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

The Wall Street Journal showed up the other day with a column I imagine was designed to impress someone like me – a person who loves words.

Better than charts, graphs, or numbers.  Even photos.  Give me words and I’ll be satisfied.

The Journal’s word:  “Still.” 

Columnist Carlos Lozada said President Joseph Biden uses the word all the time to send an important message:  The United States still has the potential to outlive the bad news of one Donald Trump.

Here, according to Lozada, is the bottom line of the Biden message: 

“This is a Biden line — a single word, really — that also stands out, and it comes up whenever this president reflects on that American soul, on what the country is and what it might become.  It is still.”

More from Lozada:

“Presidents are forever linked to their most memorable lines or slogans, phrases that become inseparable from their passage through history.  Ronald Reagan proclaimed morning in America.  Barack Obama promised America hope and change.  Donald Trump pledged to make America great again.

“Our leaders also utter words they might rather take back — say, about lip-reading (George Herbert Walker Bush) or the meaning of “is” (Bill Clinton) — but their go-to lines can capture their message, signal their attitude, and even portray their worldview.”

Biden, Lozada writes, has long settled on his preferred pitch.  

“We are living through a battle for the soul of this nation,” he wrote in 2017, after the darkness of Charlottesville.

“Biden highlighted the battle for that soul again in his 2020 and 2024 campaign announcements and has revisited it in multiple speeches.  It is ominous and a bit vague — John Anzalone, Biden’s 2020 pollster, complained during that race that no one knows what ‘soul of America’ means and that the line ‘doesn’t move the needle.’”  

But it does provide the rationale for Biden’s candidacy and presidency.  Under Trump, Biden contends, America was becoming something other than itself.

Examples of Biden’s use of the word “still:”

• “We have to show the world America is still a beacon of light,” Biden wrote in a post-Charlottesville essay.
• “We have to prove democracy still works — that our government still works, and we can deliver for our people,” he said in a speech to a joint session of Congress in April 2021.
• “We are still an America that believes in honesty and decency and respect for others, patriotism, liberty, justice for all, hope, possibilities,” the president said in a speech in September at Independence Hall in Philadelphia, where he asserted that the foundations of the Republic were under assault by MAGA forces. “We are still, at our core, a democracy.”

There is an implicit assumption in Biden’s use of the word “still.”  It is his belief that many Americans no longer believe in the nation’s professed virtues or trust that they will last much longer, and that we must be persuaded of either their value or their endurance.

These are the persons – the disaffected and irritated – who are the exact political stratum to which Trump appeals.

Lozada:  “To say that America is a democracy is to issue a statement of belief.  To say that we are still a democracy is to engage in an argument, to acknowledge — and push back against — mounting concerns to the contrary.”

The contrast between Biden saying America is still a democracy and Trump vowing to make it great again is more than a quirk of speechwriting, Lozada contends.

“What presidents say — especially what they grow comfortable repeating — can reveal their underlying beliefs and basic impulses, shaping their administrations in ways that are concrete, not just rhetorical.

“Biden’s ‘still’ stresses durability; Trump’s ‘again’ revels in discontinuity. ‘Still’ is about holding on to something good that may be slipping away; ‘again’ is about bringing back something better that was wrested away.

“Biden’s use of ‘still’ is both soothing and alarming.  It connotes permanence but warns of fragility.  The message of ‘still’ is that we remain who we are, but that this condition is not immutable, that America as Biden envisions it exists somewhere between reality and possibility. 

“‘If we do our duty in 2022 and beyond,’ Biden said ahead of the mid-term elections last year, ‘then ages still to come will say we — all of us here — we kept the faith.  We preserved democracy.  We heeded not our worst instincts but our better angels.  And we proved that for all its imperfections, America is still the beacon to the world.”

So, in all of this, I am “still” in Biden’s camp.  I will never support Trump “again.”

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

Last Sunday was a day of contrasts for me.

On one hand, I attended church with my wife here in Salem, Oregon and was able to see a spirited, welcome scene – refugees from Africa performing on the church platform, wearing colorful native garb and singing to the Lord – their Lord and my Lord.

On the other hand, I came home to an e-mail challenging me and others to come out against “immigration,” a word that, unfortunately these days, has come to describe a movement that asks everyone to make new people in this country “the enemy.”

One Donald Trump is the basic architect of this “movement,” which he hopes will make people he doesn’t like enemies and chart his way to another term as president of the United States.

But just think of this:  All of us are immigrants in this country, perhaps a generation or more ago, but still immigrants.

