PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE:  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 of 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.

Whether you agree with all of her proposals or not, it should be noted that Governor Kate Brown met her obligations to produce a new two-year set of budget recommendations on time.

The deadline was yesterday, December 1, and she met it.

A two-year set of spending proposals for the 2021-23 biennium represents the starting point for the 2021 Legislature as it meets for about six months in Salem starting officially in January, but, in fact, around February 1.

As I wrote yesterday, the biennial budget recommendations were a focus of my interest for about 40 years, first as a state government manager for 15 years and then as a state lobbyist for 25 years.

The reasons:

• With a nearly $30 billion proposed spending blueprint over two years, governor’s recommendations represent what the individual in the state’s highest political office thinks and values.  So, the proposals are more than just a set of numbers; they are a set of public policy prescriptions.
• Income taxes provided by citizens and businesses support four main state government spending categories – K-12 schools, higher education, public safety (including prisons and cops), and social programs (including health care for low-income Oregonians).  All are very important for the future of the state.
• Reviewing the budget recommendations was a way for me to know whether a governor had lived up to his or her charge, which, I believe, is to develop a spending blueprint for two years WITHOUT new, proposed taxes.  In other words, what would it cost to run government for two more years, including inflation and caseload growth?  That way, the Legislature would have a real chance to decide whether it agreed or not.

At first blush, it appears to me that Brown met what I consider to be this obligation.

I suspect there is little question but that Brown, in her last two years as governor, will want tax increases.  She will have to propose those to the Legislature and, with super-majorities of Democrats in both the House and the Senate, she may see them enacted.  And that would likely set up major campaigns at the polls if business is asked to absorb new taxes and opposes the impact, even as virus recovery presumably will be under way.

Okay, let me stop there, except to reprint what my colleagues in my old firm, CFM Advocates, wrote last night about the budget recommendations.  The memo to CFM clients contains good and solid information.

**********

Governor Kate Brown kicked off December by releasing her proposed 2021-23 Governor’s Recommended Budget (GRB), which includes $25.6 billion in total spending, an 8 per cent increase from the current biennium.

Lawmakers will use it as a starting point to hammer out the state’s official budget during the upcoming 2021 Legislative Session. Brown’s budget proposes the closure of three state prisons while reducing support for healthcare services.

In a press release outlining her budget on Tuesday, Governor Brown emphasized that each area of the budget was formulated with an emphasis on racial equity.  

The budget relies very heavily on the hope that Congress will pass an additional coronavirus relief package soon and send revenues to bolster states battling the pandemic. Federal aid would be used to fill funding shortfalls in the Oregon Health Plan, increase Covid-19 testing, support ailing businesses and allow the state to forgive nearly $350 million in unpaid rent. 

While expectations were grim, recent forecasts show revenue collections remaining steady despite the economic shock associated with the pandemic.  Despite job losses, average income levels have remained balanced.  In a state where personal income taxes provide the lion’s share (88 per cent) of revenues, Oregon’s coffers have not yet taken a significant hit.

However, consumer spending linked to the $14 billion influx of federal aid into Oregon’s economy, which is expected to be reduced over the coming months, paints a cloudy picture for revenues heading into the 2021-23 biennium.  

Healthcare
As a result of the pandemic, many more Oregonians have signed up for the Oregon Health Plan, resulting in a $718 million budget gap.  In her budget narrative, Governor Brown implores Congress to provide substantial federal stimulus dollars make up for the shortfall.

Despite hospitals and health care advocates fighting successfully at the November ballot to pass Measure 108, raising hundreds of millions of new revenue for Oregon’s Medicaid plan through an increased tobacco tax, the GRB ignored that contribution and sought additional reductions on the system protecting Oregonians against the COVID-19 pandemic. 

The GRB also seeks over $20 million in reductions to Oregon’s Coordinated Care Organizations, the backbone of care for vulnerable Oregonians.  Such a reduction will end up hurting doctors, nurses and care providers around the state as reimbursement rates are slashed to compensate for the reduction.  These are the front-line workers managing the pandemic and may raise significant concerns with lawmakers over this recommendation. 

Wildfire Recovery
In 2020, over a million acres and over 4,000 structures burned in wildfires across Oregon.  Brown’s budget calls for nearly $360 million to rebuild Oregon communities devastated by the Labor Day wildfires.  It also includes $73 million for wildfire preparedness, response and prevention.  

Education
While Oregon’s K-12 school funding receives a historic $9.1 billion for the next biennium in the GRB, that may not meet the state’s current service level roll-up costs.  The budget as outlined could lead to reductions in teachers or increased class size. 

Business and Labor
Businesses impacted by the pandemic and subsequent shutdown orders are not provided direct assistance in the proposed budget, and Governor Brown again calls on relief from the federal government.

