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, 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.

Even as the U.S. House is debating impeachment at this moment, I write again about the bottom line for me.

By Trump’s defenders, we – as Americana – are being asked to just head to the 2020 election rather that support impeachment.

Sure, we are supposed to trust that the election will be fair. It won’t be.

To buttress this point, I point to a column by Dana Milbank that appeared this morning in the Washington Post. He writes that, not only does Trump stanbd accused of asking a foreign government to intrude into the election on his behalf, he is continuing to seek the what has been labeled “a favor.”

Rather than post more of my comments on this blog, I simply will quote excerpts of what Milbank has written.

**********

It was as if an accused white-collar criminal, during jury selection for his bribery trial, had offered the judge a briefcase full of unmarked bills.

Or if a drug offender, taking the stand to defend himself against charges that he trafficked in narcotics, had tried to sell a brick of cocaine to the jury foreman.

But it really happened. Even as the House on Tuesday worked out the rules of the debate that will almost certainly see President Trump impeached by Wednesday night, Trump and his team continued to commit the very offenses for which he is being punished.

As the Rules Committee moved to the floor an impeachment article alleging Trump had abused his office by soliciting foreign help for his reelection campaign, Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, boasted to CNN that Trump is “very supportive” of Giuliani’s ongoing efforts to dig up political dirt in Ukraine that would help with Trump’s reelection campaign.

“We’re on the same page,” a defiant Giuliani, fresh from a dirt-seeking trip to Ukraine, said of Trump. “Just in case you think we’re on defense, we’re not.”

It was the latest stop on Giuliani’s media tour — of Fox News, the New Yorker, the New York Times and the Post — boasting about Trump’s active engagement in Giuliani’s attempts to get dirt on Joe Biden and to bulldoze, with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s help, U.S. officials who stand in their way.

The moment Giuliani’s plane touched down from Ukraine last week, he said, Trump called him to ask, “What did you get?” He boasted that he forced out corruption-fighting ambassador Marie Yovanovitch because he needed her “out of the way.” He says he’s writing up a 20-page report full of the dirt he has dug for Trump.

And Trump doesn’t disagree. “He does this out of love, believe me,” the president said of Giuliani on Monday.

In response, Democrats must show their love, too — of the rule of law, the sanctity of elections and democracy itself — by impeaching this recidivist president. Trump continues to cheat in the 2020 election.

**********

Point made. We cannot trust the 2020 election, so why wait for it.

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, 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.

Let it be said that the Washington Post agrees with me.

When it comes to the impeachment process, I wrote in this blog that it made no sense to me that, instead of the process, we should just wait until the next election in 2020.

Sure.

Wait for an election that is already tainted and will continue to be skewed in favor of Trump by actions Trump himself takes, immune as he is to anything and anyone who fails to bow before the Trump altar

With a series of intentional act by the president, U.S. democracy is being turned on its head.

Here’s the way the Post made the same point:

“President Trump has fallen into a pattern of behavior: This is not the first time he has solicited foreign interference in an election, been exposed, and attempted to obstruct the resulting investigation.

“He will almost certainly continue on this course.

“We cannot rely on the next election as a remedy for presidential misconduct when the president is seeking to threaten the very integrity of that election.”

For me, that is the bottom line of the impeachment process. Go forward with it because we cannot trust the next election.

A footnote.

More than 750 historians across the national have signed on to a letter that verifies Trump’s abuse of power. Here is what the letter said:

“President Trump’s numerous and flagrant abuses of power are precisely what the Framers had in mind as grounds for impeaching and removing a president. The president’s offenses, including his dereliction in protecting the integrity of the 2020 election from Russian disinformation and renewed interference, arouse once again the framers’ most profound fears that powerful members of government would become, in Hamilton’s words, ‘the mercenary instruments of foreign corruption.’”

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, 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.

If you think about it only for a minute, it’s mind-boggling.

Trump is guilty of a host of crimes.

Writing in the New York Times, Paul Waldman puts it this way:

“Throughout his life, Trump used his wealth as a shield against accountability, allowing him to commit all manner of misdeeds. Again and again, he deceived, dominated or defeated people who had less power than him and institutions incapable of constraining him, whether it was a women he abused, a small business owner he stiffed on a bill, a mark whose life savings he stole with one of his scams, workers left holding the bag when he walked away from his debts or a government agency that didn’t realize he was defrauding it until the statute of limitations had expired.”

