Perspective from the 19^th Hole is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

Even as the country focused on a hard-fought presidential election, results in Oregon offered no major surprises.

In many cases, results could have been predicted accurately even before the election.

That means that, in a year when Republicans have claimed the White House, the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House, Oregon voters did what they have reliably done for much of this century:  Handed Democrats the reins to state government.

For example:

• It appears Democrats were successful in securing a supermajority in the Senate. 

[Supermajorities are important because, when they exist, the party in charge has the ability to make decisions on its own without having to seek support across the political aisle.  And that matters mostly when it comes to tax increases, which, if proposed, must start in the Oregon House of Representatives — see next bullet.]

• It is not clear yet that Democrats will have a super-majority in the House, though a handful of races are too close to call and, if results favor Ds, they could get a supermajority.

• Democrats continued their dominance in statewide elected races by winning in the Secretary of State, Treasurer and Attorney General races.

• One congressional race in Oregon changed hands when Democrat Janelle Bynum prevailed over the incumbent, Lori Chavez-DeRemer.

So, it could be contended that Oregon is out of sync with many parts of the rest of the country, which, by recent media accounts, went to the right, though it also is hard to use political phrases such as “the right” to describe the “why” of Trump’s win.

The fact is that Democrats are in charge in Oeregon and have been for years.  The trend to the left is likely to continue.

As I write this, I remember that the last Republican governor in Oregon was Vic Atiyeh, for whom I had the privilege of working.  Incredibly, that was more than 40 years ago.

Now, as we look forward to the long legislative session in 2025, one of the major issues will be transportation funding where advocates for more say dollars are far too short.  If tax increases are proposed, they will have to originate in the House where, if the current totals –35 to 25 for the Ds – hold, the Ds will have to find one Republican to pass any tax increase on to the Senate.

Another major issue will revolve around the still undecided issue – whether Oregon will be able to compete nationally for new federal semi-conductor investments that, if Oregon succeeds, would mean hundreds of new, high-paying jobs.

A tough part of this for current Oregon Governor Tina Kotek will be whether she will succeed in an effort to designate farmland for such investments.  So far, farm interests are opposing her effort, but, if the land is needed for semi-conductor investments, she could win.

Still, when all is said and done about Oregon’s election, the results will mean that Democrats and Republicans will have to find a way to work together, at least on occasion.

Perspective from the 19^th Hole is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

In the aftermath of Donald Trump’s election win, one of my good friends asked whether Christians should have or should now raise their voices about immigration.

The unfortunate reality is that Trump campaigned against immigrants, leaving his intentional impression that all of them were criminals intent on destroying the country.  Many voters fell for that dishonesty.

Of course, that is not true, which is what could be said about much of what Trump said along the campaign trail or in his previous term as president.

Plus, the fact is that, in America, all of us, other than Native Americans, either are immigrants or descendants of immigrants.  And that includes Trump.

To my good friend, I said several things:

We should make sure in our individual conversations that we don’t denigrate immigrants and, instead, emphasize that they are “real people” who deserve to have a chance to survive, if not thrive, in America just as we have had.

We should find ways to support immigrants by our actions such as, for example, in Salem, to support Salem for Refugees with our time, talent and money.  

The organization, which likely will come under fire in a Trump administration, will be interested in all kinds of support.  To my wife’s credit, we have supported the organization through donations and now will be doing even more when the organization is under threat.  

And, for me, by our actions, we can illustrate our support for ALL people who either are or have the potential to become “children of God.”

I also believe that should not enable our churches to become political instruments.  It is perfectly acceptable in church to value all people as the Bible instructs us – all people regardless of skin color, heritage, and various orientations that could be different than our own.

But, in my judgment, the church should not allow itself to become what Trump appears to want it to become, which is a political organization to support his beliefs, including his anti-Christian ones because, for him, Christianity is nothing more than another political animal.

As I responded to my friend’s good question, I also looked through my past blogs, knowing that, from time to time, I had written about immigration.  I found what I consider to be a good one, one giving credit to George W. Bush for his thoughts on immigration after his presidency.

Here are excerpts from that blog.

**********

When he was president, I liked George Bush for several reasons.

He showed grace and skill under pressure.  He led the nation in responding effectively to the 911 terrorist attack.  He came across as human, admitting his failures and mistakes.

Now, another reason to like Bush has emerged.  It was noted in the Washington Post under this headline:

George W. Bush: Immigration is a defining asset of the United States.  Here’s how to restore confidence in our system.

The nation’s 43^rd president has emerged with what strikes me as incredible piece of work, a book that contains at least two things – a prescription for what this nation should do to reform the immigration system, and a series of drawings by Bush that illustrate that he is an accomplished artist.

I looked at his drawings (which, unfortunately do not copy well in this blog, so I suggest that you get a copy of his new book, which I will do, as well) and recognized almost all of the subjects.

But, here, rather that write more myself, I reprint what Bush proposes on immigration.

**********

Next week, I’m proud to publish a new collection of my paintings, entitled “Out of Many, One.”  The book may not set the art world stirring — hopefully, the critics won’t call it “One Too Many.”

I set out to accomplish two things:  To share some portraits of immigrants, each with a remarkable story I try to tell, and to humanize the debate on immigration and reform.

I hope that these faces, and the stories that accompany them, serve as a reminder that immigration isn’t just a part of our heritage.  New Americans are just as much a force for good now, with their energy, idealism and love of country, as they have always been.