Recognizing that many businesses are leaning heavily on virtual or online methods to stay afloat, the budget proposes $118 million for investment in broadband for rural and urban communities. 

Housing
The proposed budget would increase funding for housing and homelessness by $66 million and direct $17.9 million toward protecting seniors in assisting living and nursing homes from COVID-19.  It also includes $20 million in homeowner assistance and invests $250 million toward affordable housing development.

Enough. 

Except to emphasize that the governor has taken on a huge issue by proposing to close three of Oregon’s 14 prisons, albeit minimum security facilities.  She’ll face push back from legislators who represent the locations of those prisons (North Bend, Salem and Lakeview).  Lawmakers believe the prisons provide important jobs in their communities.  For her part, the governor said corrections policy should control the issue, not jobs.

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE:  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 of 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.

There always is a controversy over whether health care issues and identities should be made public or kept private.

Often, privacy rules and that’s okay.

But, issues with the Covid virus have underlined the tension as never before.

Consider this.  What if, in a community of which you are a part, some individuals are reported to have come down with the virus?  Should their names be made available, at least to you and others in the community, in order to help stop the potential spread?  Or, should the names be confidential?

In the health care arena, one of the controlling laws is called HIPPA – the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act.  Passed in 1996, it required creating national standards to protect sensitive patient health information from being disclosed without the patient’s consent or knowledge. 

The law has controlled health care information for years and creates a balancing test that often falls down on the side of privacy.  Which, I add, is good in the sense that I want my health information protected, just as many citizens do.

I lived closely with HIPPA during my professional career, 15 years in Oregon state government management and 25 years as a lobbyist during which I represented hospitals and health insurers.  HIPPA governed many of our operations, including in the development of public policy at the Capitol in Salem.

I remember many times that, due to HIPPA, I could not respond to requests from legislators for information on their constituents who might have been in hospitals or on health insurance company rolls that I represented.

The rubber has met the road during the pandemic.

Here’s how.

In the community where I live, it became known that three individuals had tested positive for the virus.  Should their identities be released or kept private?

I can argue both sides:

• On one side, it should be up to the individuals who tested positive to decide whether to allow their names to be released or not.

• On the other side, the rationale to prod release of the names is to allow others who may have come in contact with the three to decide how to respond, including whether to quarantine to reduce chances for the virus to spread.

• Would I support forcing release of the names?  No.  The decision should rest with those individuals who have contracted the virus.

To avoid the “one side-other side” debate, let me just say this.  If I came down with the virus, I would allow my name to be known so others could decide how to respond – and so effective tracing could be done.

Beyond all this, my fervent hope is that a vaccine will be approved soon and that the tough issues of distribution will be solved so we can begin healing from the pandemic.

Meanwhile, all of us should diligently follow reasonable prescriptions to slow spread of the virus, even if, on occasion, divulging names trumps privacy.

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE:  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 of 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.

Wait for it!

It is not very well known, but December 1 is an important date in Oregon state government every other year, the odd-numbered year.  December 1, if you don’t have your calendar handy during the pandemic, is tomorrow, Tuesday.

It is the date when, by the law, the governor must unveil a “Recommended Budget for the New Biennium,” this time for 2021-23.

During my 15 years in state government management, it was always a very important date because I was involved in either of two ways:  (a) I was in charge of the two-year budget for an agency when I served as deputy director of that agency, or (b) or, I was on tap to answer questions from reporters and editors about budget recommendations for an agency or for the Governor’s Office when I worked for Governor Victor Atiyeh.

When I became a lobbyist, the date retained its importance because it would have substantial affect on my firm’s clients.

That’s because state tax revenue goes essentially four places – K-12 schools, higher education, social and health programs, and public safety programs, (including state police and prisons).  Many of my firm’s clients cared deeply about these funding locations.

Add federal funds, lottery funds and fees to the mix and you get a $36 million biennial enterprise – state government as a whole every two years.

Here’s what important about the budget recommendations:

• What the budget recommends is what the governor – in this case, Governor Kate Brown – views as important for the future of Oregon.  Put another way, some observers believe a budget is just another set of numbers.  No, it is the most detailed example every time of a set of POLICY recommendations by the leader of state government.

• There is also a belief, in some quarters, that the budget is only a set of “recommendations,” not something that will stick.  But the reality is that about 90 per cent of what a governor recommends will be retained through the legislative process.

• I am not sure what Brown will do this year, but, in some past cases, governors made a mistake by not recommending what I call a “current services” budget.  That is a document that recommends what it would cost to operate state government for another two years, including the cost of inflation and predicted caseload growth — and not including expanded programs.

The recommended budget also is NOT supposed to include proposals for new taxes, which should be lodged in a separate document, not the main budget document. 

In a current services budget, members of the Legislature’s Joint Ways and Means Committee could consider genuinely what it would cost to operate government for two more years and decide whether to retain or change the cost.

