TRUMP’S RACISM COULD BRING HIS PARTY DOWN WITH HIM

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19TH 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, 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.

The aspiration in the headline is one I hope comes true.

Palpable racism is another reason why Donald Trump doesn’t deserve to hold the nation’s highest political office and should be shown the door next November.

Former Member of Congress, now media analyst Joe Scarborough, described Trump’s continuing racism in a column in the Washington Post this morning.

”President Trump can’t help himself. The former reality-TV host was warned by White House staff, his campaign team, financial contributors and Republicans on Capitol Hill that his afternoon news conferences were causing political damage. But after a weekend of tweeting out conspiracy theories about former presidents and insults aimed at cable-news pundits, the president was at it again Monday.

“And, true to form, Trump burned himself.

“His coronavirus ‘update’” ended abruptly after he hurled a bigoted remark toward an American journalist who grew up in West Virginia. When CBS News’s Weijia Jiang asked Trump about his misleading testing comments, the president blurted out: “You should ask China.”

“Jiang’s family emigrated from China when she was two. For what it’s worth, Trump’s own mother immigrated to the United States when she was 18, and his wife, Melania, gained an “Einstein Visa,” reserved for those of “extraordinary ability,” in 2001. After Trump’s snarling China comment, CNN’s Kaitlan Collins pressed Trump until he abruptly retreated from the presidential podium.”

Typical Trump.

He can’t stand the heat so he gets out of the kitchen. More to the point, he conducts what could be called a “continuing campaign of distraction.”

When opposition mounts, he distracts by inciting controversy.

He did so again last weekend by issuing an astonishing number of tweets – more than 100. All of them trashed persons he didn’t like, who asked hard questions, or had not supported him. Incendiary language. Exactly his intention. Washington Post writer Michael Gerson labeled it “a tweet storm.”

As Trump stumbled away from his press conference, Scarborough reported that he couldn’t help but be reminded of Trump’s racist 2016 attacks aimed at Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel. The then-candidate, Trump, said he couldn’t trust Curiel because he was “Mexican.” But Curiel is an Indiana native; his parents immigrated there from Mexico before he was born.

More Scarborough: “Four years later, Trump’s Republican Party has become numbed to its party leader’s daily outrages — the racist attacks, the 18,000 lies (and counting), the petty insults, the breaches of constitutional norms, and the gross incompetence that has worsened the covid-19 crisis in the United States and has driven America to the edge of a depression. These GOP politicians have long believed that ignoring Trump’s unfitness for office is their best political play…”

With Scarborough, I ask, what will it take for Republicans to stand up to Trump, including his every deranged tweet, every racist remark, his failure to execute the responsibilities of his office. Perhaps polling showing Trump could lose will prompt some Republicans, finally, to stand up for character, not Trump swill.

If they rise to the occasion and oppose Trump, they may be able to look themselves in the mirror.

JUST CALL ME A TECHNO GEEK

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19TH 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, 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 use the headline to indicate that, in this age of coronavirus, I have become proficient in new technologies.

Well, not proficient.

Just call me the assistant chief technology officer at my household.

The chief is my good wife. With her help, I have been able lately to use such virtual meeting venues as Go-To-Meeting, Skype, and Zoom.

If you cannot meet in person, then meet on-line.

Examples:

  1. I used Go-To-Meeting yesterday to join a number of colleagues on the Oregon Golf Association Board of Directors Executive Committee for our regular meeting.

Spread around the state, we were able to communicate as if we were together in one room. We dealt with issues about keeping golf going in Oregon during the pandemic, which has been and will be a feat of new engineering and creativity.

  1. I will be using Skype this Friday to participate on-line in a meeting of the State of Oregon Ethics Commission.

Normally, we meet in a Salem conference room. This time, we will be on-line and the meeting, by law a public one, also will be available for any citizen who wants to tune in.

  1. Each Friday at 8 a.m. I tune in via Zoom to a Bible study for members of Illahe Hills Golf Club who want to do more than golf together.

The user-friendly Zoom allows us to be together from our own living rooms.

Regarding Zoom, Fortune magazine reports that the virus outbreak has supercharged demand for the video-chat service. Zoom won’t disclose usage numbers beyond its last reported quarter, but CEO Eric Yuan said on March 4 that the company has seen a “large increase in the number of free users, meeting minutes, and new video cases” – beyond such older systems as Skype and Go-To-Meeting.