I write about a champion runner who barely survived ethnic violence in East Africa, and who told me, “America has given me everything I dreamed of as a boy.”  I share the story of a young man from France who followed his dream to become an American soldier, and went on to earn the Medal of Honor.  And readers may recognize two distinguished citizens who fled pre-war Europe as children, and who each became U.S. secretary of state.

The backgrounds are varied, but readers won’t have to search hard for a common theme.  It’s gratitude.  So many immigrants are filled with appreciation, a spirit nicely summed up by a Cuban American friend who said:  “If I live for a hundred years, I could never repay what this country has done for me.”

The help and respect historically accorded to new arrivals is one reason so many people still aspire and wait to become Americans.

So how is it that, in a country more generous to new arrivals than any other, immigration policy is the source of so much rancor and ill will?  The short answer is that the issue has been exploited in ways that do little credit to either party.  And no proposal on immigration will have credibility without confidence that our laws are carried out consistently and in good faith.

“Out of Many, One” is not a brief for any specific set of policies, which I leave to the political leaders of today.  However, the book does set forth principles for reform that can restore the people’s confidence in an immigration system that serves both our values and our interests.

One place to start is DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals).  Americans who favor a path to citizenship for those brought here as children, known as “dreamers,” are not advocating open borders.  They just recognize that young men and women who grew up in the United States, and who never knew any other place as home, are fundamentally American.  And they ought not be punished for choices made by their parents.

Another opportunity for agreement is the border.  I have long said that we can be both a lawful and a welcoming nation at the same time.  We need a secure and efficient border, and we should apply all the necessary resources — manpower, physical barriers, advanced technology, streamlined and efficient ports of entry, and a robust legal immigration system — to assure it.

Effective border management starts well beyond the border, so we must work with our neighbors to help them build freedom and opportunity so their citizens can thrive at home.  We cannot rely on enforcement alone to prevent the untenable and so often heartbreaking scenes that come with large-scale migration.

We also need a modernized asylum system that provides humanitarian support and appropriate legal channels for refugees to pursue their cases in a timely manner.  The rules for asylum should be reformed by Congress to guard against unmerited entry and reserve that vital status for its intended recipients.

Increased legal immigration, focused on employment and skills, is also a choice that both parties should be able to get behind.  The United States is better off when talented people bring their ideas and aspirations here.  We could also improve our temporary entry program, so that seasonal and other short-term jobs can more readily be filled by guest workers who help our economy, support their families and then return home.

As for the millions of undocumented men and women currently living in the United States, a grant of amnesty would be fundamentally unfair to those who came legally or are still waiting their turn to become citizens.  But undocumented immigrants should be brought out of the shadows through a gradual process in which legal residency and citizenship must be earned, as for anyone else applying for the privilege.

Requirements should include proof of work history, payment of a fine and back taxes, English proficiency, and knowledge of U.S. history and civics, and a clean background check.  We should never forget that the desire to live in the United States — a worldwide and as powerful an aspiration as ever — is an affirmation of our country and what we stand for.

Over the years, our instincts have always tended toward fairness and generosity.  The reward has been generations of grateful, hard-working, self-reliant, patriotic Americans who came here by choice.

If we trust those instincts in the current debate, then bi-partisan reform is possible.  And we will again see immigration for what it is:  Not a problem and source of discord, but a great and defining asset of the United States.

*********

My conclusion:  Good words from one of our former presidents.  We should reflect on them and accept the principal to support people – ALL people.

Perspective from the 19^th Hole is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

At least for a day, I am taking a break from writing about Donald Trump to focus on a better subject – golf.

For this blog, I am indebted to two sources – one of my good friends, Anne Theis, who likes golf rules as I much, if not more, than I do, and Golf Digest magazine from which I cribbed information.

I hope Anne does not mind that I used her name – and, if she does, well it’s too late.  Her name is in this blog…several times.

I write this blog because it is possible to think of golf rules mostly as carrying penalties for you as a golfer.  And, to be sure, that can be the case.

But, rules also can benefit your game.

Here is the article in Golf Digest that Anne pointed out for me and this is the lead-in to its article:

“There’s an old saying that knowledge is power.  Well, we’ve found a corollary for golfers:  Knowledge of the Rules of Golf can be a powerful asset for anyone looking to keep from giving away too many strokes during a round.

“While most people see the rules as limiting what golfers can do on the course, a broader understanding of golf’s do’s and don’ts allows players to take advantage of opportunities the rules also present — and keep your scorecard from blowing up in the process.”

Relying on Jay Roberts, assistant manager for Rules—Technology, Content and Education for the United States Golf Association, Golf Digest listed seven ways for golf rules to help any golfer, me included.

In what appears below, I am not quoting the Digest verbatim, but providing my own paraphrase of the story.

So, here are the seven:

FREE RELIEF FROM THE ROUGH TO THE FAIRWAY

Under Rule 16.1, a player is entitled to free relief from abnormal course conditions, including immovable obstructions.  The relief could result in the player getting better or worse conditions – no guarantees.

So, it is possible that a golf ball that was in the rough could be dropped in the fairway because the rules treat the fairway and rough the same, both being part of the “general area.”

MAKE STROKE-AND-DISTANCE PENALTY LESS PENAL

This one is a little complicated because a golfer has to take a penalty before taking advantage of the rules.

The situation is this:  A golfer’s drive ends up behind a tree and he or she tries to hit a draw around the tree but ends up going out-of-bounds.

Under Rule 14.6, when your ball goes out-of-bounds, you must take a stroke-and-distance penalty.  But, then take the drop the right way.  The rule allows you to drop within a full club-length of the spot you played your original shot from, not from the exact spot of that previous shot.