At the same time, the House and Senate Revenue Committees are the venues for considering proposals for new taxes, which, if passed, first by the House and second by the Senate, would then go to the full House and Senate chambers for actions on a statutorily required three-fifths vote.

In the past, I have recommended that governors be charged with proposing three documents, not just one, every other year.  So, from my position outside government, I loft these recommendations again.

• Governors, by law, should be required to announce a CURRENT SERVICE LEVEL budget recommendation

• Governors, by law, should be required to produce a document showing TAX INCREASE PROPOSALS

• Governors, by law should be required to produce a document describing programs that have outlived their usefulness or have not achieved agreed-upon objectives and, thus, should be CUT BACK OR SCRAPPED.

If these kinds of proposals were adopted, the budget recommendations would gain far more clarity.  Often, the current documents can be opaque because they mix and match spending and taxes.

For a $36 billion dollar enterprise, clarity is critical.

And, here’s hoping that, tomorrow, December 1, we’ll get that clarity…but I also am holding my breath.

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE:  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 of 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.

But to call Thanksgiving a “holiday” is to limit its meaning.

What the day is:  Most of all, a day to remember and give thanks, especially to God, who has enabled us to live for another year with friends and family.

And, it is not an exaggeration to suggest that every day should be a day of thanks, just as today is, three days after Thanksgiving.

Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan performed her annual ritual again this year when she wrote e-mails to a number of people and asked them to report back to her about why they were thankful, even in the midst of what she called “a hard year.”

Here are the firsts paragraphs of what she wrote:

“It’s been a fairly gruesome year—pandemic, lockdowns, economic woe, death and illness. We’ve done a column in past years asking friends and acquaintances what they’re thankful for.  This year we emailed a dozen people whom we respect and who know a lot, asking what they’d seen, experienced or realized this annus horribilis that left them moved or grateful. 

“It could be personal or galactic in scope, concrete or abstract, but not political, and it had to be particular to this year.

“An investor who feared he wouldn’t see much of his grown kids since they’d flown the coop is awed to be living with them in crowded, happy circumstances.  A priest is grateful young people are still coming into the church.  A former pollster can’t believe how Zoom kept her far-flung family together.

“There was a lot of surprised gratitude for technology. A subtext emerged, unexpected gifts of the pandemic.  Most of all and strikingly there was deep gratitude for the people who work on the ground in America, who kept the country functioning.  Almost everyone mentioned personal thanks for grocery-store workers and truckers.  For eight months we’ve read and heard stories of self-sacrifice and dedication.  They have sunk in.  I believe the pandemic inched forward a certain cultural shift, a broadened sense of who deserves honor.”

Noonan’s point is that the goal is to get your eyes off yourself and look to the good deeds of other who, even if they don’t know you personally, have made your life better in the last year.

So, in that spirit, here is my list of some of the reasons why I am thankful.

• The heritage of my parents.  I think of them literally every day and am grateful for solid start they gave to me and my four siblings.
• My wife who agreed to marry me 47 years ago, the best decision of my life.
• My kids – Eric and Lissy – and way they allowed me to be both father and friend.
• My grandkids – Mason, Drew and Kate – who are growing up too quickly for words.  I treasure all of my days with them.
• My dogs – Hogan (now looking at me from up in heaven) and Callaway – who love me even if I shoot bad scores on the golf course.
• Friends who have supported me through the years, including those on the golf course who have became great friends.
• Colleagues in a business I helped to found – CFM Advocates – which represented a host of solid public policy clients over, for me, more than 25 years.  With me in retirement, CFM is still active today.
• Churches I have attended – the one in Portland where I grew up, the one in Washington, D.C. where, as a family, we spent a couple years, and the one in Salem, Oregon, which we helped to lead for a number of years.  But, remember, “church” is more than just buildings; it is a place to gather as “children of God” and express gratitude for the relationship we have in Christ.

In this context, the words of a great hymn come to mind:  Christ has provided “a bridge across the great divide,” or, if you like, “a cross to bridge the great divide.”

Have a great Thanksgiving – every day.

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE:  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 of 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.

Call it gotcha!

That’s what has happened recently when some well-known politicians were caught violating virus restrictions very soon after they imposed them.

In the Wall Street Journal, columnist William McGurn put it this way:

“Yours truly enjoys a good gotcha as much as the next man.  And it’s easy to mock pols for their blatant hypocrisy when they are caught.  But maybe the more important lesson to be learned here is that hypocrisy is guaranteed when we impose one-size-fits-all mandates that are rigid and unworkable.”

McGurn makes a good point…not just about the “gotcha deal,” but also about the one-size-fits-all approach taken by many governors, including Kate Brown in Oregon.

One of governors who came in for criticism about being a hypocrite was Gavin Newsom in California.

