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.

Anyone who knows me knows that I do not believe LIV Golf is good for the game we love.

Better, I say, for pro golfers to work to improve the PGA Tour.  Better for golfers and fans like me to stick with golf competitions, not exhibitions.

So it was that I read an announcement by LIV Golf that it – finally – had secured a place for its exhibitions to be shown on TV, the CW, which I had barely heard of before the announcement.

Did the announcement matter?  No.

To hear LIV Golf blunderbuss Greg Norman tell it, the answer was yes.  But, after all he has said and done to damage pro golf over the years, not just with his new gig at LIV, but well before that, it is hard for me to give credibility to anything Norman says.

Instead, these two comments.

FROM COLUMNIST EAMON LYNCH IN GOLFWEEK:  “There are many possible explanations for why LIV has failed to gain traction with fans — the format, the frat brats in the lineup, the insignificance of the competition, the garish theatrics, the source of the funding.

“Perhaps ease of access to tournament broadcasts was another factor, but it requires a grandiose optimism to believe that The CW will sustain better results than YouTube’s 2.6 billion active users.

“For all the spin put forth by Norman and his team, LIV has simply found a lesser storefront for the very same product that was ignored when given the largest platform possible.  What was announced this week is less a broadcast deal than a distress sale, which is not to imply that anyone was willing to pay for it.”

FROM THE NATIONAL PRESS CLUB:  It’s safe to say the National Press Club is not happy with Nexstar’s decision to partner with LIV Golf.  [Nexstar is the parent of the CW.]

Founded in 1908, the National Press Club is the world’s leading professional organization for journalists.  The Club has 3,000 members representing nearly every major news organization and is a leading voice for press freedom in the U.S. and worldwide.

Its president Jen Judson released a statement regarding LIV Golf’s multi-year TV deal to air its tournaments on the CW Network, which Nexstar Media Group owns.

The statement speaks for itself.

“We are deeply disappointed that a company that makes money from news like Nexstar would agree to participate in such a shameful PR stunt as LIV Golf, which is fundamentally designed to rehabilitate the Saudi reputation, tarnished irreparably by the state-ordered gruesome murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in October 2018.

“We are left to wonder what if anything Nexstar stands for.  You cannot have a brand in news and act this way.  Saudi Arabia murdered a Washington Post journalist and cut him up with a bone saw.

“Riyadh wants to use golf to get Americans to forget about murder.  We must not let them get away with it.  We call on Nexstar employees — many of whom are journalists — to demand management explain why they have partnered with the murderers of a journalist.

“We urge Nexstar to do the right thing and cancel their bloody golf show.  And if they don’t drop the program here is what we can do:  Don’t watch it; and write each sponsor asking them not to sponsor.”

The National Press Club position is another indication that LIV is not worthy of TV coverage, or, for that matter, for any of us who love real professional golf to watch it.

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.

“Governor Tina Kotek pitches big spending on housing and behavioral health, even amid economic uncertainty.”

That was headline that ran in the Oregonian newspaper this week as the new Oregon governor, Tina Kotek, conveyed information on one of her major, early actions in office – proposing a “Governor’s Recommended Budget for 2023-25.”

It is a required action.  Once they take office in early January, new governors, by law, are given until February 1 to announce a recommended budget for the biennium.  That set of recommendations then goes to the Legislature.

As a state lobbyist in Oregon for more years than I care to count, release of governor’s budget was always a development I anticipated with a mix of dread and excitement.  Why?  Because what governors recommend sets the tone for the only legislative action required in each long session in Salem – approval of a budget that balances expenditures with revenue.

Dread?  Perhaps governors would ignore my clients’ priorities.  Excitement?  It was a critical step in aligning state government for another two years, including, perhaps, reflecting my clients’ priorities.

In what I wrote above, note that I wrote “balanced.”  It is what Oregon law requires, far different than the federal budget where expenditures always exceed revenue, sometimes, but not always, with good reason.

Did Kotek’s first recommended budget meet the balanced budget target?

Well, deciphering that is a tall task, just as it is a tall task to read the governor’s budget and understand what it does and does not do – and what it costs to do what the governor wants to do.  It is a thick document – much like, to illustrate my advanced age, the size of an old phone book.

Still, I give Kotek credit for laying out her case for aggressive government action on her priorities, the chief of one which appears to be dealing with homelessness.  That’s what governors should do – lay down markers for what they want to achieve, then work with the Legislature to find middle ground.