In other words, you have a “relief area,” which could provide enough benefit to avoid having to hit another draw.

GROUND UNDER REPAIR RELIEF

This is similar to what’s immediately above.  Taking proper relief could be positive.

Most golfers know they can get free relief when their ball comes to rest inside an area marked as ground under repair (GUR).  Fewer, however, realize that they also can get relief if their ball isn’t inside the GUR area marked, usually marked with white paint.  If their feet are in GUR when they take a stance to play their next shot under Rule 16.1, they get relief.

So, the point is that relief applies to ball, stance, and swing.

RAKING BUNKER BEFORE TAKING A DROP

This is part of what I could consider to be the strangest rule in golf – Rule 12, which deals with bunkers and, for one thing, allows golfers “to strike the sand in frustration and anger.”  Say what!

Despite that general strangeness, the following makes sense. 

If you are in a bunker and play a shot, only to hit it thin, skull it over the green and watch the ball sail out-of-bounds, then you get interesting relief.

Under the stroke-and-distance penalty, you have to drop in the sand, but the same is all messed up from your previous shot.  The good news is Rule 12.2 allows you to clean things up before your drop.  It explains that there are no restrictions on raking a bunker after a ball is played out of the bunker.

RELIEF WHEN A RIGHTY TAKES A LEFTY SHOT

Okay, here’s one I didn’t know about.

Assume a golfer’s drive leaves his or her ball up near a tree.  There’s no way to take a true right-handed swing at the ball, so the right-handed golfer decides to play the shot left-handed.  In taking his or her stance, however, his or her foot is on a cart path and the question then arises:  Can he or she get relief?

The answer is yes because, under Rule 16.1, playing an abnormal stroke doesn’t preclude you from taking relief so long as the stroke you’re trying to make isn’t “clearly unreasonable.”

After you go through the proper steps for finding the nearest point of complete relief and drop your ball back into play, you can proceed to play take the next shot with your normal right-handed stroke if that is better than continuing with the left.  Even more amazing:  If, when you take your stance to play the shot right-handed, another obstruction interferes with that stroke, you can take relief yet again.

IT’S OK TO PRACTICE BETWEEN HOLES (REALLY!)

This is also new for me.

I knew that, in match play, golfers who had finished a hole were allowed to putt again on that hole before moving on to the next hole.

But, in stroke play, I would have said “no,” until I read Golf Digest.

For this issue, Rule 5.5 makes no distinction between the two formats – match play and stroke play.  It restricts the place where practice putting and chipping is allowed to the putting green on the hole just completed, to any practice green (Rule 13.1e) at the course or to the next tee.

The main caveat:  Don’t unreasonably delay play and don’t play any shots from a bunker.

I still don’t understand this one – that the rules allow practicing on any practice green or the next tee from the green you just finished.  Makes no sense to me, so, as I play, I won’t do it.

Plus, why don’t you see tour pros doing this on the PGA Tour or LPGA?  Because the tours use a Model Local Rule I-2 that prohibits players practicing putting or chipping.

FROM OUT-OF-BOUNDS TO THE FAIRWAY

As part of the USGA/R&A rules modernization in 2019, the governing bodies drafted Model Local Rule E-5 as an option for recreational golfers who hit a ball out-of-bounds.

Rather than replay from a tee box that gives you the creeps — maybe there’s a forced carry or a dogleg that just doesn’t suite your swing — you can safely put your ball in play in the fairway at roughly the spot where your first ball went out-of-bounds.

If this model rule is in force, a downside is that you have to add two penalty strokes, so, when you’re playing that shot from the fairway, you’re hitting your fourth shot.

So, with credit again to my friend Anne Theis and Golf Digest, knowing golf rules – such as the ones above – can help, not hurt, your golf game.  

Perspective from the 19^th Hole is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

I am among Americans who are still reeling from the reality that Donald Trump won the election.

No matter that he was convicted of rape, that he views women as sexual objects, that he hates military heroes, that he is a convicted felon, that he considers himself to be the smartest person in any room.  Still, with all that and more, Americans voted for him in strong numbers.

So, to get past that, I say that we now have to hope that Trump has better traits than he displayed the first time he served as president or that he showed on the recent campaign trail.

In the aftermath of the election that is now mostly over more quickly than we thought it would be, it may be a time of despair if you are a democrat – or, more accurately, if you are afraid of the authoritarian now heading to the White House.

For me, I have written that it is time to move on, recognize the result even if you hate it, and live the kind of life you want to live as you value ALL Americans, no matter what happens in the White House after the first of the year.

Plus, I have said that it is best, for a Christian like me, to view the election through the prism of the Bible, which assures that, whatever happens on earth, God is still in charge.

To all this, New York Times writer Nicholas Kristof wrote what he called a “manifesto for despairing democrats,” of which he is one.

His manifesto is worth reading because it provides good advice for all of us who opposed Trump.  Plus, for all of us in Oregon, Kristof has solid connections, having grown up Yamhill County.  He wanted to run for governor last time around, even though it turned out he did not meet the residency requirements.

So, given his credentials, I provide excerpts from his manifesto in this blog.

**********

So, what do we do now?

For those who think as I do, the election feels devastating.  My country has elected a felon whose former top aides have described him as a fascist and “the most dangerous person to this country.”  Yet, in an election that wasn’t even close, voters not only chose him but also picked a Republican Senate to empower him further.

This will be a test of our country and of each of us, so let me offer a manifesto for how ordinary Americans of my ilk can respond.