Californians live under some of the tightest Covid-19 restrictions in the nation, so when Newsom was recently caught without a mask at a crowded table for 12 at a posh Napa Valley eatery – it was only a day or so after imposed restrictions on such activity — he instantly became the poster boy for the “Do as I Say, Not as I Do” crowd.

According to the columnist McGurn, he’s hardly the only one.  Not long after Newsom’s visit to the French Laundry was exposed, Californians read about a delegation of their lawmakers who jetted to a Maui resort for a conference as everyone else was being told to avoid non-essential travel.

New Yorkers earlier learned that Mayor Bill de Blasio was working out at his favorite Park Slope YMCA right as he was shutting down the city.  And of course House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot made headlines for sneaking off to get their hair done when barbershops and salons were closed to everyone else.

Now, does a mistake by the likes of Newsom, de Blasio or Pelosi negate all of their actions.

Of course, no.

Do their actions jeopardize their records in office and their ability to get things done.

Of course, yes.

Should we remember their hypocrisy?

Of course, yes…at least for a time to make sure they don’t continue down a hypocritical path.

Now, on to two other issues with the pandemic that represent areas of concern for me.

First, let me say that I have no interest in making decisions about how to control the pandemic and I have sympathy for public officials caught in this challenging problem.  I wouldn’t want their jobs, so I summarize my concerns from the cheap seats in La Quinta, California.

• I have concerns about the one-size-fits all approach, such as is being done in Oregon.  There is no way pandemic restrictions in downtown Portland should be the same as those imposed in far Eastern Oregon.  The same could be said about other states, such as the one I am sitting in now, California.
• I also have concerns that there does not appear, in many cases, to be a direct relationship between the cause for virus spikes and the actions directed to stem the tide.  It is not absolutely clear, for example, that restaurants are “superspreaders,” yet they are singled out for closure, which could mean many of them will go out of business.

In this connection, I was hopeful that a suit by the Oregon Lodging and Restaurant Association contending that Governor Brown had unfairly singled out restaurants for restrictions would go a way toward highlighting this deficit. 

But, a judge ruled yesterday against the Association’s suit, contending simply that the governor was within her rights to impose the restrictions.

Back to McGurn’s Wall Street Journal column:  “Daniel Halperin is an adjunct professor at the University of North Carolina’s Gillings School of Global Public Health.  He says he understands why people get upset when politicians are caught doing something they are admonishing everyone else not to do. But as he explains in his recent book, ‘Facing COVID Without Panic,’ he believes a bigger part of the problem has been the reliance on mandates, especially those that have only a marginal impact on the virus’s spread.

“’Many of these mandates and guidelines fixate on behaviors and settings where the actual risk is very low, such as fleeting public encounters, surface-based transmission or beach visits,’ he says in an email. ‘Meanwhile, measures which could have the greatest prevention impact, such as re-engineering buildings to improve air circulation, are still not widely prioritized—not to mention even simpler actions, such as opening windows to allow outdoor air to circulate indoors.’”

McGurn ends his column with a paragraph that resonates with me.  “Certainly leaders ought to live by the same rules they impose on everyone else.  But as we celebrate this Thanksgiving amid the many examples of double standards, maybe we should take them as less a morality tale than a sign we need workable guidelines that even politicians could obey.”

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE:  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 of 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 remember the time many months ago when I read a major story in The Atlantic reporting that the Trump presidential campaign intended to rely on what was labeled “disinformation” to push Trump to victory.

As usual with Trump and his sycophants, there was no commitment to honesty and accuracy.

The good news:  It didn’t happen.  At least not in sufficient supply to re-elect the worst president in U.S. history. 

Now, the question is what to do about the disinformation, which still lurks in the background of the just-concluded presidential election race.  Or, perhaps in the foreground as Trump refuses to admit defeat says he might run again in 2024.

Washington Post media columnist Margaret Sullivan dealt with the topic in a piece for the Post last weekend by contending that the media should play a role in separating fact from fiction as the U.S. recovers from the Trump debacle.

To me, her thoughts are important for at least two reasons.  First, I got my start in my professional career in the news media business, so writing about media responsibilities catches my attention.  And, second, if we are to return politics to a solid, ethical process in this country, we will have to recover from Trump excesses.

Under this headline, Sullivan posited what “journalists must do about it” – meaning about disinformation:

The disinformation system that Trump unleashed will outlast him.

“President Trump didn’t create the media cesspool that he’ll bequeath to a troubled nation,” Sullivan wrote.  “He just made it exponentially worse — not only with his own constant lies, but with his ability to spread the ugliness.

“Just days ago, he tweeted out a debunked conspiracy theory that a company that makes voting machines had deleted millions of Trump votes.  And though he — barring true disaster — will leave office in January, the widespread disinformation system that he fostered will live on.