I hope Kotek does this.  As a governor who came out of the Legislature, she should understand the business of dealing with legislators, not trying to run roughshod over them.  Time will tell how she does in this regard.

From the Oregonian newspaper, here are a few highlights of the Kotek budget proposal:

• Kotek wants to tap Oregon’s savings accounts to pay for expanded initiatives to tackle the state’s housing shortage, homelessness crisis, behavioral health care needs and poor education outcomes.
• Kotek wants the state to issue $770 million in debt to help build affordable homes for renters and new homeowners.
• Kotek wants to increase salaries at least for health care workers, though no doubt she eventually will go on record for salary increases for all workers at the collective bargaining table.
• Kotek wants lawmakers to approve $9.9 billion in core funding for Oregon K-12 schools, more than the $9.5 billion that state budget analysts calculated Oregon would need to hold steady at current service levels, but less than the $10.3 billion that schools advocate, including school boards and the statewide teachers union, say is necessary to prevent cuts.  [A reminder:  School lobbyists always ask for more money than they need because better that, they say, that settling low early.]

Does what Kotek has recommended meet the text of balancing revenue and expenses?  Perhaps.  But barely.

That’s because Kotek’s ambitious proposals come as state economists have said it is more than likely that Oregon will enter a mild recession this year – a recession that will reduce income tax revenue, thus making it difficult to find the money Kotek is advocating for all her priorities.

Any governor’s budget proposes trade-offs and Kotek’s first one is no exception.  For one thing, she is not recommending bonding to build new state university buildings, which has been a hallmark of most recent governor’s budgets.   Instead, she wants to focus state bonding on affordable housing. 

No doubt state universities are in the process of coming unglued.

So, are Republicans who are in the minority in both the Oregon House and Senate, a status which means they won’t usually agree with the Democrat in the state’s top political office.

Here’s what House Republicans said:  “The caucus is optimistic the governor’s budget does not call for tax increases, but we remain concerned Kotek and her agencies will raise fees on hardworking Oregonians.”

They also expressed relief that Kotek did not propose diverting Oregon’s unique “kicker” tax rebate in order to boost government spending, and they reiterated their desire for lawmakers to issue the kicker as a check to taxpayers this year instead of the usual method of returning it as a credit when people file their taxes in 2024.

“We are committed to returning these hard-earned dollars back to Oregon taxpayers,” Republicans said.

Not surprisingly, the Oregon Taxpayers’ Association has been more strident in raising questions about Kotek’s proposals.  According to an on-line publication, the Oregon Catalyst, there are more than a few questions about what Kotek is recommending.  Among them:

• Is Kotek’s plan is to spend up to $50 million paying people’s rents just a response to the rent control bill Kotek supported last session?
• How does Kotek’s budget for more affordable housing jibe with government currently blocking available land for more housing?
• If Kotek believes children have a right to education “that will set them up for a lifetime of opportunity,” why does she turn her back on charter schools?

So, in all of this, one traditional summary is this:  The governor proposes and the Legislature disposes.

What’s ahead are six months of back and forth as legislators “dispose” of what the governor has recommended and, in the end, the budget must be in balance, which means all those involved will have to engage in comprise, which means:  Getting a little and giving a little.

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.

To demonstrate my management agility, I am opening the Department of Pet Peeves today hard on the heels of opening the Department of Inquiring Minds earlier this week.

These are two departments I run with a free hand to manage as I see fit.  The others are the Department of Good Quotes Worth Remembering, and the Department of “Just Saying.”

See, I am nothing if not a management guru.

Today, in the Department of Pet Peeves, I choose to limit myself to one peeve.

HOW TO RUIN A GOOD PROFESSIONAL GOLF TOURNAMENT:  Pro golfers return this week to one of the great courses in America – the Pebble Beach Golf Links in California.

Tough to beat it as a location for golf, with its vistas and solid tournament history.

However, CBS, which televises the tournament, makes a huge mistake, which earns it a place in my list of peeves.  This:

Every year, CBS gives a prominent place to the antics of someone who calls himself a comedian – actor Bill Murray.

His act, always stale to me, has become especially stale lately as he prances around the golf course pretending to play the game we love.  But, he spends most of his time, in addition to prancing, making fun of spectators as he encounters them along the rope line.

CBS could do me and other real golf fans a huge favor:  Avoid giving any airtime to Murray.  He was not funny as he acted in such films as Caddyshack, nor is he funny today.