Republicans in Congress don’t agree and are defending Trump at every turn, believing, it would appear, that their own future in politics depends on being tied ever more closely to a terrible public figure, Trump.

The trouble is they might be right.

Trump could win in 2020 because, for one thing, Democrats may propose a candidate with no ability to encourage voters to a higher calling than to support a scofflaw.

Many Democrats running for president are so far left as to be off any semblance of a political spectrum. They want to transform the country, making it essentially a socialist state as government provides everything for everybody.

At least three Democrats in the presidential sweepstakes are not so far left – Pete Buttigieg, Joe Biden and Amy Klobuchar. But each of them carries deficits that may harm their chances – Buttigieg is young and gay, Biden is old and prone to verbal gaffes, and Klobuchar is not well known enough to carry a national profile.

For me, given Trump’s conduct, he cannot be trusted to act in the national interest. As a narcissist, all he sees is his own interest and he proves it every day.

This is the essential definition of Trump – a narcissist. If you consider what appears in the following paragraphs, it sounds just like Trump.

In the December issue of The Atlantic, Dan P. McAdams, a psychology professor at Northwestern University, provided thoughtful insight into this mental health ailment – narcissism.

“Psychological research,” he wrote, “demonstrates that many narcissists come across as charming, witty, and charismatic upon initial acquaintance. They can attain high levels of popularity in the short term. As long as they prove to be successful and brilliant, they may be able to weather criticism and retain their exalted status.

“But more often than not, narcissists wear out their welcome. Over time, people become annoyed, if not infuriated, by their self-centeredness. When narcissists begin to disappoint those they once dazzled, their descent can be especially precipitous. There is still truth in the ancient proverb: Pride goeth before the fall.

“Nearly three years into Trump’s presidency, how does this generalization about narcissism hold up for him?

“On the one hand, many of the people who have staffed Trump’s administration have learned that he is not the ‘stable genius’ he claims to be. Disappointed and beaten down, they have left in droves. On the other hand, Trump has retained the loyal backing of many voters despite scandal, outrage, and chaos.

“How is this possible?

“Why has Trump followed the predictable course for narcissism in one way, alienating many who have served in his administration, and defied expectations in another way, by continuing to attract an adoring core?

“At its mythic heart, narcissism is a story of disappointment. The ancient source is the Greek tale of Narcissus, a beautiful young boy who falls in love with his reflection in a pool. Captivated with his beguiling image, Narcissus vows never to leave the object of his desire.

“But the reflection — forever outside his embrace — fails to reciprocate, and as a result Narcissus melts away, a victim of the passion burning inside of him. The lover’s inconsolable disappointment is that he cannot consummate his love for the reflection, his love for himself.

“A real-life narcissist, by contrast, manages to take his eyes off himself just long enough to find out if others are looking at him. And if the narcissist has admirers, this makes him feel good. It temporarily boosts his self-esteem.

“Likewise, his admirers feel a rush of excitement and allure. They enjoy being in the presence of such a beautiful figure—or a powerful, creative, dynamic, charismatic, or intriguing figure. They bask in his reflected glory, even if they find his self-obsession to be unseemly. As time passes, however, the admirers grow weary.

“Once upon a time, they thought the narcissist was the greatest, but now they suspect that he is not. Or maybe they just get tired of him, and disgusted with all the self-admiration. They become disappointed, for very few narcissists can consistently provide the sufficient beauty, power, and greatness to sustain long-term unconditional devotion. In the end, everybody loses.

“The former fans loathe themselves for being fools, or else they blame the narcissist for fooling them. And the narcissist never attains what can never be humanly attained anyway: supreme and unending love and adoration of the self.”

This describes Trump perfectly. He fawns over himself and, if others don’t follow suit, then he derides them, often in terms marked by his own fear and loathing.

As one example, consider Trump’s comments about the late senator John McCain. When McCain, a genuine American war hero, didn’t bow at the throne of Trump, then, to Trump, he was not worth anything, so in hugely derogatory terms, he said so.