I accept Donald Trump’s victory.  If we are to stand up to Trump, we must first resist the impulse to be like Trump.  We lost.  We were outvoted.  In a democracy, the majority rules, and that was not us.  Yes, there is a contradiction when a democratic election elevates someone working to undermine democracy, but our first obligation is still to respect the voters’ choice.

I will be a watchdog, not a lap dog.  Accepting Trump as president-elect does not mean surrendering to authoritarianism.  In particular, I will be extra vigilant about attempts to abuse the legal system to go after Trump’s critics, and I will support institutions that are the backbone of democracy, such as the legal system, journalism and the civil service.  I may hug a lawyer.

I will back organizations fighting to uphold human values.  During Trump’s first term, the ACLU did heroic work battling family separation at the border.  Planned Parenthood fought to preserve access to reproductive health.  So many other organizations stepped up to assist the vulnerable.  Let’s support them.

I will subscribe to a news organization.  This is self-serving and God knows that we in journalism make mistakes all the time, but it remains true that journalism is critical to hold officials accountable.  Oversight from news organizations will be particularly crucial if Republicans end up controlling both houses of Congress.  As the corollary for that subscription:  Hold us in the news business accountable for holding Trump accountable.  We journalists shouldn’t dispassionately observe a journey to authoritarianism; we shouldn’t be neutral about upholding democracy.

I will try to understand why so many Americans disagree with me.  Too many Democrats reflexively assume that any person backing Trump must be a bigot or an idiot.  But let’s beware of invidious stereotypes, for finger-wagging condescension alienates centrist voters; it’s difficult to win support from people you’re calling idiots and racists.  Many working-class Americans have been left behind economically and have reason to feel angry.  And Democrats aren’t going to win elections as long as they seethe at a majority of voters.

I will keep my cool.  Conservatives regularly accused liberals like me of suffering “Trump derangement syndrome,” and perhaps they had a point.  When he was president, Trump pushed us liberals leftward on issues like immigration and policing, with some Democrats calling to abolish the police or to eliminate U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE.  That may have felt noble, but the outcome was more support for Trump.

I will care for my mental health.  There’ll be many, many times in the next four years when we’ll be irritated, anxious and alarmed, probably with good reason, so we need to find a way to relax and mellow out.  For me, that’s backpacking and wine- and cider-making.  In my day job, I shout at the world, and it pays no attention, so it’s a relief to raise grapes and apples and have them listen to me.  And remember that sometimes the best therapist has four legs.  A few years ago, many families got a pandemic dog, and for some this may be time to get a dog.

I will be alert to gender nastiness.  This campaign saw Trump gleefully engaging in vulgarity and misogyny, and one result was a widening gender divide. I  suspect we may see more such nastiness targeting feminists, and it will be important — particularly for men — to uphold norms and push back at this tide of degradation.

I will help Ukrainians.  One of the big winners of this election is Vladimir Putin, and one of the big losers is Ukraine.  This will be a brutal winter for Ukrainians not just because of the cold and the North Korean troops joining Russian forces but also because America may soon abandon Ukraine. S o consider supporting an organization that helps Ukraine, such as Razom.

I will back humanitarians around the world.  Trump is likely to cut funds for the U.N. Population Fund and other reproductive health organizations, as he did before.  The Trump administration may cut support for the U.N. agency providing education and assistance to Palestinians, UNRWA, and it is much less likely to speak out about Israeli abuses in Gaza and the West Bank.  It will be less likely to work for peace in Sudan, now probably the world’s worst humanitarian crisis.  One way to fight back against isolationism and indifference is to support organizations with a global humanitarian mission.

I will push for blue places to govern themselves better.  Trump isn’t the only one we should hold accountable; we must also hold ourselves accountable.  The truth is that some blue cities out west have fumbled issues like homelessness and public order:  San Francisco and Portland are now Republican talking points.  And even if liberal policies are stymied at the national level, federalism still allows Democrat cities and states to experiment and devise new approaches to improve education, chip away at poverty and increase the housing supply.  Let’s take that opportunity seriously.

I will temper my strong views with humility.  The challenge is to unflinchingly proclaim our values even as we appreciate that we are fallible and may eventually be proven wrong.  Accepting that contradiction curbs the tendency toward arrogance and self-righteousness, which in any case are utterly unhelpful in promoting those values.

I will share Thanksgiving with relatives, even if I think they’re nuts.  There’s too much division in America, and we hang out too much with people who think just as we do.  So, if you’re debating whether to break bread with family members whose politics you can’t stand, go for it.  Don’t let Trump get between you and your family or friendships.

I will start planning for recovery.  It’s time to start working for the 2026 congressional elections.  That will mean more focus on winning elections nationwide.  Too often, Democrats in safe districts in New York or California stake out far-left positions that hurt Democrats in Ohio or Georgia, damaging the causes we believe in.  America is a centrist nation, and just because Trump takes extreme stances does not mean we should.

Instead of despairing, I will find purpose.  For four decades, I’ve reported on pro-democracy activists struggling against dictatorships.  I saw them massacred in 1989 at Tiananmen in China, and I’ve had too many friends tortured and imprisoned in other countries, but I also saw democracy come to Eastern Europe, South Korea and South Africa.  What I’ve learned from people like Archbishop Desmond Tutu is that despair — even a quite reasonable despair — is self-fulfilling, while democratic activists with a sense of purpose can sometimes, unpredictably and imperfectly, make unexpected progress.  To avoid being crushed over the next four years, that sense of purpose must be our north star guiding us forward.