“Social media platforms, streaming ‘news’ channels and innumerable websites will spew lies and conspiracy theories, and will keep weakening the foundation of reality that America’s democracy needs in order to function.”

Sullivan proposed three actions:

First, she says, “the media should be bolder and more direct than ever in telling it like it is.  No more pussy-footing or punch-pulling.  No more of what’s been called ‘false equivalence’ — giving equal weight to truth and lies in the name of fairness.

I add that “false equivalence” is a critical topic because all of us – reporters an editors included – should not equate lies with truth.

Second, Sullivan maintains that “the only hope is for mainstream journalism is to appeal to passion as well as reason — providing moral clarity along with truthful content.  

“In other words, the reality-based press has to unapologetically stand for something.  Otherwise, it’s just a pallid alternative to the excitement of burgeoning lies.”

Third, Sullivan advocates that journalists and news organizations should get much more involved in media literacy — working with educators and advocates to teach people of all ages, but especially students, to distinguish lies from truth, propaganda from factual reporting.

All of this can be an uncomfortable role for journalists because it smacks of advocacy, something that mainstream journalists – at least those my age — were taught to avoid.  When I worked for a daily newspaper in Oregon, I was expected to focus on facts and context, not opinions.

So, Sullivan poses the bottom-line question.  “Can journalists, mired in our ‘how we’ve always done it’ mind-set, really change their stripes to fight the war on disinformation?  Can we be more clear and direct, embrace a moral purpose, help to educate news consumers? And even if we do, will it make a significant difference?”

The jury is out, but here’s hoping quality journalists will rise to the occasion – an occasion that is very important because the current occupant of the Oval Office is on the way out.  The goal should be that the disinformation campaign should be gone with him.

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE:  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 of 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, remember, is one of three departments I run with a free hand to manage as I see fit. 

The others are the Department of Pet Peeves and the Department of “Just Saying.”

For the Department of Good Quotes Worth Remembering, there are many candidates for inclusion, one reason for which is that the conduct of Donald Trump is so far off base from reality that he cannot serve the country by bowing out of office as a loser, which he surely is. So, the commentators wax eloquent.

From columnist E. J. Dionne in the Washington Post:  “…when politics is reduced to all slapping and no reasoning, and when the words ‘take this country back’ mean keeping the loser of a free election in power by manipulating the truth and the law, we have traveled a long way from the democratic tradition.”

Comment:  I don’t often cite Dionne because he is much too far left for me, but this time he has a point.  Trump is retreating so far from democracy traditions and conventions that his conduct is becoming ridiculous.  And, what’s worse is that many Republicans refuse to call him on it.

From columnist Karen Tumulty in the Washington Post:  “The inauguration of a president is a ritual we have gone through 58 times in the history of our country, through periods of war and depression and political strife.

“But there has never been anything quite like the circumstances surrounding the upcoming 59th, which will take place amid a pandemic and shrouded by false conspiracy theories about a ‘stolen’ election that are being spread by the White House itself.  President Trump’s maneuvers to hold onto the office he lost are becoming more and more desperate.

“So what transpires on Jan. 20, 2021, will demand a re-imagination, both of what an inauguration means and of how it sets the tone for the months and years ahead.

“As for the rest of the hoopla — the parade, the gala, the concerts, the balls, the parties, the luncheon inside the Capitol — it almost certainly will be ditched.”

Comment:  Good point.  Make the inauguration simple and straightforward, thus illustrating what it is and should be an official transfer of power in U.S. government.

From the Wall Street Journal:  “Americans are increasingly — and understandably — impatient about tight and even draconian restrictions on their daily lives because of the pandemic.  So it shouldn’t be a surprise that they become outraged when those who impose the rules fail to live by them, too.  Case in point:  Governor Gavin Newsom’s recent fancy dinner in Napa Valley.

“It would be bad enough if this were the only high-profile example of a leader disobeying their own pandemic rules. But that’s not the case. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was caught this summer getting a haircut without a mask in a San Francisco salon at a time when normal people in the city were barred from such visits.”

Comment:  These aren’t the only examples of hypocrisy on the part of the public officials.  In one sense, these may be one-off examples, but, when the charges of hypocrisy stick, it makes all of the government look bad, even if that is an inaccurate generalization.

And, this further comment:  The Oregon Restaurant and Lodging Association is suing Oregon Governor Kate Brown, contending that she has overreached her authority by mandating the closure of restaurants, perhaps forcing many of them out of business.

Beyond hypocrisy – and it should be noted that Brown has not been accused of this – this illustrates another failure of pandemic closure restrictions:  They are not necessarily related to the specific reasons for the increase in virus cases.  In this case, Oregon restaurants stand ready to prove in court that they are not the prime culprits.

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE:  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 of 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.

On occasion in this blog, I reprint extensive excerpts from a column in the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post or New York Times.