Okay, given the tournament format, a pro-am, I don’t mind airtime for such celebrities as Buffalo Bills quarterback Josh Allen.  But, Murray?  No.

The focus should be on golf.  Not stupid, stale antics.

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.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce weighed in on the non-compete issue, a proposal by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to insert itself even more heavily into private business decisions.

The Chamber says it will fight the intrusion.

I have written about this before – the issue of using what are called “non-compete” agreements to protect trade secrets and, in the particular issue in which I was involved as a lobbyist in Oregon, to protect major investments by radio and TV broadcast stations in on-air talent.

Chamber President and CEO Suzanne P. Clark said this:  “We’ll go to court if necessary to stop the legally baseless ban on non-compete clauses.

“When Lina Khan assumed the chair of the FTC, she said her goal was to ‘shape the distribution of power and opportunity across our economy.’  Her proposed ban on all employment-based non-compete agreements suggests she doesn’t intend to let the law or Constitution get in her way.

“The U.S. Chamber of Commerce will oppose the proposed regulation with all the tools at our disposal, including litigation.  If the FTC can regulate non-compete agreements without authorization from Congress, there is no aspect of employment or commercial arrangements that it doesn’t have the authority to regulate or ban arbitrarily.”

In its more than 100-year history, the FTC has never enforced a rule to regulate competition, and Congress never intended the agency to have that power.  Instead, legislators gave the FTC authority to identify, on a case-by-case basis, individual acts that constitute unfair competition.  And this authority is subject to judicial oversight.

Clark contends “this structure has been a key to preserving innovation in a free market and avoiding overregulation.  It prevents the FTC from writing the laws it is assigned to enforce, which is necessary to protect the constitutional separation of powers.”

To repeat, the proposed regulation to ban non-competes takes regulation one step further than has occurred in the past.  Rather than reviewing and judging the specific and individual conduct of companies under Section 5, the FTC has proposed simply to issue a nationwide ban of a type of employment contract that three unelected commissioners have decided they don’t like.

Now, why was I involved in the non-compete issue?

It occurred when, as a lobbyist, I represented the Oregon Association of Broadcasters (OAB), an organization of more than 200 radio and television stations across Oregon.  The OAB uses non-compete agreements to protect its often-huge investments in promoting on-air talent.

Without such agreements, competing stations could just entice on-air talent such as “anchors” to move down the street, thus negating the investment the home stations had made in promoting the popularity of those anchors, and, thus, ratings for their stations.

Under pressure in Salem, the OAB, with me as the lobbyist, managed to retain the ability to use non-compete agreements, but, if the FTC initiative takes hold, such agreements around the country – and in Oregon – would be null and avoid.

And that’s as bad for broadcasters as it is for any business protecting its investments and trade secrets.

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.

This department is one of several I operate with a free hand to run each as I see fit.

The others are the Department of Pet Peeves, the Department of Good Quotes Worth Remembering, and the Department of “Just Saying.”

With so much time on my hands in retirement, here are some of the things I wonder about as the Department of Inquiring Minds opens again.

MEDICATIONS:  If you take multiple medications every day as I do and have done for about 20 years, how do the various ones get to the right place at the right time?

I guess you must be a doctor to understand this miracle of modern pharmacy. 

I am not a doctor, so I don’t know the answer.

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES:  Every day produces new, strange actions in Congress.  One of the latest is why House Republicans don’t get rid of George Santos. 

His approach has been to lie about everything.  And the fact that he is still in U.S. House attests to the tolerant leaders there who believe lying is an acceptable strategy.  Of course, they lie routinely themselves.

Santos’ constituents are the worse for this excuse for representation.

DUST:  In an obviously less serious issue than what’s happening – or not happening – in Congress, the issue of dust bothers me here in the California desert where my wife and I live in the winter.  Especially this weekend – dust was in the air.

Why does dust get into everything?

After we clean it up one day, it’s back the next.

Which is why I wonder if companies that sell brooms and vacuum cleaners somehow work to send dust around.

COMMUNICATING BY E-MAIL, PHONE, OR TEXT:  This is an issue that, for me, is dominated by curiosity.

Why do some folks in an age category or two below me prefer to communicate by text, not e-mail or telephone?

Sometimes, these folks – often friends or family members – won’t answer the phone if they are home, but would rather get a text, then respond to it by another text.

So it is that you communicate in segments, not together.

So be it.  At least via text, I am included in the communication.

At my age, that’s a virtue. 

For me, though, my preference is e-mail or phone.