Perspective from the 19^th Hole is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

What I feared would happen has now happened.

We have elected an authoritarian leader as U.S. president and that bodes ill for all of us in America.

If Donald Trump intends to be Trump, which is the mark of an egotist, then we are in trouble.

If he chooses to lead America more wisely that he has done in the past or more carefully than he alleged he would do on the campaign trail, then things won’t be as bad as I fear they might be.

Here is what five commentators say about the current status with Trump heading back to the White House:

From Ruth Marcus in the Washington Post:  “I don’t think this (election result) was about Trump prosecutions and Trump as victim as a significant factor.  

“Maybe, but I suspect this was more about voters’ anger and unhappiness about their own situations, and about their own perceptions of themselves as victims, including of an elite that disdains them, than it is about Trump himself.  

“We are an angry and divided country.  A country where too many people are willing to blame immigrants for all sorts of woes.  A country that is furious about prices that are not still rising at unacceptable rates but that are too high.  A country where too many people somehow find this strongman with his authoritarian impulses attractive as a leader.  A country where — and I think we have to consider this as well — too many people are not able to countenance the notion of a Black woman as president.”

From New York Times editorial writers:  “American voters have made the choice to return Donald Trump to the White House, setting the nation on a precarious course that no one can fully foresee.

“The founders of this country recognized the possibility that voters might someday elect an authoritarian leader and wrote safeguards into the Constitution, including powers granted to two other branches of government designed to be a check on a president who would bend and break laws to serve his own ends.

“And they enacted a set of rights — most crucially the First Amendment — for citizens to assemble, speak and protest against the words and actions of their leader.

“Over the next four years, Americans must be cleareyed about the threat to the nation and its laws that will come from its 47th president and be prepared to exercise their rights in defense of the country and the people, laws, institutions and values that have kept it strong.

“It can’t be ignored that millions of Americans voted for a candidate even some of his closest supporters acknowledge to be deeply flawed — convinced that he was more likely to change and fix what they regarded as the nation’s urgent problems:  High prices, an infusion of immigrants, a porous southern border, and economic policies that have flowed unequally through society.”

From Tom Nichols in Atlantic Magazine:  “An aspiring fascist is the president-elect, again, of the United States.  This is our political reality: Donald Trump is going to bring a claque of opportunists and kooks (led by the vice president–elect, a person who once compared Trump to Hitler) into government this winter, and even if senescence overtakes the president-elect, Trump’s minions will continue his assault on democracy, the rule of law, and the Constitution.

“The urge to cast blame will be overwhelming, because there is so much of it to go around.  When the history of this dark moment is written, those responsible will include not only Trump voters, but also easily gulled Americans who didn’t vote or who voted for independent or third-party candidates because of their own selfish peeves.

“Trump’s opponents will also blame Russia and other malign powers.  Without a doubt, America’s enemies — some of whom dearly hoped for a Trump win — made efforts to flood the public square with propaganda.  According to federal and state government reports, several bomb threats that appeared to originate from Russian email domains were aimed at areas with minority voters.

“But as always, the power to stop Trump rested with American voters at the ballot box, and blaming others is a pointless exercise.”

From Niall Stanage in hill.com:  “The comeback is remarkable for a host of reasons.  The 45th president’s political career seemed to be over after he sought to overturn his 2020 election defeat and spurred his supporters to march on the Capitol, an event that led to a riot and the evacuation of Congress.

“Before that event, Trump became the first president ever to be twice impeached; was charged in four separate criminal cases; was found liable for sexual abuse in a civil case; and was convicted in criminal court of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records.

“But Trump was buoyed up by a fervently loyal support base — most of whom believe his narrative that he has been unfairly victimized by a corrupt political, legal, and media establishment.”

From Karl Rove in the Wall Street Journal:  “President-elect Trump achieved his victory by assembling a new coalition.  He added to the GOP’s traditional base working-class noncollege voters of all races; young voters, especially young men; the biggest share of the Hispanic vote since at least 2004; and the largest black percentage for Republicans in decades.

“He expanded his majorities in rural counties and small towns while building his numbers in cities and suburbs.  His percentage of the vote ballooned in blue states like New York, New Jersey and Illinois.

Early Wednesday morning Trump promised:  “Every citizen, I will fight for you, for your family and your future.”  He pledged “with every breath in my body, I will not rest until we have delivered the strong, safe and prosperous America that our children deserve.”

This is the moment when both victors and the defeated traditionally set aside the election’s acrimony and, even if briefly, give the incoming president a chance to start fresh.  Trump is the only president America will have come January.

“We should all wish him godspeed and pray for wisdom in his efforts. Our nation’s success is once again tied to him.:

From me, whatever we may think, I say it is time to move on and hope that (a) Trump does not succeed in his bid to change America for the worse, and (b) that the checks and balances system that our forefathers installed will work.

To which I add that my focus will continue to be on what I wrote yesterday, which is to rely on the Bible as a prism through which to view the election – and to focus on such passages as Psalm 10, which assure that God is still in charge, no matter what happens on earth.

Perspective from the 19^th Hole is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

Along with many others, I am processing results of the election today – an election that is more final than I thought it would be – and didn’t go the way I voted.

First, why did the presidential candidate I favored, Kamala Harris, lose?

Well, it’s too soon to deliver the full diagnosis, but Ruth Marcus, writing in the Washington Post this morning, produced what I view as solid analysis:

“I don’t think this was about Trump prosecutions and Trump as victim.  Maybe, but I suspect this was more about voters’ anger and unhappiness about their own situations, and about their own perceptions of themselves as victims, including of an elite that disdains them, than it is about Trump himself.