So, I am not alone in using on-line meeting devices in the pandemic. But my experience has been and will be that programs represent a valuable way to stay connected in one of the most difficult times in our country’s history.

A footnote here is that my niece, Zan Fiskum – a musical talent considerable proportions (meaning that got none of her ability from my side of the family — has been competing on the NBC program, The Voice. In the last few weeks competition has occurred on-line. Several months ago, she was in Los Angeles in the studio, but with the pandemic, she and other contestants have been singing from their homes around the country.

Celebrity judges also have been in their homes and both the contestants and the judges have had to learn to put together the technology to be on line. It was feat of significant propositions.

Go Zan!

A NEW WORD, AT LEAST FOR ME: GASLIGHTING

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19TH 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, 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.

The world of politics sometimes gives us new words, which, by continued use, become part of our lexicon.

One of them, at least for me, is the word “gaslighting.”

I didn’t know what it meant, so, using Google, I opened the dictionary. Here’s the definition:

“Manipulate someone by psychological means into questioning their own sanity.”

This issue arose for me when I read a piece by Washington Post opinion writer Greg Sargent, which appeared under this headline:

TRUMP’S LATEST EFFORT TO GASLIGHT AMERICA IS FALLING APART

Sargent went on:

“The news that the novel coronavirus has invaded President Trump’s inner circle — and that the White House is implementing aggressive testing and tracing to combat it — is a devastating story on an obvious and immediate level, but also on a deeper and longer-lasting one.

“Most palpably, it has revealed the sort of glaring double standard that’s catnip to political media: The White House is taking extensive steps to protect Trump and his top advisers with resources that are largely unavailable to the rest of us, in part due to his own dereliction.”

So, Sargent asks how Trump will persuade the country to return to something approximating normal economic activity when his own advisers are panicked about their health.

According to CNN, Trump’s advisers grasp that this story has become a deadly problem for them. But note why they have concluded this:

“An official said there is extreme sensitivity inside the White House at the current state of affairs with officials recognizing the contradiction in telling states to reopen while the White House enhances protocols to prevent the spread of the coronavirus.”

This story reflects, Sargent writes, “a larger illusion Trump is trying to weave with his magical reality-bending powers — that the coronavirus has been so tamed by his stupendous leadership that it’s now safe to reopen the country, setting the stage for an equally spectacular Trump-marshaled comeback.”

Last weekend, Trump unleashed a frantic barrage of messaging – more than 100 tweets, if you can call tweets “messaging” — that everything is going spectacularly well. Trump claimed it’s “great to see our country starting to open again and hailed his own “great” handling of the pandemic (nearly 80,000 dead).

Trump’s stupidity is, Axios reports, “an epic gaslighting campaign.”

“The next step will be for Trump to begin questioning the death totals, something he’s already done privately and so, could become a “full death denier.”

Stories in this morning’s editions of the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post reported that new polls show that Trump’s re-election is anything but a foregone conclusion, if only because many Americans are coming to the conclusion that Trump has no idea what he’s doing as president, other than catering to his narcissism.

So, I say, don’t let Trump gaslighting succeed.

HOW TRUMP’S SUPPOSED ADVANTAGES COULD PLAY OUT IN THE NEXT ELECTION

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19TH 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, 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.

Various polls show that Donald Trump may not win re-election which, for me, would be a welcome result.

But two other factors are in play. The first is that, in political terms, it is an eternity until the election next November. There is no way to predict what could happen in seven months.

The second factor is that Trump may have a few advantages heading into the election despite his inadequate – not to mention unfailingly stupid — attempts to manage the coronavirus pandemic.

Gerald Seib, who writes the Capital Journal column for the Wall Street Journal, pointed out four potential Trump advantages in a piece published yesterday. Here they are, with, in each case, comments from me:

  • “Trump can portray himself as the president best able to lead an economic recovery.”

Seib adds that “One prominent Democrat strategist frets privately: I worry that voters will think we need a businessperson to get out of the country’s financial mess.”

Comment: I say that, even if that were true – we need a businessperson – Trump would not be it. His business experience, like his tenure in the presidency, rests on a house of cards.

  • “Some persuadable voters may be more disposed to Trump than commonly imagined.”