WHY:  Just asking:

• Why did Jon Rahm, when he played in the Farmers Insurance Open in San Diego, fail to shake hands with the U.S. Military serviceman who was standing by one of the Torrey Pines greens?  It appeared his oversight, if that’s what it was, was intentional.  The courteous, not to mention statesmanlike act, would have been to shake hands with the serviceman and thank him for his service.

• Why do so many professional football players engage in taunting or outlandish exhibitions of showmanship after they score a touchdown or make a good play on offense or defense.  All of that happened repeatedly Sunday in the NFL Football games.  Better to take the reward of scoring or a good play and forget showing off.

One reason I have very little respect for most NFL players:

In the opening drive today, Philadelphia receiver made a remarkable catch on 4th down that lead to a touchdown. When he got up, he immediately urged a quick play before it could be reviewed.

A replay later showed he bobbled the ball so it should have been ruled incomplete. So, the player knew it wasn’t a catch. Compare that to a golfer who calls a penalty on himself even when no one is around.

Also, the in-your-face taunting and disgusting celebrations by so many players. Can you imagine Rory McIlroy doing that after making a birdie?

Golf is a gentlemen’s game…NFL not so much.

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.

I wrote recently about this – being glad I am missing the start of the new Oregon legislative session in Salem.

Not to mention the finish six months down the road.

When I was a lobbyist, the start of the legislative session was a day I dreaded because it was the beginning of many hours at the State Capitol in Salem, including many early morning and late evening meetings.

My old firm, now called CFM Advocates, came up this week with a specific reason I would have cited as a main reason for the dread, if I had known the numbers.

“Lawmakers, lobbyists and members of the public returned to the Oregon Capitol last week for the first time since March 2020 as the 2023 legislative session convened with an initial pile of 2,000 bills to consider.”

Yes, 2,000!

And, for more than half of the 90 House and Senate members, it was their first in-person legislative session – thus their first to be beset by a huge pile of paper.

Further, a question is whether 90 legislators – not to mention the governor – must read that slog of paper. 

The answer is no.

One reason is that much of the legislation will never see the light of day.  For some legislators, simply introducing a bill is an end in itself.

But, if legislators want “their” bill to be heard, they must function much like lobbyists – advocate for a hearing and then action.

In the Oregon Legislature, the only way for a piece of legislation to move forward is for it to be heard in a committee.  Not just heard.  Where the votes stand in a committee become clear when a bill is scheduled for a a second hearing, which is called a “work session.”

Smart committee chairs won’t usually schedule a work session unless they know the votes will be there to enable passage.  Why, they wonder, allow a process to be scheduled for a hearing that produces nothing.

Overall, the route to final action includes these steps:  (1) Consideration in a committee hearing; (2) a “work session” if the committee chair decides to hold one; (3) upon passage out of a committee, the bill goes to the House or Senate floors; (4) then, upon passage on the floor, the bill proceeds to the other chamber; (5) passage in the second chamber requires the same set of actions – committee hearings and work sessions; (6) if passage in committee, the bill goes to the full chamber; and (7) and, if passage there, the bill goes to the governor for her action, which could be support, veto, or allowing the bill to become law without her signature.

In what is listed above, I don’t even mention the additional steps if the House and Senate pass different versions of the same bill.  Suffice to say, more committee hearings and floor sessions.

Aren’t you surprised that, me, a retired lobbyist remembers all these steps?

I recall them with just a bit of glee today because I am no longer involved in them.  However, I add that, when I was involved, I found the process to be purposeful.  It’s just better now to relax in retirement.

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.

The headline on this blog makes a point I have made in all my time in professional or volunteer life:  There is always room for improvement.

If you are involved in an enterprise, there is no reason to be satisfied with the status quo, however solid that may be.

Even if the enterprise operates well, look for ways to improve.

This has worked for me in:

• The church in Salem, Oregon, where I served in leadership positions for more than 12 years.  [Plus, if operational improvements were made, the credit would go to God, not to me or my colleagues.]
• The company where I worked with many others to conduct public relations and lobbying campaigns.  [The credit here would go to the clients.]
• The State of Oregon commission where I serve with others to emphasize the need for ethics in government.  [The credit here would go to the worth of ethical conduct and behavior in public life.]

All this came to mind when I read a recent piece by Wall Street Journal Publisher Almar Latour.

In a memo to readers, he emphasized the need for “continuous improvement.” 