“We are an angry and divided country.  A country where too many people are willing to blame immigrants for all sorts of woes.  A country that is furious about prices that are not still rising at unacceptable rates but that are too high.  A country where too many people somehow find this strongman with his authoritarian impulses attractive as a leader.  A country where — and I think we have to consider this as well — too many people are not able to countenance the notion of a Black woman as president.”

But beyond commentators like Marcus or my personal perceptions, one of the best ways for me to process this or any other election is to look at the Bible.  That’s because I am a Christian.

For a Christian, the Bible provides a prism through which we should view life, as well as election results.

First, the definition of the word “prism,” which most of us do not use very often. 

It means this:  “Used figuratively with reference to the clarification afforded by a particular viewpoint.”  In other words, look through a prism and see something real on the other side.

In this case, prism clarifies how Christians can view this election.

Further, my wife pointed out a great Psalm – Psalm 10 – yesterday, which helps in this regard.  So, I read it a few times.

Here are the words, which can stand on their own:

Psalm 10

Why, Lord, do you stand far off?
    Why do you hide yourself in times of trouble?

In his arrogance, the wicked man hunts down the weak,
    who are caught in the schemes he devises.
He boasts about the cravings of his heart;
    he blesses the greedy and reviles the Lord.
In his pride, the wicked man does not seek him;
    in all his thoughts there is no room for God.
His ways are always prosperous;
    your laws are rejected byhim;
    he sneers at all his enemies.
He says to himself, “Nothing will ever shake me.”
    He swears, “No one will ever do me harm.”

His mouth is full of lies and threats;
    trouble and evil are under his tongue.
He lies in wait near the villages;
    from ambush he murders the innocent.
His eyes watch in secret for his victims;
like a lion in cover he lies in wait.
He lies in wait to catch the helpless;
    he catches the helpless and drags them off in his net.
His victims are crushed, they collapse;
    they fall under his strength.
He says to himself, “God will never notice;
    he covers his face and never sees.”

Arise, Lord! Lift up your hand, O God.
    Do not forget the helpless.
Why does the wicked man revile God?
    Why does he say to himself,
    “He won’t call me to account”?
But you, God, see the trouble of the afflicted;
    you consider their grief and take it in hand.
The victims commit themselves to you;
    you are the helper of the fatherless.
Break the arm of the wicked man;
    call the evildoer to account for his wickedness
    that would not otherwise be found out.

The Lord is King for ever and ever;
    the nations will perish from his land.
You, Lord, hear the desire of the afflicted;
    you encourage them, and you listen to their cry,
defending the fatherless and the oppressed,
    so that mere earthly mortals
    will never again strike terror.

As important as elections are in our democracy, it is critical to remember this salient fact:  Whatever happens inside or outside of elections, God is still in charge.

And I take solace in that reality.

Perspective from the 19^th Hole is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

Building off this blog headline, will the election end today, Tuesday?

The best answer is “no” as armies of attorneys on both sides are just waiting for the supposed outcome – either to defend the result if their candidate wins or to oppose it if their candidate loses.  Thus, beyond the voters, the result will end up in court.

For me, in all of this, there is a piece of good news.

With my wife, I was on the road for two days recently heading from our home in Salem, Oregon to our winter residence in La Quinta, California, so we missed much of the to’ing and  fro’ing in one of the last days before polls close.  Good.

Still, as a dedicated newspaper reader, given my background in journalism, I did read the New York Times to note the different messages both candidates – Kamala Harris for the Democrats and Donald Trump for the Republicans – are using to try to sway last-minute votes.

Here is how the Times characterized the difference:

• For Kamala Harris, her message has concentrated on the economy and gains during the last four years, of which there are several, even if some members of the public don’t want to notice.
• For Donald Trump, one theme dominates:  Fear.

More from the Times:

“…in the final days of the tightly drawn presidential campaign, the last messages to voters in the seven swing states that will decide the election continue to flood televisions, computers and smartphones.

“From Harris and her supporters, those messages cover a mix of kitchen-table issues on the economy and taxes, the fate of legal abortion, and the dangers posed by a return of Trump to the White House.”

“For Trump and his allies, one message dominates:  Defeating Harris is a matter of life and death.  Your death, to be specific.”

As for me and my wife, we already have voted, so we now will wait for the outcome on Tuesday or later. 

And, to illustrate my bias in favor of Harris, this from Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank:

“On the Ellipse, in the very spot from which Donald Trump dispatched a violent mob to the Capitol in 2021, tens of thousands of people, of all ages and colors, gathered in peace last Tuesday night, waving small American flags.  Thousands more stood on the slope leading up to the Washington Monument.

“Harris, protected by bulletproof glass on three sides and by snipers perched on top of a truck, made her last, best pitch for her candidacy.  The vice president spoke the words that define this moment.

“’Donald Trump has spent a decade trying to keep the American people divided and afraid of each other.  That is who he is,’ she said, with an index finger in the air.  ‘But, America, I am here tonight to say:  That is not who we are.’”

Harris is right and I hope America concurs.

And, finally, this summary caught my attention in the New York Times this morning.

“On ‘Real Time’ on Friday, Bill Maher made one last appeal to undecided voters, or as he called them, ‘the Christmas Eve shoppers of politics — they know the big day is coming, but they just can’t get themselves to do anything about it until the last minute.’