Narcissism explains a lot about Trump. I just wish those who have fawned over Trump will become, as the writer above says, “annoyed, if not infuriated, by Trump’s self-centeredness and will just get tired of him, disgusted with all the self-admiration.”

It cannot happen too soon for this country.

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, 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.

A writer in the Wall Street Journal has drawn an appalling stupid on the quid pro issue.

It is this:

• On one hand stands President Donald Trump who dangled a quid pro quo pro to Ukraine leader Volodymyr Zelensky in an effort to rig the next presidential election in Trump’s favor.
• On the other handstands House Speaker Nancy Pelosi who, it is said, offered a quid pro quo to prod her Democrat colleagues to vote in favor of impeachment when it reaches the House floor next week. [For the record, she denies “whipping her members, which is Congress talk for trying to compel votes.]

The difference?

Trump sold out the country for his personal gain, thus creating an incredible taint on the next presidential election. Meanwhile, Trump acolytes in the U.S. House want us to wait for that tainted election.

Pelosi, by contrast, did the work of being a political leader by rounding up votes in a legislative body, even as she averred she would not try to compel members to vote one way or the other – as if she could compel in the first place.

She did not sell out the national interest for her personal gain.

For Pelosi, there is no illegal quid pro quo.

For Trump, there is an illegal quid pro quo.

If we needed more evidence of Trump’s misdeeds, the Ukraine case is stark and growing starker — if that is a word.

As California Representative Eric Swalwell has summarized: Investigators learned that Trump sent Rudy Giuliani to Ukraine to get dirt on Joe Biden, directed two ambassadors to work with Giuliani, fired an anti-corruption ambassador to Ukraine, told Vice President Pence not to go to the Ukrainian inauguration, had his staff chief withhold Ukraine’s military assistance, refused a White House meeting with Ukraine’s president, ignored his advisers’ anti-corruption talking points, asked the Ukrainian president for “a favor” and for an investigation into opponent Biden, confirmed it publicly, asked China to do the same, and blocked investigators from learning more.

Trump is still doing it. Guilani just returned from Ukraine and will be telling Trump about new dirt he has dug up against Joe Biden.

Enough!

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, 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.

If you want to know about the sad state of politics in this country, just look at the House Judiciary Committee impeachment process now under way in Washington, D.C.

Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan wrote today that many outside of D.C. say it is not worth looking at impeachment process because is all about government, not issues of importance to real citizens. Plus, the outcome is clear anyway.

Still, for me, a political junkie, it is not hard not to pay just a bit of attention to the House Judiciary Committee. Things fell into disarray yesterday. The hearing focused on name-calling, insults and scandals.

I blame both sides for this precipitous loss of decorum and polity – and, given what’s literally at stake for this country, it’s hard even to use the words “decorum and polity” when so much more is at stake. The “much more” is the ability for Americans to vote in fair and open elections. With Trump and his minions, this will not be possible and, make no mistake, they are still working to rig the next election.

For the loss of decorum and polity, I blame Trump whose approach to politics focuses yelling and screaming, as well on over-the-top criticisms of anyone who has the temerity not to agree with him as this country’s dictator who can do no wrong.

Yesterday, even as the House Judiciary Committee was convening, Trump hurled a tweet to his 60+ million followers blasting a 16-year-old girl with Asperger’s syndrome, Greta Thunberg, who has rallied efforts at fighting climate change around the globe.

Why?

Well, Thunberg was named Time’s Person of the Year over guess whom? Trump. That produced the tweet. Incredibly, Trump tweeted 110 more times during the day, a record the Washington Post took as a sign he was worrying about impeachment.

Doesn’t Trump have anything else to do but tweet?

Trump’s criticism of Thunberg was not the first time he has come across as the worst kind of bully. He has shown time and again that he has no qualms about bullying anyone and everyone. He poked fun at Carly Fiorina’s looks when she was competing with him for the Republican nomination during the 2016 campaign. In that same campaign, Trump mocked a New York Times reporter by crudely mimicking his physical disability.

I could go on and on, even including the despicable fact that Trump mocked U.S. military hero John McCain, both before and even after his death.

Despite all this, the chances of impeachment conviction are slim in the Senate. But, when the House votes in favor of the two impeachment articles – as it will next week – Trump will stand as only the third president in history to be impeached by Congress.