The reason is that writers there often convey critical information about public policy issues better than I could.  So, I reprint rather than quote.

This is another example.  This time, the column is by Peggy Noonan, who writes for the Wall Street Journal.  In addition to having a good way with words, she also excoriates Trump for his attempts to undo the election that he lost – actions on his part that risk democracy in this country, for all he cares about that goal.

Trump cannot stand being a loser – a status he deserves unreservedly – so he goes after, not only the winner, Joe Biden, but also ANYONE involved in tabulating election issues around the country.

The headline on Noonan’s column put the stakes this way:

A Bogus Dispute Is Doing Real Damage

Conspiracy theories are damaging the country today and will hurt Republicans tomorrow.

So, now for the rest of Noonan salient thoughts:

**********

No hard evidence of widespread fraud, no success in the courts or prospect of it. You can have a theory that a bad thing was done, but only facts will establish it. You need to do more than what Rudy Giuliani did at his news conference Thursday, which was throw out huge, barely comprehensible allegations and call people “crooks.”

You need to do more than Sidney Powell, who, at the same news conference, charged that “communist money” is behind an international conspiracy to rig the U.S. election. There was drama, hyperbole, perhaps madness. But the wilder the charges, the more insubstantial the case appeared.

More than two weeks after the election, it’s clear where this is going. The winner will be certified and acknowledged:  Joe Biden will be inaugurated.  But it’s right to worry about the damage being done on the journey.

It’s one thing when supporters of the president say, simply, “Let’s go through the process and see where we are.”  It’s not bad to look into how messy the voting system is, not the worst to realize it needs long-term remedial attention.  How did we devolve into a nation that no longer has an election night but an election month?

But the sheer nuttiness surrounding the current mess is becoming deeply destructive. Online you see the websites read by millions saying the entire election system is shot through with criminality.

The headlines read: It was stolen. We have proof of coordinated vote tampering. The president has many avenues to victory. The Trump campaign sent an email under the name of formerly respectable Republican Newt Gingrich, once speaker of the House, saying “The Corruption is Unprecedented”: “It’s time for us to get MAD.” We can’t “roll over.” “Please contribute $45 RIGHT NOW to the Official Election Defense Fund.”

 This isn’t a game. America isn’t your plaything.  Doesn’t Mr. Gingrich realize how dangerous it is to stop people like this, to rev them up on the idea that holding even the slightest faith in the system is for suckers?

Trump staff and supporters should know at this point that in trying to change the outcome they are doing harm—undercutting respect in and hope for democracy. Republican senators and representatives, in their silence, are allowing the idea to take hold that the whole system is rigged. This lessens faith in institutions and in their party’s reputation.

Republicans were once protective of who we are and what we created in this democratic republic long ago.

Now they’re not even protecting themselves; in future years what’s happening now will give their voters an excuse not to take part or show up.  What’s the point?  It’s all rigged.

And they are accepting a new post-election precedent, that national results won’t be accepted until all states are certified and all legal options, even the most bizarre and absurd, exhausted.  Wait until this is used against you, in 2024 or ’28.  You won’t like it.

I found myself thinking this week of the 1960s and the John Birch Society, which had some power in its day as an anticommunist movement whose core belief was that officials of the U.S. government were conspiring with international communism to take down America. They were pretty wild. In time they accused Dwight D. Eisenhower, president of the United States and hero of Normandy, of being a secret communist agent.

Rising conservative leaders, embarrassed by the Birchers, didn’t wish to see their movement tainted. They also didn’t want to alienate voters who sympathized with the Birchers: Every movement has its nuts. Russell Kirk, Barry Goldwater and William F. Buckley pushed back, the last calling the head of the society, Robert Welch, “far removed from common sense.”

Even Ayn Rand joined in:  Thinking the country’s woes were due to a communist conspiracy “is childishly naive and superficial.”    Anyway, “they are not for capitalism but merely against communism.”

The John Birch Society faded because all these conservative leaders, and more, sort of congealed and took the larger weight of their movement in other directions. And so modern conservatism was born as pretty much a healthy movement, and not pretty much a sick one.

I’ve been thinking about all this because of the question: What would have happened if the John Birch Society had been online, if it had existed in the internet age when accusations, dark warnings and violent talk can rip through a country in a millisecond and anonymous voices can whip things up for profit or pleasure?

It wouldn’t have faded. It would have prospered.

We’ve all decried this aspect of the Internet for 20 years; our alarm about its ability to enable and encourage extremism is so old, we forget to keep feeling it.  But we’ll look back on this time as one in which the least responsible among us shook big foundations.

Responsible Republican leaders ought to congeal and address the fact that what rough faith and trust we have in the system is being damaged.  Which means our ability to proceed as a healthy democracy is being damaged.