“’The phrase I hear so much that makes me just want to un-alive myself is, ‘How’s she going to help me?’  Like the president is your personal genie. It’s Kamala, not ‘Kazam.’”

Agreed.  I hope voters will vote for the country more than for themselves.

Perspective from the 19^th Hole is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

The Atlantic Magazine, back in early October, went where the Washington Post would not go:  Endorsing a candidate for president.

The choice:  No surprise.  Kamala Harris.

Here is how the Atlantic started its endorsement editorial:

“For the third time in eight years, Americans have to decide whether they want Donald Trump to be their president.  No voter could be ignorant by now of who he is.  Opinions about Trump aren’t just hardened—they’re dried out and exhausted.

“The man’s character has been in our faces for so long, blatant and unchanging, that it kills the possibility of new thoughts, which explains the strange mix of boredom and dread in our politics.

“Whenever Trump senses any waning of public attention, he’ll call his opponent a disgusting name, or dishonor the memory of fallen soldiers, or threaten to overturn the election if he loses, or vow to rule like a dictator if he wins.  He knows that nothing he says is likely to change anyone’s views.”

So it was that The Atlantic viewed Trump as unqualified to be president.  It added more background:

“Of all Trump’s insults, cruelties, abuses of power, corrupt dealings, and crimes, the event that proved the essential rightness of the endorsements of Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden [The Atlantic made those endorsements.] took place on January 6, 2021, when Trump became the first American president to try to overturn an election and prevent the peaceful transfer of power.

“This year, Trump is even more vicious and erratic than in the past, and the ideas of his closest advisers are more extreme. Trump has made clear that he would use a second term to consolidate unprecedented power in his own hands, punishing adversaries, and pursuing a far-right agenda that most Americans don’t want.”

Then, The Atlantic turned to its endorsement of Harris.

“About the candidate we are endorsing:  The Atlantic is a heterodox place, staffed by freethinkers, and for some of us, Kamala Harris’s policy views are too centrist, while for others they’re too liberal.  The process that led to her nomination was flawed, and she’s been cagey in keeping the public and press from getting to know her as well as they should.

“But we know a few things for sure.  Having devoted her life to public service, Harris respects the law and the Constitution.  She believes in the freedom, equality, and dignity of all Americans.  She’s untainted by corruption, let alone a felony record or a history of sexual assault.  She doesn’t embarrass her compatriots with her language and behavior, or pit them against one another.

“She doesn’t curry favor with dictators.  She won’t abuse the power of the highest office in order to keep it.  She believes in democracy.  These, and not any specific policy positions, are the reasons The Atlantic is endorsing her.”

The Atlantic concludes with this sentence.

“Electing Harris and defeating Trump is the only way to release us from the political nightmare in which we’re trapped and bring us to the next phase of the American experiment.

“Trump is the sphinx who stands in the way of America entering a more hopeful future.  In Greek mythology, the sphinx killed every traveler who failed to answer her riddle, until Oedipus finally solved it, causing the monster’s demise.  The answer to Trump lies in every American’s hands. Then he needs only to go away.”

Kudos to The Atlantic for endorsing in the presidential election – and for endorsing Harris.

It did what the Washington Post would not do and the action – read, inaction – has translated so far into a loss of 250,000 on-line subscriptions.  And more holders are leaving every day.

Perspective from the 19^th Hole is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

With only a few days left to go in the current presidential election, it is time to pay attention to the closing arguments from both candidates.

• From Kamala Harris:  No surprise:  Equality for all Americans and she wants the focus of tHE presidency to be on “delivering for everyday Americans.”

Dana Milbank in the Washington Post, quoting Harris, adds this:  “Donald Trump has spent a decade trying to keep the American people divided and afraid of each other.  That is who he is.  But, America, I am here tonight to say:  That is not who we are.”  So, he supports Harris.

• From Donald Trump:  No surprise:  Vulgarity.  He has become coarser, and somehow managed to become even cruder in recent days.

Regarding Trump, here’s the way The Atlantic put it: 

“This is the time for closing arguments from Donald Trump and Kamala Harris.  But Trump’s closing argument is not a closing argument at all:  It’s an invitation.  He and his campaign are acting in hopes of provoking Harris, pushing her to muddle her final message.

“The statements and sentiments on display from the Trump campaign this past week, and particularly at Sunday night’s rally at Madison Square Garden, have been racist, xenophobic, and violent.  To note a few:  The comedian Tony Hinchcliffe, invited by the Trump campaign, called Puerto Rico a ‘floating island of garbage.’

“This incendiary language is not only a crude attempt to bait critics; it’s part of a pattern of hate from Trump and his closest allies, and a type of rhetoric that Trump has made clear he intends to incorporate into his plans as president.

“But in continuing to push the lines of decency in American politics, Trump is also attempting to goad the opposition.  His campaign is ramping up a familiar and often effective cycle:  He says or encourages something inflammatory, then goes on to blame his opponents or members of the media for overreacting, sometimes attempting to rewrite his own statements in the process.”

By contrast,  Harris delivered her closing argument on Tuesday, arguing that, as president, she would focus on delivering for everyday Americans while he – Trump — would fixate on exacting revenge.

“A week before the end of the most turbulent and closely fought campaign in recent memory, Harris appeared on the Ellipse, surrounded by Washington’s iconic monuments to democracy, and tore into her Republican rival as un-American.  She cast him as a ‘petty tyrant’ and called him ‘unstable,’ ‘obsessed with revenge,’ ‘consumed with grievance’ and ‘out for unchecked power.’