If it’s possible, things got worse in the Judiciary Committee yesterday.

These extraneous issues came up. Hunter Biden’s drug problem. Allegations about Trump’s sexual escapades. A congressman’s past DUI arrest.

According to the Washington Post, one of the dramatic moments occurred when Representative Matt Gaetz, a freshman from Florida, proposed an amendment to add mention of Hunter Biden and his former position on the board of Burisma, a Ukrainian gas company, to the articles of impeachment.

More from the Post: “Gaetz then proceeded to discuss Biden’s struggle with drug addiction, reading directly from a New Yorker article that discussed it and an episode involving a crack pipe discovered in Biden’s Hertz rental car.

“I don’t want to make light of anybody’s substance abuse issues. [Yeah, right, I add.] But it’s a little hard to believe that Burisma hired Hunter Biden to resolve their international disputes when he could not resolve his own dispute with Hertz.”

In the current ways of D.C. – one bad turn deserves another bad turn — Democrats responded by noting Gaetz’s previously reported DUI arrest in 2008.

In an unusual move relative to a newcomer in Congress, the Post produced a long piece on Gaetz, which chronicled his efforts to stand out from the crowd and bow before Trump.

Gaetz is achieving his goal – shameless publicity as a way to curry favor from Trump.

This from Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank: “…Gaetz is among the most vulgar I have ever encountered in covering Washington, D.C. He invited a Holocaust denier to be his State of the Union guest. He led the Republicans storming of a secure hearing room, endangering government secrets. And now this.”

In terms of fawning over Trump, Representative James Collins, the Republican from Georgia, also goes over-the-top. He is the ranking member on House Judiciary. When he talks, he yells and screams into the camera to rail against Democrats who are conducting what he calls a sham hearing that doesn’t recognize Trump’s many accomplishments.

I could go on and on about the absolute loss of decorum.

What does all say about politics or more broadly about the state of politics in this country?

Not much positive.

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, 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.

We have seen more occasions this week when critics have suggested private sector work comes close to disqualifying an individual for public sector work.

But consider this quote: “Good public servants — including recent Democrat presidents — have worked in the private sector.”

The quote appeared in the Wall Street Journal in a story reporting that Democrat presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg released a list of his clients when he worked at the McKinsey Group. He was able to do so after McKinsey lifted a requirement on Buttigieg not to disclose private sector client lists.

It was good news for Buttigieg. It allowed him, for example, to withstand criticism from another D president candidate, Elizabeth Warren. Apparently concerned about the fact that polls show Buttigieg ahead of her, she produced the height of duplicity when she called out Buttigieg.

Before getting elected to the Senate, Warren, too, worked as a consultant to private corporations – corporations she reviles in all of her campaign activity.

Buttigieg’s client list showed genuine work for private clients, not weird political projects.

From the Wall Street Journal on what Buttigieg said as he released his client list:

“Now, voters can see for themselves that my work amounted to mostly research and analysis. At the same time, I am also concerned about efforts to demonize and disqualify people who have worked in the private sector for the sake of political purity. The majority of Americans have worked in the private sector at some point in their life.”

Good point.

In today’s politics, the risk is that experience –- including private sector experience – is often viewed as disqualifying. Those on the far left, including Warren, want fealty to a list of proposals to expand government, so that health care, education, the chasracter of all buildings (the so-called “Green New Deal”) rest on the federal bureaucracy, not individual effort.

They don’t value real-world work.

For me, Buttigieg’s private sector work is a qualification for public office.

I talked with a friend of mine last night who said he was considering voting for Buttigieg in the Democrat primary. He suggested that Buttigieg’s status as a gay individual, not to mention his young age, actually could work in his favor, if younger people in this country vote.

Hadn’t thought of it in just this way, but my friend could be right.

I just think Buttigieg has conducted himself with distinction along the campaign trail, which has been littered with the fulminations of many others. While I do not agree with all of his comments, he has managed to come across as a reasonable individual with perspectives worth considering.

Part of this rests on his private sector experience. And that’s one reason why I am considering his candidacy.

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, 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.

What Republicans in the U.S. House are saying is that we should wait for the next election to make a decision on Donald Trump.