There is no realistic route to victory for the president, only to confusion and chaos and undermining.  He is not going to find the votes in recounts to win the election.  Dominion, the voting-machine company under attack, has not been credibly charged with doing anything wrong.  As the Journal said this week in an editorial, “Strong claims need strong proof, not rumors and innuendo on Twitter. ”

The irony is that this election will be remembered for the president’s attempts to sow chaos, not for what it actually appears to have been, which is a triumph for America.  In the middle of a pandemic, with new rules, there was historically high turnout.  Under stress the system worked.  Voters were committed, trusting, and stood in line for hours.

There was no violence at the polls, no serious charges of voter suppression. In a time of legitimate hacking fears, there were no reports of foreign interference.  Our defenses held.  On top of all that, the outcome was moderate:  For all the strife and stress of recent years, the split decision amounted to a reassertion of centrism.

You’d think the president would take his winnings and go home, because he had them.  He outperformed polls and exceeded his 2016 vote total by more than 10 million.  For one brief shining moment, on Nov. 3, he’d finally expanded his base to almost 50% of the electorate. He found new sources of support.

Imagine if he’d acted even remotely normal in his first term, if he’d had the intellectual, emotional and spiritual resources to moderate himself, to act respectably. Heck, imagine if he’d worn a mask.  He might have won.

He is set on going out like a villain. He and his people would find this Jacksonian—he’s refusing to bow to entrenched establishments! He would think this is what his base wants—the old battler refusing to accept the illicit judgments of a decadent elite.

If he were clever and disciplined, he’d do it differently. He’d accept the election’s outcome, if not graciously at least with finality, go home to Mar-a-Lago, play golf, and have fun torturing his party by plotting his return.  “I’ll be back.” Instead he leaves behind real and politically pointless ruin

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE:  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 of 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 pandemic is top-of-mind for almost all of us as the rate of the virus reaches new heights.

No big news here…just a slew of perceptions accumulated in my mind as I had nothing much else to do while driving from Salem, Oregon to La Quinta, California.

PUBLICITY WHERE NONE IS DUE:  Former state legislator Tootie Smith, a Republican legislator from Clackamas and incoming Clackamas Commission chair, made news a day or so ago – news she probably wanted to make.

Here is how the Oregonian newspaper reported the story:

“In defiance of governor’s orders, one of Clackamas County’s top elected officials plans to host a large dinner in her Molalla area home on Thanksgiving despite the raging COVID-19 pandemic.

“Tootie Smith, who will start her term as chairwoman of the Clackamas Board of County Commissioners in January, posted the following to Facebook Saturday:  ‘My family will celebrate Thanksgiving dinner with as many family and friends as I can find. Governor Brown is wrong to order otherwise.’”

She even upped the ante yesterday by going on national TV to herald her opposition.

Now, let it be said that I know Smith, having lobbied her at the Capitol in Salem over the years.  She was always a bit of a loose cannon and she is up to it again.  If you are going to defy a gubernatorial order, why not, as Nike would say, “just do it’ instead of trying to get publicity for it?

DOWN HERE IN LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA:  We got down to Southern California a couple days ago and wondered whether new pandemic control mechanisms would be the same here as up in Oregon.

Looks similar, but not identical, though it’s too early to make generalizations.

At the golf course where I play, for example, those who show up at the Clubhouse wear masks, but, while playing, masks are not required – and that is similar to what occurs in Oregon.

The Clubhouse is open for breakfast, lunch and drinks, but only if consumed outside.  Similar to Oregon.

Beyond golf, no firm perceptions yet, though restaurants are open at least for takeout and, at least to a degree, to outside seating, though that is clearly more likely here with temperatures hovering in the 70s and 80s.

AMAZON TRUCKS BY THE DOZENS:  This may not be just pandemic related, but I suspect it is, in a way.  The “this” is the fact that, while driving south over two days, we saw large numbers of Amazon trucks plying the highway going both north and south.

Americans increasingly want “stuff” to delivered to their homes, which now is more prevalent in the pandemic, but which might occur to a degree anyway.

Just think about it for a moment – you can get almost anything you want from Amazon (including prescriptions soon) and it will be at your house in a day or so after you place your order. That means, of course, that goods have to be transferred from one place to another very quickly – and that means lots of trucks.  Airplanes, too.

It would be fascinating to go behind the scenes and watch how the phone-in orders are translated into delivery.  Fascinating.  But I won’t do it.  Too busy. 

AND, AS FOR BIDEN:  New reports say that President-Elect Joe Biden is taking a mostly cautious approach on his unofficial leading role in the pandemic response, at least a lead role that will be confirmed when he is inaugurated in January.

For now, he has appointed a science panel to advise him on virus issues and has been very pointed in his criticism of Trump, saying that his failure to concede, including by not providing extensive and detailed “pandemic transition briefings,” risks American lives.

If that is true, no surprise, because, for Trump, everything always is about him, not the good of the country.

