacerbated them, encouraging Americans to diminish their fellow Americans, even to rise against our democracy, as they did on January  6, 2021.

Trump’s unique danger lies in his claim that only he can lead the nation.  I will not make the same mistake.  Nor will I do anything that would ease his return to power.  Staying in the race could do just that.

The question on American minds when Washington stepped aside was:  What now?  I owe Americans an answer to that question, too.  The Democrat National Committee, senior Democrat leaders and I have agreed on an orderly process to select our next nominee, which will include debates between now and our convention in August.

My vice president, Kamala Harris, has graciously and courageously agreed to participate.  Though Democrat primary voters cannot be included at this late date, their delegates will make the final choice.

Between now and November, I will do all I can to support the next Democratic nominee — and to encourage Americans to rediscover the optimism and energetic spirit that built this nation. Last week, Trump described a country in deep and unprecedented crisis.  His story of America was fiction.  This is not the country I see.

Four years ago, the pandemic was raging.  More than 10 million Americans were out of work.  Many businesses and schools were closed.  People were exhausted by Trump’s chaos.

Today, our economy is the envy of the world, thanks to 15 million new jobs, extraordinarily low unemployment and a start-up boom.  Record numbers of Americans have health insurance, and we have made historic investments in our infrastructure and in the fight against climate change.  Our allies respect us again, as we have rallied the free world against Russian aggression.

Americans, I invite you to search your soul as I have.  Are we so unsure of ourselves that we will empower a would-be king, one who has been given expansive powers by an activist Supreme Court?

Or will we look back on Washington’s example, in the spring of American life, and recognize that our independence is built on service, sacrifice, a willingness to assume the best in one another and the belief there will be better seasons to come?

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.

As I write this, it is the morning of July 4^th and we should be celebrating America.

Instead, at least if we allow ourselves to follow today’s news, we are dealing with two realities – Joe Biden is too old to serve as president and Donald Trump is too insane and addled to take the nation’s top political job.

It appears that we may stuck with too bad options, though, as I have said before, if that remains as the choice, I’ll go with Biden.  Better to have an old person than a felon (Trump).

One of Trump’s main messages grates on me every time I hear it:  Immigration is bad for the country.

It’s  just not true.  But, that can be said about almost anything Trump says – truth is not an arbiter.

I have written about this before, suggesting that, in a way, all of us are immigrants.  Either our forebears came from another country to America, or we did.

Trump, too.

Then, yesterday, I read a story in the Wall Street Journal touting immigration as being one of the factors behind a strong U.S. economy.

Here are excerpts:

“The most economically important part of the presidential debate was a leitmotif — and at times, a heavy motif — throughout the evening:  immigration.

“While Donald Trump made many false remarks throughout the debate, he spoke a grain of truth when he said of his opponent that ‘the only jobs he created are for illegal immigrants and bounce-back jobs that bounced back from the Covid.’ 

“The employment level for native-born workers is indeed below its pre-pandemic level, while foreign-born workers have accounted for all employment gains.  But contrary to Trump’s contention, that’s a strong argument for, rather than against, immigration.

“The U.S. population is aging, and millions of baby boomers retire each year.  We can expect that absent immigration, we would have a decreasing working-age population and shrinking employment for decades to come — especially considering the low fertility rate.  This is already happening in Japan and will soon happen in many European countries.

“Meantime, millions of jobs have been added for foreign-born workers since 2019.  The majority of these immigrants were in the U.S. prior to Covid, but another roughly 10 million have arrived since then, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

“These newly arrived immigrants are the main reason the U.S. economy has defied pessimistic forecasts, with 200,000 jobs added a month, real growth in gross domestic product at 3 per cent in the past year, and an inflation rate that has fallen dramatically in the past few years.  The biggest factor behind this strong economic performance is immigration.”

For me, this reality is not the major reason to support immigration, though it is important to understand this reality.

Two other factors for me:

• First, we should recognize simply this – immigrants are people and, as people, they don’t deserve to be pilloried.
• Second, those who lead our government in Washington, D.C., both in the Executive and Legislative Branches, should get their act together by agreeing on an approach to stem the tide of illegal immigration.  Tough.  Worth doing.

So, on this 4^th of July, let’s rally around America, celebrate good things happening all around us – not just negative stuff which garners more media headlines.  And recognize immigrants as “real people.”

Happy 4^th!

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.

If you want to understand the “pace of play” problem in golf, just look at the professional golf tours.

It takes players hours to complete an 18-hole round which should take about four hours.  On the professional tours?  More like six hours.

Apple News showed up this week with a major story on the subject, calling it “a major problem.”

I agree.

When pro golfers go slow, often agonizingly slow, it’s tough to watch – and I say that as a dedicated fan of the game I love.

For example:

• As good as he is, it’s hard to watch Patrick Cantlay get ready to play or take a stroke, especially a putt.

• Keagan Bradley dances around over a shot far too long.

• J. B. Holmes plays agonizingly slow, so much so that other players don’t even want to be paired with him.

The official golf rule book deals with the subject.  Here’s how:

“Other than on the putting green, the timing of a player’s stroke will begin when it is his or her turn to play and he or she can play without interference or distraction.  Time spent determining yardage and other conditions (such as wind) will count as time taken for the next stroke.