It may be a good sound bite, but it doesn’t make sense.

For this simple reason: Trump has demonstrably indicated that his approach is to cheat to win the next election and there is little doubt but that, even with the impeachment process moving forward, he’ll continue to do anything to cheat in order to win.

So, we can vote in an unfair election!

No.

While the conventional wisdom is that impeachment won’t move to conviction in the Senate, I say let the process go forward. The more we know about Trump’s unethical, dishonest actions, the more the misdeeds and distortions might come home to roost against him in the 2020 election, even if not the U.S. Senate.

Is it possible to have a second bottom line? Perhaps not, but I have one anyway.

It is this. There is little question but that Trump abused his office by advancing his own personal (political) interests ahead of the national interest. That, to me, warrants conviction. Frankly, it’s hard to think of something more severe – putting yourself as president before the country.

Trump should be sent packing.

 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, 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 may seem like an arcane subject to warrant a blog, but, at least, it’s better than more on the impeachment that grinds on in Washington, D.C. That process seems more like a scripted play than anything else – a play in which the actors, the Democrats and the Republicans, utter hopelessly predictable lines.

The subject in the headline came to my mind late last week as I was invited to attend the annual retreat of the lobbying and public relations company I helped to found more than 25 years ago, CFM Strategic Communications.

Today, I am an emeritus partner, though I don’t get paid to do anything, even as I try to stay in touch with my professional colleagues because, if nothing else, I am a political junkie.

One reason I was asked to be at the annual meeting, I suspect, was that the event was held at a place called Top Golf in Hillsboro, Oregon, which, like other facilities around the country, has a golf driving range, augmented by food and drink.

I am a golfer while many in my old company are not, so there is little doubt but that I was invited to become a temporary golf coach.

In advance of the time on the three-story range, I sat in on about 30 minutes of the all-day meeting which considered company performance issues, including client development. It was reported that, since I retired about three years ago, the company has not been involved as heavily in representing private companies that want to do business with state government.

No surprise there in the sense that my background in state government, before I became a lobbyist, gave me an unusual type of expertise to represent private companies in their bids for state work.

At the same time, it was critical then – and it is critical now — to involve yourself in such representation with a specific set of commitments to preserve the work as being above-board and honest. That’s how we approached the work at CFM – and I recount this, not to take credit for it, but to underline how important it is to represent companies with a strong sense of ethics, including on the part of the companies.

Here is a summary of credentials that are important to do this kind of work. When I first wrote this a few years ago, I labeled it “A Primer on Representing Companies that Want To Do Business with Government, including Oregon State Government.”  The title still works today.

There are at least three main keys to success in this line of lobbying; call them the three c’s:

1. COMPETING:  A major emphasis was to make sure clients understood the need to COMPETE for government business.  Sweetheart deals were not in play, at least not as a matter of course — and, if on occasion, they were, I believed our client should remain above and apart from that kind of unseemly fray.  We believed public officials needed to justify their decisions in the light of day by verifying that the competitive process they oversaw was fair and open to all comers.
2. CONTENT: It was critical for clients to deliver a brief set of messages to the government officials who had circulated a request for proposals.  Brief, staccato-like, to the point.  Get the attention of those making procurement decisions without boring them with “sales or product pitches.”

There usually were three overarching messages to emphasize — as I called them, “the three on’s:”

*  Be on budget:  For most governments, there is no more critical commitment than to live within the amount of money that has been dedicated to a project.

*  Be on time:  Again, it is critical to illustrate an understanding of the time constraints any government is under.

*  Be on track and on target:  Wishes and designs of the government officials are paramount; clients need to understand they are the consultant, with expertise and experience to be sure, but are reporting to the contracting authority which sets the parameters of a project.

3. CREDENTIALS:  If someone is applying for a high-level job, there is no substitute for experience. The same was true for companies competing for government business.  There is no substitute for experience.  Show experiences and successes elsewhere, including welcoming first-hand tours of the sites of the other experiences.

CONCLUSION: Representing companies before government executive agencies can be a private, behind-the-scenes business.  For me, it was not.  I always registered with the appropriate agency, either the Oregon Government Ethics Commission (OGEC) or a local government comparator. Our clients also registered.