To make this point, Seib cites poll results that give Trump almost no margin for error as he tries to prompt voters to choose him. Many of these so-called “persuadable voters” are soft Republicans, Independents, young men and people who approve somewhat of Trump’s job performance, despite his abject failures.

So, Seib says they could end up voting for Trump.

Comment: I hope not. Make a better choice for America.

  • “Trump knows how to win an unpopularity contest.”

Seib says that one of the secrets to Trump’s success is that “people don’t have to like him to vote for him.”

Comment: True enough. Last time around, when Trump won he had to go against Hillary Clinton, she even had more negatives that he did. This time, he will be competing against Joe Biden and his negatives will be no where near Clinton’s.

  • “The Trump campaign has a cash advantage.”

While money isn’t everything in politics, it helps.

Comment: I continue to hope that character trumps (pardon the words) cash.

Seib is a solid writer and political analyst, no doubt smarter than me. But, I find his list of Trump advantages a bit strained at times, perhaps because I want Trump to lose the office he shouldn’t have won in the first place.

I will continue hoping that Trump is not able to capitalize on whatever strengths he supposedly has so we can have an occupant of the Oval Office who displays solid leadership credentials in a very though time in American history.

YOUR LIFE OR LIVELIHOOD: AMERICANS WRESTLE WITH IMPOSSIBLE CHOICE

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19TH 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, 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.

The headline in this blog captures the impossible choice all of us – both governments and individuals – face these days in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic.

It is not an exaggeration to label it as a choice between “life and livelihood.”

It also is not an exaggeration to label it as impossible. Impossible in the sense that there is no definitive right answer.

That’s why I tend to give many forthright government individuals a bit of room to make and announce their decisions.

I say “forthright government officials,” a phrase that excludes Donald Trump, the make-believe president who cannot see past his own nose as he faces a major challenge to his presidency.

If I were to be cast in a role to help make the “live and livelihood decision” for Oregon, I’d come down on the side of preserving life.

But I’d also know that it’s not that simple. I’d also reckon with the fact that “preserving life” also means preserving the way to earn a livelihood because, if that’s gone, there will be huge health and mental health ravages.

Here is the way columnist Peggy Noonan put it in this morning’s Wall Street Journal:

“But the economic contraction will have repercussions as destructive as the virus itself. People will die and sicken because of lost jobs, lost income and a feeling of no opportunity, no possibility.

“Alcoholism, drug abuse, anxiety, suicide, strife within families—all these things will follow. And there’s a feeling of terrible generational injustice. My generation is on pause, but the young are on stall, and it’s no good for them. People need to operate in the world to become themselves.”

The New York Times painted the challenge this way, putting the issue in individual, not just collective, terms:

“As states begin to loosen restrictions, the act of re-opening will be carried out, not by governors or the president, but the millions of individuals being asked to do it.

“When Maine finally announced this week that hair salons could reopen, a stylist in Lewiston, stayed up late wondering what to do, feeling overwhelmed.

“The virus still scared her. It seemed too soon to open up. Then again, her bills had not stopped and her unemployment benefits had not started, and she was starting to worry about next month’s rent.

“Around midnight on Thursday, she finally drifted off. But she woke an hour later, and did not sleep much after that.

“’It’s an extremely hard decision for all of us,’ she said. ‘I want to go back to work. I want to have the money. I want to see people. But it’s hard because I’m worried about the virus coming back around. I can’t get my mind off it. It’s very stressful.’”

The director of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment called the decision navigating “a really tricky balance between trying to continue to keep the disease transmission at a level at which it won’t overwhelm our hospital systems and allow people to still try and earn a living.”

The fact is that sometimes hyper-partisan wrangling between Trump and governors over whether to re-open has obscured the way many Americans are thinking about the issue. We are not always neatly divided into two political tribes, with Republicans wanting to see restrictions lifted and Democrats wanting to remain shut down. Even within each of us there can be conflicting instincts.

There are, for me.

In her column, Noonan says, “People need hope. Americans live on it. We must return to life. That is where the bias must be.”

She adds: “…we must unleash the creativity of businessmen and businesswomen, an uncalled-on brigade, in this battle. Not only doctors and scientists will get us out of this, business must be on the lines, too.

“…we also have to cooperate by doing the things that contain the illness so that businesses can stay open and functioning. A mask isn’t a sign of submission as some idiots claim. It’s a sign of respect, responsibility and economic encouragement. It says, ‘I’ll do my small part.’”