“Donald Trump has spent a decade trying to keep the American people divided and afraid of each other.  That’s who he is.  But America, I am here tonight to say:  That’s not who we are.”

Regarding Trump’s vulgarity, the Washington Post wrote this:

“Democracy depends on many things:  Institutions, traditions, public legitimacy and, yes, a culture of civility.  The peaceful transfer of power requires people to have at least a minimum degree of trust in their fellow citizens — that the stakes are not existential.

“In this regard, former president Trump showed, in his closing argument at a raucous rally at Madison Square Garden, that, whether he wins or loses on November 5, he has already done severe damage to American politics by coarsening and corroding public discourse.”

In all of this, I recall one of the best public policy quotes from the past, one uttered by the late military general Colin Powell, when, some years ago, he declined to run for president.

He said then – and I agree now – that he wouldn’t run because he “bemoaned the loss of civility in politics.”

No doubt Powell would say the same today.

So, pay attention to closing statements from Trump and Harris, compare the two, and then vote for the one who advocates civility – Harris.

Perspective from the 19^th Hole is the title I chose for my personal blog, which is meant to give me an outlet for one of my favorite crafts – writing – plus to use an image from my favorite sport, golf.  Out of college, my first job was as a reporter for the Daily Astorian in Astoria, Oregon, and I went on from there to practice writing in all my professional positions, including as press secretary in Washington, D.C. for a Democrat Congressman from Oregon (Les AuCoin), as an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, as press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and as a private sector lobbyist.  This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.  I could have called this blog “Middle Ground,” for that is what I long for in both politics and golf.  The middle ground is often where the best public policy decisions lie.  And it is where you want to be on a golf course.

Many of us who play golf in the winter in the Pacific Northwest follow two rules we define for ourselves even if they may not be in golf’s official rulebook. 

They are the “leaf rule” and the “root rule.”

But, one of my friends who also likes to focus on golf rules alerted me this week that the “leaf rule” can be found in golf rules if you look hard enough.

First, what are these rules”

• The “leaf rule” allows you to play a golf ball without penalty if you cannot find it within three minutes in piles of leaves on golf courses such as the one I play in Salem, Oregon, Illahe Hills Golf and Country Club.

• The “root rule” allows you move a golf ball without penalty if playing it near on a tree root would risk damage to your or your golf club.

Can the “root rule” be found in the golf rule book?  No.  It just makes sense here in the Northwest.

As for “leaf rule,” my friend cited a story in Golf Digest for specific information.  So, rather than recite the rule myself, here is the story.

**********

Each fall, golfers in northern climates invoke the “leaf rule” to lobby for a free drop when they can’t find their ball under a pile of foliage.  Some use it as a concession to appease a frustrated opponent.  Others claim it as justification for avoiding their own lost-ball penalty, emphatically asserting the Rules of Golf supports it.

But is it an official rule?  

Yes, in some instances.  It takes some explaining.

In everyday use (irrespective of what the official rules dictate), when golfers lose a ball that clearly came to rest in a pile of leaves, they often take a free drop rather than incurring a penalty and replaying the previous shot.   On the surface, this “leaf rule” is logical.  Why should a golfer who can’t find his or her golf ball in a dense pile of leaves just off the fairway receive the same penalty as one who just sliced one out-of-bounds?

Unfortunately, in many cases the rules are not so lenient.  Rule 18.2 states that “your ball is lost if not found in three minutes after you or your caddie begin to search for it.”  And, according to the same rule, when a ball is lost, you must take stroke-and-distance relief (adding one penalty stroke) and play from the spot of your previous shot.

So, where is this “leaf rule?”  Proponents of the free drop often cite Rule 16.1, which allows a player to take free relief from a ball not found when it is “known or virtually certain” it came to rest in or on an “abnormal course condition.”  This is where things get a little gray.

Leaves are considered an abnormal course condition only when they are intentionally piled for removal outside of a penalty area.  If that’s the case, and you either saw the ball enter the leaves or are virtually certain it did, then you are entitled to a free drop by finding the nearest point of complete relief and dropping within one club-length, no closer to the hole.

A more common scenario occurs when leaves are scattered or pile up naturally.  They are not considered an abnormal course condition.  They are simply loose impediments, so you are not entitled to free relief even if you’re sure your ball is lost under them.

However, this is where the “leaf rule” can save you.  You may be entitled free relief under Model Local Rule F-14, which a tournament committee or course staff can choose to implement.

At certain times of the year, piles of loose impediments such as leaves, seeds or acorns may make it difficult for a player to find or play his or her ball.  A committee can choose to treat such piles of loose impediments in the general area or in a bunker as ground under repair from which free relief is allowed under Rule 16.1.

Long story short?  Make sure to check with the golf course staff or tournament committee (if you’re playing in competition) before heading out for an end-of-the-year-round to see if they’re implementing this local rule.  If it’s being used, you’re entitled to free relief from a ball lost in leaves.  If not, you’re out of luck.

And, if you’re one of the passionate defenders of the leaf rule, you now have your argument for convincing your head pro to adopt the rule for your fall member-guest. Or, at least, to point to when your buddies question why you’re campaigning for a free drop.

*********

And, if you ask for a local rule on leaves, add the “root rule” to your request.

The head pro where I play doesn’t favor it because he says “it would help players maintain a lower handicap rather than ‘playing the ball as it lies.’”

For me, the “leaf rule” and “root rule” remain in effect during winter golf.  But, oh I soon I forget.  Winter golf for me means playing in La Quinta, California, so now “leaf rule” or “root rule” there.