This illustrated a critical commitment, both for CFM as the lobbyist and for the company seeking government business:  There was no substitute for full disclosure.

To provide context for decisions such as this, I provide four examples where our representation helped to produce a contract for a client:

Medicaid Management Information System (MMIS):  When Oregon state government set out to establish a new on-line system for managing medical payments for clients under the Medicaid program, Electronic Data Systems (EDS), decided it wanted to compete for the contract, as it done in a number of other MMIS projects around the country.  The company came to me to ask for help and I readily agreed.

EDS won the contract. [Then, Hewlett-Packard bought EDS, so the contract was signed by H-P.]

Oregon Wireless Interoperability Network (OWIN):  In the aftermath of the 911 terrorist attack in New York, authorities in Oregon agreed that they should create an “interoperable” public safety communications system to assure that various types of first responders could communicate with each other in the event of a natural or man-made disaster.  One company that indicated it wanted to compete was M-A/COM Wireless Systems. It came to CFM for help.

M-A/COM won the contract. [The company eventually became Harris Corporation, so the contract was signed by Harris.]

State of Oregon e-government operations:  As EDS won the Oregon state government contract to run the MMIS system, its credentials came to the attention of the State of Oregon chief information officer who asked EDS if it would be willing to take over operation of state government’s overarching e-government system.

The answer was yes. And, again, EDS engaged CFM.

EDS won the contract.

Oregon State Capitol Building Renovation:  About 15 years ago, the “gold man” at the top of Oregon’s State Capitol building almost came tumbling down in what for Oregon was a major earthquake.  That, coupled with a general recognition that parts of the infrastructure for the Capitol building were more than 75 years old, prompted legislative leaders to embark on a major renovation project.

On the construction management competition, a company with a long-standing Oregon office, JE Dunn, decided to submit a bid and sought help from CFM because our firm had worked with company officials over the years on a variety of other projects.

JE Dunn won the contract.

The successful projects listed above underline a final important credential for competing in Oregon — and that is to understand the political context within which procurement decisions will be made.  A company doesn’t have to operate offices in Oregon, though that can be a clear advantage if it does.  But it does have to illustrate an understanding of the political backdrop which exists for any major government project.

All in all, representing companies competing for government contracts is a purposeful business.  It rests on the reputation of a company like CFM, which takes representation seriously and realizes that any useful project will be handled with full disclosure in the light of day.  It also rests on the credentials of the company competing for state business.

May the best bid win, not always the lowest bid.

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, 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.

It used to be that politics was defined as “the art of compromise.”

No longer.

To many, compromise is a dirty word. For me, as a retired lobbyist, the fall of compromise from the political lexicon is bad news.

It makes good sense for middle ground solutions to exist when policymakers face difficult issues. It should not just be “win or lose.” The process should allow, if not value, finding solutions in the middle.

That’s one reason why, during my career, I enjoyed lobbying more than running election campaigns.

In the former, middle ground exists. In the latter it does not – it’s only win or lose.

We face these realities in today’s version of politics:

• Donald Trump and other Republicans on the right (if that is really where Trump belongs?) ignore political processes to advance their own causes – no compromise.
• Democrats running for president and various members of Congress on the left want government to handle nearly every issue. They, too, avoid compromise at all costs.
• Voters across America also are fault because they reject notions of compromise as being evil since only “their principles” matter – no compromise.

So, these definitional phrases come to my mind to chronicle the sad state of politics today – phrases that are more accurate than the old one, “politics is the art of compromise:”

• Politics is when you go out to the street corner (figuratively at least, if not literally) and yell about how right you are on every issue.
• Politics is when you call someone who doesn’t agree with you stupid, ignorant and just plain wrong all of the time – often in words that impugn the character of those who disagree with you.
• Politics is when you stand on what you call principle to justify your behavior when no ethical, moral principles are involved.
• Politics is “my way or the highway.”

In my work as a volunteer member of a committee appointed by Oregon Common Cause to propose ways to restore ethical conduct as a hallmark of American citizenship, my colleagues and I have worried a lot about the loss of trust in government.

In the case of public impeachment hearings in Washington, D.C., testimony from witnesses and questions from committee members illustrate that trust is up for grabs in America.