“On the putting green, the actions allowed under Rule 13.1 are not included in the timing of a player’s stroke, provided the player is not unreasonably delaying play.  However, time spent surveying the line of play from any angle will count as time taken for the stroke.

“A player is permitted a maximum of 40 seconds to play a stroke.  (Note:  This 40-second time limit includes the first player to play from the teeing ground, fairway, or near or on the putting green.)

“A player is considered to have made a bad time only when the player exceeds 40 seconds, plus an additional 10 per cent timing margin.”

There. 

Just consider this rule as you watch pro golf next time.  Hardly anyone – other than perhaps Scott Scheffler – lives within the 40-50 second time limit. 

And, guess what?  There have been no penalties for slow play.  Zero!

After all this, I have an easy solution.

Do what the European Tour did a few years ago:  As it did, call it a “Pace of Play Tournament.”

Position a golf cart on every hole following every group of players.  Have a shot clock positioned on the cart.  Time every player when they get to their golf ball and are ready to play – or at least they should be.

If the pace exceeds the allowable – 40 seconds, with a 10 second “timing margin” – issue a warning.  For the second violation, impose a one-stroke penalty.  A third violation earns disqualification.

If pro basketball and football can impose shot clocks, with all of their temperamental stars, golf could do the same.

If done, this would be tough for many tour players.  But, I say, so what.  Overall, faster play has every chance to result in better play.

Down in the California desert where I play in the winter at The Palms Golf Course, the time allowed for an 18-hole round is 3 hours and 40 minutes.  Of course, to state the obvious, those of us who play there are not pro golfers, with so much money on the line, but as a relatively competent amateurs, my friends and I have been proving that faster play works – and is good for the game. .

My fond hope is that those who lead pro golf will get play to move along faster.

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.

The U.S. Supreme Court made headlines yesterday when it ruled on a key issue facing all Americans – presidential immunity.

What to make of the ruling?

Well, there are at least two views and, of course, many others between those two.

• The decision allows a president – one like Donald Trump – to do anything he wants as “king.”
• The decision enables a president to act as he or she should be able to act without fear of every presidential decision to be questioned legally.

Which?

So, to get more information the two views, I went again to two editorials – one from the Wall Street Journal and one from the Washington Post.  As always, these two views help me understand what may be at stake in this momentous decision – one from the near right, the Wall Street Journal, and one from the near the left, the Washington Posst.

Before the detail, the ruling was written by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts who said:  “A president inclined to take one course of action based on the public interest may instead opt for another, apprehensive that criminal penalties may befall him upon his departure from office.”

On another hand, Justice Justice Sonia Sotomayor writes:  “The relationship between the president and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably.  In every use of official power, the president is now a king above the law,” even she added, in what I hope is an overstatement, a president could assassinate one of his rivals.

Enough from me.  Here are excerpts of the two editorials.

FROM THE WALL STREET JOURNAL:  The headline — The Supreme Court Protects the Presidency in Trump v. U.S.

A 6-3 majority rules that presidents have ‘presumptive immunity’ from criminal prosecution for their official acts.

Partisans on the left and right are reacting to Monday’s Supreme Court decision on presidential immunity based on how it affects the fate of  Donald Trump. That’s a blinkered view that ignores the long-run implications for the American republic.  The 6-3 Court majority rightly focuses on the institution of the Presidency, and the ability of all Presidents—not merely the last one—to act in the national interest free from prosecution for official acts.

FROM THE WASHINGTON POST:  The headline — The Trump immunity decision isn’t the end of democracy — but it is bad.

The Supreme Court’s opinion is much bigger than Trump.

The Court gives former President Trump all the immunity he asked for and more, Justice Sonia Sotomayor declared in her dissent from Monday’s Trump v. United States ruling.  The decision virtually guarantees that special counsel Jack Smith’s Jan. 6 case against the former president won’t move to trial before the election. Yet the implications are much bigger than Trump. More important — and more alarming — are the potential long-term consequences that could persist well after Trump is gone.

All six of the court’s conservatives ruled on Monday that the president is entitled to absolute immunity for official acts involving his core responsibilities — pardons, say, or recognizing foreign nations or removing appointed officers.  Moreover, he’s entitled to what’s known as presumptive immunity for official acts that aren’t related to those core responsibilities.

This presumption can be overcome only if a prosecutor can show that holding him accountable won’t intrude on the executive branch’s ability to function — as Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. put it, writing for the court, that it wouldn’t prevent the president from taking the “bold and unhesitating action” essential to his job.  Liability isn’t spared for unofficial, or private, conduct. But that’s not terribly comforting.  

While the commander in chief embezzling money or even falsifying business records to cover up an affair is unseemly, these are hardly threats to democracy.

As a non-lawyer, I read the decision and believe that Donald Trump wins. ..again.  He can tell his vice president, Mike Pence, to break the law and he, Trump, is free from any penalty.

He can do almost whatever he wants – perish the thought – while his lawyers stand by to contend he is within his right, and as Justice Sotomayor put it, “he king above all laws.”

If it weren’t for Trump, it would be easier for me to understand the Court’s ruling.  With Trump, it simply makes legal all this illegal behavior.

I’ll give the last word to Kate Shaw writing this morning in the New York Times:

“The Supreme Court’s radical decision handing the president broad immunity from criminal prosecution on Monday will rightly be understood as enormously increasing the power and enormously reducing the accountability of the president.”