“All in all,” he wrote, “the Journal will not sit still in the coming year.  We believe in the old mantra from Clarence Barron, who presided over the Journal a century ago:  ‘We can always improve.’   Your feedback is key to that.  So, together, as we make sense of the changing world around us, we look forward to hearing from the most important part of our institution:  You, the reader.”

Kudos to the Journal for this commitment.  Among other things, it means I will continue to read the newspaper because of, (a) its quality writing, (b) the range of its purview of all things government, and (c) its commitment to continuing improvement.

In the general stuff I have read, I also have noted various “Guiding Principles of Continuous Improvement,” as follows:

1. Focus on the Customer

If you are in business, it’s obvious who your customers are.  They come first.  If you are in government, you should think of those who pay taxes and depend on your services as your customers.  Serve them well.

•  Use Workers’ Ideas

Continuous improvement does not always come from top management, leadership teams, or outside consultants.  Instead, it often comes from the workers who deal with processes daily and know their operations well.  Value their suggestions.

As one example, when I worked in the Oregon Executive Department many years ago, I joined with another manager to create the “Good Ideas Program,” an effort to encourage line staff to make suggestions about improvements in the operations of Oregon state government.  They did and we rewarded them for their initiative.

•  Drive Incremental Change

For continuous improvement, needed change often is delivered in small doses on a frequent basis.  Seemingly small changes will add up to significant change.

•  Use Fact-Based, Measurable Methods and Monitoring

Continuous improvement is not just trying hard or giving 110 per cent. No matter how often you hear that expression, it’s still ridiculous; a person simply cannot give 110 per cent.  When you make continuous improvement changes, you need to measure where you started and where you have arrived to show that you really have made improvements.

•  Set Goals, Incorporate Feedback, and Deliver Reinforcement

Enough said.

Measure success and reward it.

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.

Salem Free Clinic has been in business for several years and has posted an incredibly positive record of success.

Not for itself.

But, for the citizens it has helped in the face of a dislocated health care system.

Here are new statistics.

• The Clinic provided 5,600 free patient appointments in 2022, about 900 above the previous year.

• The top three diagnoses related to mental health issues.

• Patients ranging in age 1 to 97 years old were served.

• Out of the total, 16 different languages were represented, including Chinese, Hebrew, French, Russian, Spanish, Swahili, and a number of others.

The Free Clinic is possible because of the volunteerism of more than 70 churches in the Salem-Keizer area.  Yes, 70!  They work together to produce a clear success.

The main location is at the church my wife and I have attended for more than 30 years in Salem, Salem Alliance.

The entire project is a great example of “putting feet to the gospel of Christ” – as well as hands, skills, good words, and love.

Patients are always asked if those serving them can pray for them.  If the patients answer yes, prayer occurs.  Perhaps more conversation.  If they say no, that’s as far as it goes.

My wife and I are proud to support Salem Free Clinics.  The good news is that people who need help are served, and credit goes to God, not us.

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.

When recreational golfers are faced with shots around the green, many tend to rely on a high-loft wedge to execute such shots, regardless of whether that club is the right one for the job.  And regardless of their ability to make such a shot.

Not me.

Those with whom I play know I usually hit a 7-iron.

That’s because I want to get the ball on the ground sooner so it can roll toward the hole.

If I have to carry something, such as a bunker, then I’ll take a wedge.

I learned the 7-iron skill when I had the privilege to play golf in Scotland on five occasions.  There, given the lay of the land in what are called “links-style” courses, a 7-iron will go a short distance or even a long one.  On one end, 50 or 60 yards.  On the other, perhaps farther than 150 yards.

For me, it’s one of the attractive aspects of links-style golf, much different than target-golf on parkland courses in the U.S.  Not necessarily better; just different.

Always using a wedge for a chip shot is a mistake, says Stefanie Shaw, a teaching professional at the Ocean Reef Club in Key Largo, Florida, and Sebonack Golf Club in Southampton, New York.

She wrote in a recent issue of my subscription to information from the Southern California Golf Association.

“You have to take a really big swing to hit a high-lofted club to make it go a very short distance, so there’s a lot of room for error there,” said Shaw, a GOLF Top 100 Teacher.  “I like to tell my students:  The only time I want to have a high-lofted wedge in my hand is when I need to get over an obstacle in front of me, like a bunker, thick grass, or water.

“A high-lofted club is any wedge with a 56-degree loft or more — usually a sand wedge in most players’ bags.”