Oh yeah, I remember that I pledged not to write about Trump anymore now that he is a loser.  Oh well, a pledge broken.

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19^TH HOLE:  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 of 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.

Though I am not a polling expert, I have arrived at one, major reason why pollsters failed again to predict the outcome of the recent presidential election.  It is this:

Many respondents find it embarrassing to report they intended to vote for the clown in the Oval Office, one Donald Trump.

Or, in these days of aggressive social media, they were worried that, if they responded truthfully, their vote would somehow become public – and, however unlikely that was, they didn’t want to risk it.

From my post in the cheap seats in Salem, Oregon, this may just be a reflection of my antipathy for Trump.  How anyone would vote for him – or admit that they were going to, given his manifest indiscretions  — is beyond me.

Do I have evidence to support my contentions?  No. 

Overall, beyond my contentions, why did so many reputable pollsters — not the ones who engage in “push polling” to produce pre-determined outcomes – miss the mark again this year just as they did in the 2016 presidential election.

One analyst I read provided six reasons why the miss occurred, both in the presidential race, as well as in results for the U.S. House and U.S. Senate.

1. In the last few years, Republican voters seem to have become less willing to respond to polls.

2. This phenomenon isn’t simply about working-class whites.  Pollsters were careful to include more of these voters in their samples than four years ago, when the polls also missed, but it didn’t solve the problem. One likely reason: Even within demographic groups — say, independent, older, middle-income white women — people who responded to polls this year leaned more Democrat than people who did not.

3. It’s also not just about Trump. Polls missed in several Senate races even more than in the presidential race, which means they did an especially poor job of finding people who voted for Biden at the top and a Republican lower down the ballot.

4. Most of the easy solutions are probably not real solutions. Since Election Day, some campaign operatives have claimed their private polls were more accurate than the public polls.  That seems more false than true.  Biden, Trump and both parties campaigned as if their own polls matched the public polls, focusing on some states that were not really competitive and abandoning others that were close.

5. Polls have still been more accurate over the last four years than they were for most of the 20th century. As pollsters get more information about this year’s election and what went wrong, they will try to fix the problems, much as they did in the past. A new challenge:  In the smartphone age, poll response rates are far lower than they used to be.

6. Journalists can do a better job of conveying the uncertainty in polls.  Polls will never be perfect.  Capturing the opinions of a large, diverse country is too difficult.  And in today’s closely divided U.S., small polling errors can make underdogs look like favorites and vice versa. James A. Baker III, the nearly superhuman chief of staff to several past presidents, also showed up with analysis in the Wall Street Journal under this headline:

Good Grief, the Pollsters Got It Wrong

Twice they’ve predicted Democratic landslides only to look like blockheads when the votes are counted.

Here are excerpts of what he wrote:

“Too many opinion pollsters have come to resemble Lucy in the cartoon strip “Peanuts.”  Ahead of the presidential elections of 2016 and 2020, they held the political football in place to tee up certain Democratic victories.  But at the last second, the ball was pulled away and the entire country landed flat on its back when the Republican candidate fared much better than expected.

“It would be funny if it weren’t a sad reality that American democracy is being undermined by bad polling that consistently favors one side over the other.  Though not as ingrained in our national heritage as politicians and the press, polling is an important component in the governance of the nation, as it presents snapshots of the positions Americans take on the challenges that confront us.

“Elected leaders, candidates for public office and constituents often rely on polling as they make their choices on issues that affect the health of the nation.”

Accurate information, Baker added, “is critical to political discourse, and everyone loses when so many pollsters are consistently wrong. Polls that repeatedly favor one side create false expectations that adversely influence the actions of both sides.  The favored side becomes overconfident and suffers when the results on Election Day don’t meet expectations.  And the disfavored side is disadvantaged in both fundraising and voter turnout by the appearance that the outcome is foreordained.”

Baker proposes actions he believes could help the public discourse.

• Require reputable media outlets to avoid polling firms that do work for campaigns and others with political agendas.  The apparent conflict of interest in such arrangements deserves correction.  
• Consider congressional hearings to gather more information, though attempts to legislate and regulate polling would likely collide with First Amendment considerations, and so the options for regulation may be limited.
• Leave the solution in the hands of those whose livelihoods depend on opinion polling.  Pollsters and those who employ them need to take a serious look at the way polls are conducted. They need to re-examine how to collect a truly representative sample of voters, an admittedly difficult task in a world of new technology where landlines have mostly been replaced by cellphones and the Internet.  They also need to examine whether they are intentionally, knowingly or subconsciously letting their biases influence them.

A set of magic answers?  Of course not.

So, for the moment, the best response of individuals interested in politics – I am one – is to retain a healthy skepticism of polling.  Don’t rely on it totally.  Vote.  They wait for election results to produce the outcome that democracy demands.