In fact, a recent PEW Research Study reported record levels of mistrust in institutions of government, religion, business and media. Since the Watergate hearings, which are now a distant memory for many Americans, ethics has receded as a matter of public concern.

That is understandable given the conduct of public officials on both sides of the political aisle who display “credentials” such as those in my list of political phrases above. It is bad news for this country.

One way to restore trust – one way, at least for me – would be to return to a position that compromise is a worthy, ethics, trustworthy goal.

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, 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.

Do you remember where you were when…

• Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin landed on the moon?
• President John F. Kennedy was felled by bullets in Dallas?
• When terrorists slammed planes into the Twin Towers in New York?
• When the draft lottery started 50 years ago – and affected so many young men in and around 1970?

Part of the reason the draft lottery came to mind related to a story I read in one of my most recent editions of The Atlantic. It recounted the draft lottery in these words:

“Festooned with mustard-yellow drapes and a dangling American flag, the room resembled a grange hall on bingo night. At center stage sat a wide vase containing oblong, plastic lotto balls, and over that vessel stood Representative Alexander Pirnie of New York.

“As his hand dug into the vase he averted his eyes, like a game-show contestant pulling prizes from a mystery bag. Almost as many U.S. television viewers as had seen the Apollo 11 moon landing a few months earlier were watching him now.

“Inside each capsule was a small sheet, to be pulled out like the slip from a fortune cookie. But these small strips did not predict the future; they changed it. Each paper’s inscription scheduled the assignment of what scientists would call a “treatment condition”—an intervention that, from that day onward, would alter the life outcomes its subjects experienced, just as a pill randomly allocated in a pharmaceutical trial might alter a participant’s health.

“Pirnie would not have thought of his role in these terms, but on December 1, 1969, he was serving as a lab assistant in one of the most significant randomized experiments in history: The Vietnam Selective Service Lotteries.

“’The lotteries’ not only changed how the Selective Service chose men for the conflict in Vietnam, they also marked a turning point in the history of science. By assigning military induction via an arbitrary factor uncorrelated with personal traits, the lotteries amounted to an experiment.”

However, all of the studies cannot overcome a basic and foreboding fact: By the sheer act of the drawing of a birthdate number, thousands of citizens died in a far enough and purposeless war where those who took the nation to war had no idea why, nor how to end the carnage.

I was subject to the draft lottery when it mattered in a huge way because of the existence of the basic fact cited above: It was a lottery to enable the fight in the ride paddies of Vietnam.

All of this remains a difficult memory for me. Not because I went there to fight.  But because many of my friends did and came away changed because of the experience, both because of the terrible toll of war, as well as the aftermath when many who risked their lives in a far off place were not welcomed back to the U.S.

Plus, one of my friends with whom I grew up in Portland shared with me a draft number that meant he would be drafted. He allowed himself to be drafted and went to Vietnam. While he survived that experience as a medic in the field, he came home to contract cancer and eventually succumb to agent-orange exposure.

For my part, I am not hesitant to admit that, when the draft occurred, I took initiative to avoid the “regular army obligation.” I chose the Army Reserve..

On the day of the draft lottery, I sat around in my dorm room at college listening to the radio because, back in that day, there was not a way to listen on-line or do much of anything else via technology.

When numbers were drawn, those numbers corresponded to a birth date. My birth date was – and, of course, still is – November 2. It was drawn as #32, so I knew for sure that I would be drafted. Estimates were that the military would have to draft 150 birth dates to reach personnel quotas.

My best friend in college, by the way, was #332, so, obviously, it was his turn to buy drinks that night.

The next day I went down to the U.S. Army Reserve recruiting station, fearing that I would be in a long line of guys around the block trying to do what I was trying to do, which was to avoid Vietnam.

I was the only one there.

So, I signed up immediately for what was a six-year hitch – eight weeks of basic training, eight weeks of advanced training, then six years of being a weekend warrior, along with two weeks of summer camp.

Better, I thought, than being shot at or shooting someone in Vietnam.

The rest is history. I survived the six years intact.

And, I also believe that, in comparison to my friends who went to Vietnam – or other friends who served in Desert Storm, in Iraq and in Afghanistan – I do not deserve the “veteran status” they have earned.

The draft lottery wanted me to go to Vietnam.  I didn’t.