So, instead of immediately reaching for a sand wedge when you’re faced with a chip, Shaw recommends using a club you can keep low to the ground instead, like a pitching wedge or, in my case, a 7-iron. 

“The lower I can keep a ball to the ground, the more control I have over it,” Shaw said.

That’s me.  Reaching for a 7.

Finally, Shaw advises:

“Next time you have a few extra minutes in the practice area, take a few balls to compare your outcomes with different clubs around the green. Once you get acquainted with the roll-out on your lower-lofted clubs, you’ll enjoy the extra control — and the lower scores.”

Makes sense to me.

That’s why I often need new grips on my 7-iron.

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.

In politics these days, especially in Washington, D.C., a major motive is to get even for alleged past sleights.

When you hear about such issues, it strikes you more like a bunch of young kids playing around than it does about elected officials who are supposed to be part of ruling the free world.

Nowhere is payback more evident than in the current turmoil over appointments to the House Intelligence Committee where the House Speaker gets the last word.

That means the speaker, Kevin McCarthy, plans to get even with Democrats when they demoted two of his colleagues from committees a year or so ago.  They were Representatives Marjorie Taylor-Green and Paul Gosar.

Frankly, they were guilty of making violent threats against the lives of Democrats in the House (guilty because both posted social media messages to that effect).  It got both booted off committees, with at least some agreement from Republicans.

Now, McCarthy says he will refuse committee seats to two Democrats – Representatives Adam Schiff and Eric Sawell — who have served on the Intelligence Committee for several years.

In response, House Minority Leader Hakim Jeffries formally has tapped both Schiff, Swalwell for seats on the Intelligence panel, a proposal which heightens another tiff between both sides in the House.

According to the Washington Post, Jeffries told McCarthy this:  “It is my understanding that you intend to break with the longstanding House tradition of deference to the minority party Intelligence Committee recommendations and deny seats to Ranking Member Schiff and Representative Swalwell.  The denial of seats to duly elected Members of the House Democratic Caucus runs counter to the serious and sober mission of the Intelligence Committee.”

Now, it would be possible to distinguish past actions against Green and Cosar with the current planned demotions for Schiff and Salwell.  Greene espoused extremist beliefs and voiced approval of violence against prominent Democrats, while Gosar posted an animated video depicting the killing of Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and violence against President Biden.

For their parts, Schiff and Salwell mainly disagreed with Republicans, though it has been alleged that Schiff at least stretched the truth in some of his musings.

This is only one major incident of the payback strategy.

Others are:

• Impeachment:  Republicans are more than a little irritated that Congress, under Democrat control in recent years, mounted impeachment processes against former president Donald Trump.  The Rs in the House now say they may do the same to President Joe Biden and some members of his cabinet.
• Classified papers:  In a column that appeared under this headline — The Biden Classified-Document Payback; Democrats stoked the Trump bonfire for years.  Now it’s put them in political hell – Wall Street Journal columnists Daniel Henninger says the time has come for payback.

Here is how he wrote about the current fracas:

“You know that a country’s politics has become unhinged when its politicians forget one of the fundamentals of their profession:  What goes around comes around.

“All that stuff about ‘my friend’ and ‘the gentlelady’ flows from knowing that, if a politician overdoes the torment, his opponent will spend years waiting for the moment of payback.  Exhibit Z is a sitting president saying about his predecessor:  ‘How could anyone be that irresponsible?’  Now comes the Democrats’ predictable crucible with everyone’s former good friend, Joe Biden.”

This comment related to the fact both Trump and Biden had classified papers in their possession.

The Rs intend to make Biden and Democrats pay for what they call “stoking the fire” of concern over Trump’s classified document haul.

This, Henninger adds, “is the permanent politics of retribution, and it can get worse.  The investigations of two special counsels — Robert Hur for  Biden and Jack Smith for Trump — will hang like two cement shoes waiting to drop across 2023 and perhaps into the 2024 presidential campaign.”

So, is there a way out of payback?

Who knows?

For one thing, it would require elected officials to act like mature adults rather than like immature children, which may be too much to ask.

For another, it would require the same officials to work to find what I call “the smart middle ground” on major political issues.  Again, probably too much to ask.

Finally, Henninger asked this about the classified papers deal:  “What would King Solomon do?  Herewith a way out of the Trump-Biden dilemma:  A grand plea bargain.  We the people pardon both Messrs. Trump and Biden (including Hunter).  We will drop everything against you if in return all three of you will just go away.”

Not a bad idea.