As usual, Noonan is trenchant.

RESTORING ETHICAL BEHAVIOR AND CONDUCT IN AND AROUND GOVERNMENT

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19TH 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, 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.

Note: This is a piece I originally wrote for an Oregon Common Cause Ethics Committee on which I sit – see below. I have revised the piece to fit this blog. I post it now, even though the importance of our work over the last year has been dented a bit by the understandable occupation with the coronavirus pandemic. Still, keeping a focus on ethical behavior and conduct is critical if government in this country is to survive.

Remember Watergate?

Well, those of us who lived through the scandal, now more than 50 years old, recall that it brought down the Nixon Administration. Those who may not have lived through it no doubt have heard about unethical dealings, dirty tricks and crimes.

If you want to understand just a bit about Watergate, watch the old film, All the President’s Men, as I did a few weeks ago. It will tell you all you need to know about a terrible chapter in U.S. history.

However, if there is good news about Watergate, it is that reaction to the crimes and excesses of the scandal ushered in almost 40 years of commitment to ethical behavior and conduct in and about government, both on the part of elected officials and the public at large.

Elected and appointed officials recognized the importance of honesty and ethics. The public expected it.

But, now, in the last 10 years, ethics has receded from public consciousness.

“The current ethics program, at least at the federal level, was developed in response to Watergate,” recalls Walter Shaub, the retired director of the Federal Ethics Office. “The system worked well for 40 years. There was room for improvement, but, for the most part, the system worked well as a preventive mechanism. The flaw was that it was completely dependent on the president’s administration to comply and set an example. The current administration has signaled that it does not want the system to work.” current federal ethics program was developed in response to Watergate. The system

In response to such a reality, Oregon Common Cause created a volunteer committee of 10 citizens more than a year ago to meet and propose ways to promote ethical behavior and conduct in public life.

Members of the committee were drawn from the Executive and Judicial Branches in Oregon state government, former state legislators in Oregon, an experienced Oregon college political science expert, and representatives of the business community. In short, a wealth of experience existed on the committee.

One step the committee took was to work with DHM Research, one of Oregon’s most reputable polling firms, to test Oregonian attitudes about ethics and honesty in government.

In one question, respondents were asked how important it was for high-level officials such as presidents, governors and senators to be honest and ethical. The answer – 98 per cent said honesty and ethics was important. That even exceeded a recent PEW Research Report, which put the proportion at 91 per cent.

In another question, DHM asked respondents to rate credentials for high-level public officials. Basic honesty came out on top, but “ability to compromise” also ranked highly. It came in at 83 per cent, again just higher than a PEW report at 78 per cent. That’s important because, for government to work in the way it is supposed to work in a democracy, finding the smart middle ground is critical.

Buoyed by the DHM survey results and after reviewing a wide ethics landscape, the Common Cause Committee decided to focus on two initiatives – (1) creating ethics pledges for public officials and, (2) injecting ethics education in school curricula. It also considered, but did not end up proposing, a major effort to educate voters about the importance of ethics, stopping that only because of the huge financial cost of such a ballot-measure type effort.

The first initiative is to advocate that candidates running for Secretary of State and the Second District Congressional seat sign pledges to commit to ethical behavior and conduct, both in the campaigns and, for the two who win, in office.

The pledge focuses on basic principles of honesty, fairness, responsibility and respect, emphasizing, for example, that opponents are valid participants in elections regardless of who wins. Such a construct would be far different than what happens in many election races these days.

Based on experience in these two races, the goal is to expand the range of elected officials who would be asked to sign such pledges, both for campaigns and in office.

“The good news here,” says state government veteran Mike Marsh, chair of the Common Cause Committee, “is that, if officials sign the pledges, they can be measured on how well they live up to them. That would increase the value of ethics in public life.”

As for appointed officials, Marsh said he and colleagues will be working with the governor and other high-level officials in Oregon to advocate enacting the ethics pledges for “executive and management service” employees, as well as those appointed to state boards and commissions. Together, that would amount to hundreds of officials who would commit to ethical behavior by signing the pledges.

For appointed officials, the idea of a pledge builds on what is already in Oregon law — ethics rules and regulations governed by the Oregon Government Ethics Commission, which is being consulted about the renewed ethics emphasis in Oregon.

