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.

To the question in this blog headline, I answer “no.”

So does Connecticut Governor Ned Lamont.  He said so in a letter to the editor of the Wall Street Journal yesterday – and I agree with him.

This arose, at least in part, because of a column written for the Journal by Peggy Noonan, who does a good job normally.  Not this time.

She averred that Harris is short on policy, which prompted Lamont to write.

Of course, one of the underlying questions is whether voters cast ballots based on policy or character – or something else.  For me and Lamont, character is more important than policy because solid character can lead to solid policy.

On this count, Harris stands head and shoulders above Donald Trump who wouldn’t know a policy if it hit him in the face.

Enough from me, at least for the moment. 

Lamont started his letter this way:

“I love Peggy Noonan, but let me posit a counter to her column “Kamala Harris Is an Artless Dodger” (Declarations, September 21). She says that Donald Trump vs. Kamala Harris is a race between awful and empty.  

“Columnists have belittled the purity of presidential candidates forever; the Abraham Lincoln vs. Stephen Douglas Senate race was slammed as a choice between the better of two evils. Really?

“I won’t opine on awful, but let me speak to empty.  Noonan says that Vice President Harris lacks specifics because she doesn’t know, doesn’t care or doesn’t want you to know.”

Lamont they listed policies Harris advocates – and the list is good one because it counters the notion from columnist Noonan and others that Harris is light on policy.

From Lamont:

• On foreign policy, I know where she stands on arming the Ukrainian freedom fighters.  Former President Trump says end the war on day one — whatever that means — but I would wait to find out if I were Vladimir Putin.  Harris knows that working with our allies makes America stronger; Trump, not so much.

• On trade, Harris wants to bring our supply chains closer to home, especially with national-security assets, and toughen our negotiating position with adversaries like China and Russia.  Trump’s tariffs would punish friend and foe alike, and Americans will pay the price.

• Noonan characterizes the Harris “economic opportunity tour” as an evasive dodge.  I believe that most of us understand it to mean that the era of free money is over, but that the Harris Administration will help you get the skills for a better job and make it easier to start a business or own a home.

• We know where Harris stands on immigration.  She understands the value of legal immigration and wants more tools from Congress to fight illegal immigration.  As with trade and our allies, where Trump doesn’t know the difference between friend and foe, he doesn’t like immigration — period.  “They’re poisoning the blood our country,” he said.

Lamont then asks and answers the question that lurks behind any presidential campaign.  Are we better off today than we were four years ago?  

Lamont’s answer:

“Four years ago, the economy was in the ditch and stores were boarded up, with sage brush blowing down empty streets and big unemployment.  Blame it all on Covid, then acknowledge that some of the comeback inflation was Covid-related as well, but we are better off than four years ago, and Harris can argue that we are only getting started.

“I think we know the difference between awful and not-so-empty.

Noonan argues that Harris spends too much time on biography — who she is, why she is and why she believes what she does.”

Lamont disagrees, saying that Harris’ biography is part of what commends her to Americans.  

Then, to end, Lamont makes a great point, one with which I absolutely agree:

“I still make a laundry list of candidates’ positions on everything from tax rates to prescription-drug prices, but as the years march on, I put more and more emphasis on character.

“Teddy Roosevelt is reputed to have said, ‘Nobody cares how much you know until they know how much you care.’  We know a lot about both candidates on the issues and on character.

“Let’s vote.”