“Ethics pledges,” Marsh adds, “are used by a number of major Oregon private companies that have a commitment to ethics and honesty in how they operate every day. This includes Intel which assigned an executive to work with us on the committee and which asks its executives to sign ethics pledges every year.”

The second initiative relates to re-emphasizing ethics issues in the social studies and civics curricula school districts have in place for high school students.

The committee has worked closely with two districts – the Bend-LaPine School District in Central Oregon and the Salem-Keizer School District in the Willamette Valley – to help officials draft appropriate additions to current curricula. Those two districts have been open to the ethics emphasis and curriculum experts are meeting now to translate proposals into usable form for the classroom.

The goal is to develop models that could work in other districts around Oregon.

Overall, there are few issues as important as building – or re-building – trust in government.

PEW Research reports that “76 per cent of Americans believe trust in the federal government has declined in the past 20 years and, when asked why, more than one third cite something related to how the U.S. government is performing – whether it is doing too much, too little, the wrong things or nothing at all – including how money has corrupted it, how corporations and unions control it, and general references to ‘the swamp.’”

It’s time for all Americans to reverse the “we don’t trust government” trend. All of us should be able to expect, if not demand, a high-level of ethical and honest behavior on the part of those who serve in government.

And, as citizens, we should practice ethical behavior ourselves as we relate to government and as we live in our neighborhoods. If we recognize a high ethical bar for ourselves, it would make what we expect of government more credible.

 

 

 

 

 

THE NEXT BIG THING FOR OREGON STATE GOVERNMENT

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19TH 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, 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.

In a way, the next big thing for state government has already started even as the first big thing – the coronavirus pandemic – continues.

What is the next big thing?

It is a huge threat to the State of Oregon government budget, which is heavily tied to personal and corporate income tax revenue.

In this blog, I set out to achieve two objectives: First, to summarize aspects of the “next big thing,” and, second, to propose a list of questions public officials should ask as they chart a new budget path.

Before long, we’ll get confirmation of the huge hole in tax revenue due to the economic shutdown.

Governor Kate Brown already has directed state agencies to prepare for almost $2 billion in cuts of “general funds” (income tax revenue) for the current two-year budget cycle.

In a memo issued to agency directors, the state’s chief financial officers directed agencies to submit plans for 8.5 per cent cuts in their general fund spending for the two-year budget cycle, a scenario that would reflect what budget officials believe is likely a worst-case outcome for the current two-year budget cycle.

Agencies funded by “user funds” also will be involved in the budget-cutting exercise (see below).

So, the hit will fall on the K-12 education funding, Higher Education, the Department of Human Services, the Oregon Health Authority, the Department of Corrections, the Department of Transportation and Travel Oregon, among others.

According to Oregon Public Broadcasting, the governor’s order — the most notable cost-cutting step Brown has taken to date — occurs against a dramatic change of fortunes for state finances. As recently as March, forecasters anticipated the state would bring in $1.15 billion more than what it planned to spend in the current budget.

That was before the COVID-19 pandemic forced major hits to some of the state’s largest revenue sources: Income and business taxes that make up the vast majority of the state’s general fund, lottery revenues decimated by bar and restaurant closures, taxes on fuel and heavy trucks, and user fees that benefit a range of different agencies.

“Clearly the state budget will take a hit, just like all private sector businesses have taken a hit to their revenues [and] workers have taken hits to their paychecks,” according to Josh Lehner, Oregon state economist. “That translates even more than one-for-one into reductions in-state resources.”

The prospect of state budget cuts arise against a backdrop of consideration in Congress to make grants to local government in the next round of coronavirus relief. But, regardless of the extremity of the circumstances in many states, including Oregon, action by Congress is far from assured.

It is bound up in tension between Democrats and Republicans — Democrats want relief for local governments; Republicans want liability protection for businesses.

Never the twain shall meet, though it could be possible for both sides to get at least a measure of what they want. Call it compromise.

Agencies in Oregon outside the general fund will not be immune from budget cutbacks. For instance, the Oregon Department of Transportation, which relies on fuel and heavy trucks taxes for much of its funding, said in a recent report that an ongoing steep reduction in driving could result in a $120 million hit to the State Highway Fund.

Meanwhile, cuts are going to be far steeper at Travel Oregon, a semi-independent agency that relies on the state’s transient lodging tax for nearly all of its funding. With travel and tourism halted in the pandemic, stays at hotels and vacation rentals that pay the tax are plummeting, and the speed of any rebound is uncertain.

So, against this formidable backdrop, even as the phase of government shutdowns could be abating just a bit, here are three questions public officials should ask as they face the budget challenge.

Do so, perhaps in special legislative session (which has not yet been called), could avoide just a flat, across-the-board approach.

What is the specific problem a budget line item is supposed to support?

This question is seldom raised or even discussed. Yet, it should be, especially now. Too often, it has been business as usual. But, if the cuts are deep enough – and they will be — the reality will call for asking this hard question, as well as answering it.

Is there an appropriate role for government to play?

This is an even more basic question that tests another often-ignored issue.

If there is a role for government, what does the state expect to get for the money it spends? In other words, what is the expected return on investment?

Return on investment often is a foreign concept in the halls of the Legislature. But, even more, amidst the coronavirus pandemic, the question is worth asking. What results are programs supposed to achieve? And, if they don’t produce those results, cut them.

Answering these questions won’t remove the pain of budget cutting, both for state government employees, school district employees, the kids they teach, and Oregonians who depend on state services. But, answering the questions well and candidly will be critical as the state charts a new budget course, one that contemplates a reduced role for state government.

That reduced role is an obligation because, when the day is done, in contrast to the federal government, state government must operate within a balanced budget.

 

THE MOMENT WHEN TRUMP’S “SCHTICK” FINALLY FAILED

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19TH 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, 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.

The headline in this blog proposes what I hope will be true.

The moment when Donald Trump advocated people ingesting poisonous cleaners to rid themselves of the coronavirus may stand at the beginning of the end for Trump.

At least that’s what Washington Post columnist Michael Gerson posits this morning.

Here is how he put it:

“President Trump’s April 23 White House briefing — in which he proposed a novel coronavirus research agenda of injected or ingested disinfectants — may be remembered as the moment his schtick finally failed.

“Of course, there have been plenty of other examples of arrogant ignorance. Trump has made a career of career-ending gaffes. After each, he has picked himself up, dusted himself off, and embraced idiocy with renewed dedication and enthusiasm.”

Over the last three years, I’ve heard a lot of words used to describe Trump, who stands, for me, as the worst president in this country’s history. But, Gerson’s column uses a new one – “schitick.”

The dictionary defines the word: a routine or piece of business inserted to gain a laugh or draw attention to oneself.”

Sounds exactly like Trump.

I have used a lot of words to describe himn, including “buffoon,” which is how he acts as president.

I also have said that Trump fails any test of political leadership, which I have described as involving such credentials as (a) integrity, (b) accountability, (c) ability to compromise (for the public good), (d) ability to communicate (including words in a sentence that make sense), (e) empathy, and (f) humility.

On all counts, Trump fails.

So, with Gerson, I hope Trump’s “schtick finally fails.”

THE SOLACE OF A ROUND OF GOLF — OR TWO OR MORE

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19TH 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, 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.

Through the coronavirus pandemic, I have been one of the lucky ones in this country who have had access to a golf course.

Then, I read an article in the Wall Street Journal over the weekend that appeared under this headline:

“A round of golf provides trivial frustrations and triumphs that feel so welcome”

Sports columnist Barry Svrluga wrote this:

“The PGA Tour is scheduled to resume competition as of July 11. I’m not here to predict whether that will happen or should happen. What I’m here to do: Throw my clubs in the back of the car, lace up the (soft) spikes and see what playing golf feels like in the midst of a crippling pandemic.

“A normal drive to the golf course can be loaded with feelings: Anticipation and excitement, but maybe even angst and anxiety depending on the state of my game and the stature of the course that awaits. This drive — my first to a golf course in 6½ weeks — brought an unusual amount of apprehension.”

That’s because, for Svrluga, golf courses in the District of Columbia and Maryland have been closed by order of their respective governments. Coronavirus has impacted all sorts of businesses, but particularly those deemed non-essential, and there’s little hope in arguing that golf courses should take on an “essential” label.

But in Virginia – as is the case in Oregon — if local and county officials feel as if it’s safe to be open, golf is allowed.

So, is golf safe during the pandemic?

I think the answer can be yes, with appropriate restrictions and safeguards.

“I do think that golf is one of the relatively safer sports to play in this era of the pandemic,” says Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins University Center for Health Security who is an expert in infectious diseases. “It naturally engenders itself to social distancing. It’s not a contact sport. It’s played outdoors. And there are ways to modify it to reduce the risks.”

Here in Salem, Oregon, my friends and I have been fortunate to play Illahe Hills Golf and Country Club throughout the pandemic.

We have done so with various restrictions, including:

  • Maintaining social distance
  • Limiting golf carts to one person
  • Leaving flagsticks in the golf hole (with a sleeve at the bottom of the flag to make sure the golf ball doesn’t go all the way down)
  • Taking rakes out of the bunkers.

All this has been possible because the Golf Alliance of Oregon was able to get this explanation from the Business Oregon Department in the immediate aftermath of Governor Kate Brown’s “Stay at Home” order:

“Golf is allowed as long as the social distancing measures are in place, country club activities for a gathering would not be allowed. We categorized golf similar to a hike or outdoor activity, rather than through “essential travel” which is meant to stop vacations.

In the spirit of full disclosure, as a member of the Board of Directors of the Oregon Golf Association (which is part of the Golf Alliance), I counseled against asking the Governor’s Office for clarification of its order as it pertained to golf.

I thought there was room within the specific words in the order to allow golf “as an outdoor activity,” and I thought it was best not to raise the issue for fear of generating a negative answer.

Fortunately, my advice didn’t matter.  Someone else called the governor’s staff and got the good answer quoted above.

So, we continued playing golf.

The fact we have done so is a tribute to the management and staff at Illahe Hills. They have done a masterful job of maintaining an important activity for home-bound folks in a way that keeps players safe.

The number of those who have played golf here has been steeply on the rise. On a normal day – remember those pre-coronavirus days? – about 50 players would have been on the course. These days, the numbers have topped 150.

According to the Wall Street Journal article, the Johns Hopkins scholar mentioned above put it very well when she said: “The virus isn’t going anywhere. It’s here until we have a vaccine. But if your choice is playing rugby or playing golf, it’s clear which one is less likely to be risky. As this social distancing continues, golf is something that I think is a relatively safe activity.”

Good.

And I am one who will never take for granted all of the good work that has allowed me to continue playing the game I love – not for score, but for “the love of the game” and for friends who enjoy it with me.

DEALING WITH WANDERLUST BY LOOKING BACKWARD

PERSPECTIVE FROM THE 19TH 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, 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.

Many of us have put traveling on hold during the coronavirus pandemic. For good reason.

Better to be stuck at home than stuck somewhere else.

A piece in the Wall Street Journal yesterday struck a chord with me as it advocated “dealing with wanderlust by looking backward.”

Backward at past trips you have taken and remembering the great experiences of those trips.

As the author, Danny Heitman, put it, “For homebound travelers, a glance at the road in the rearview mirror has pleasures of its own.”

Heitman continued:

“Last autumn, my wife and I traveled to England and France for our 25th wedding anniversary, a trip we almost didn’t take. There were a hundred reasons not to go, and we’d considered delaying our second honeymoon until this spring, but we went ahead anyway. Now, as a pandemic makes such travel impossible, we’re glad we took the plunge when we did.

“All of this came to mind a few weeks ago as I was clearing our household study so I could join millions of other Americans in working from home. That’s when I came across a thick manila folder filled with pamphlets, playbills and receipts from our trans-Atlantic idyll.

“Out spilled the store map from Harrod’s, the iconic London department store where we savored ice cream and tea on a drizzly October evening. A brochure brought me back to Samuel Johnson’s old house near Fleet Street, another favorite spot. A rail pass reminded me of our day trip to Paris—and of strolling arm in arm along a stone bridge crossing the Seine.”

For me, the good news of past trips is that my wife, Nancy, has been very good at taking photos that memorialize fond memories. Looking back at those photos these days is a great escape.

Similarly, daughter, Lissy, has done a great job of collecting photos and other memorabilia and binding them in books that on our coffee tables – but not just “sit;” we look at the grreat photos often.

So, if you, like me, are tried of being housebound, take the great escape of looking at photos of past trips. Revel in the memories.

Heitman closes with this:

“With jets grounded and itineraries dashed, prospective tourists can’t know for sure where they’re going or when they’ll get there. But in this peculiar pause, homebound travelers have a rare chance to think more deeply about where they’ve been.

“That’s a real gift, since technology has both enlarged our capacity to collect travel memories and indulge the backward glance.”