I have written about this before, but it bears repeating.

What happened Sunday in our church was due to the work of a great new “program,” Salem for Refugees, which is more than just another “program.” 

It is an effort to welcome refugees to Salem because they are moving here in greater numbers from more than 20 countries around the world, including Afghanistan and The Ukraine, but also, as we saw Sunday, from Africa.

Those people – yes, they are “people” – on our church platform Sunday sang songs to the Lord in about seven languages, their own, English and others.

It was thrilling for me to watch them illustrate that they are children of God, just as we have the potential to be.

So, I say, welcome refugees.  Don’t tarnish them with a broad political “immigration brush.”

Recognize that God loves them.  Just as we should.

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

“The only path to a subversion of the republican system of the country is, by flattering the prejudices of the people, and exciting their jealousies and apprehensions, to throw affairs into confusion, and bring on civil commotion.  When a man unprincipled in private life, desperate in his fortune, bold in his temper…is seen to mount the hobby horse of popularity, he may ‘ride the storm and direct the whirlwind.’”

So said Alexander Hamilton in 1790.

He could have been talking about Donald Trump.

The headline I used for this blog was written over a Wall Street Journal essay that appeared over the weekend.  It was written by Jeffrey Rosen, and it was a great piece of investigatory journalism.

The subhead was this:

“This week’s indictment of the former president outlines the sort of demagogic challenge to the rule of law that the Constitution’s architects most feared.”

Talk about being prescient!

More from Rosen:

“The founders designed a constitutional system to prevent demagogues from sowing confusion and mob violence in precisely this way (the way Trump is doing).  The vast extent of the country, James Madison said, would make it hard for local factions to coordinate any kind of mass mobilization.  The horizontal separation of powers among the three branches of government would ensure that the House impeached, and the Senate convicted corrupt presidents.  The vertical division of powers between the states and the federal government would ensure that local officials ensured election integrity.

“And norms about the peaceful transfer of power, strengthened by George Washington’s towering example of voluntarily stepping down from office after two terms, would ensure that no elected president could convert himself, like Caesar, into an unelected dictator.  ‘The idea of introducing a monarchy or aristocracy into this country,’ Hamilton wrote, ‘is one of those visionary things, that none but madmen could meditate,’ as long as the American people resisted ‘convulsions and disorders in consequence of the acts of popular demagogues.’”

The quotes from more than 200 years ago illustrate the woes of exactly Trump.

According to the federal indictment issued this week, Trump attempted to overturn the results of the 2020 election by conspiring to spread drivel or worse — discounting legitimate votes and subverting election results,  perpetuating three separate criminal conspiracies:  To impede the collection and counting of the ballots, Congress’s certification of the results on January 6, 2021, and the right to vote itself.

Rosen reports that J. Michael Luttig, former U.S. Court of Appeals judge, has said that “I do not believe there is anything that approaches this in American history.”

I am nowhere near the student of history that Luttig is, but I agree. 

The question facing all of us:

• Whether the actions by Trump – “subverting the republican system of government and flattering the prejudices of the people, exciting their jealousies and apprehensions “– will tear this country to shreds, which, I submit, is exactly what he wants.

• Or, that the country and its institutions will remain intact despite the intentional turmoil of Trump.

I vote for the latter.

Once again, Washington Post Associate Editor Ruth Marcus performs a service in a column that appeared over the weekend.

She lays out the specific charges against Donald Trump, then gives her opinion about how each will fare in court.

She started her column this way:

“Now the legal wrangling begins.  The indictment of Donald Trump lays out four felony counts:  Conspiracy to defraud the United States; conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding; obstruction and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding; and conspiracy against voting rights.”

Without surprise in her voice, she says that “Trump’s lawyers will surely move to challenge the legal sufficiency of the case, arguing that the allegations, even if true, don’t amount to a crime and filing a motion to dismiss the indictment even before the case goes to trial.”

She adds, “I think they’ll lose, even if some charges are knocked out or pared back, prosecutors will be able to proceed on others.”

Below is what Marcus reported — the rationale against the charges based on comments from Trump attorneys, though some of them may have to recuse themselves because they also could become witnesses:

Argument #1:  The statutes governing conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding and obstruction of an official proceeding (Counts Two and Three) don’t apply here, because that prohibition only covers destruction of evidence and other forms of evidence tampering.

The relevant law [18 U.S.C. 1512(c)], Marcus writes, provides that whoever “corruptly (1) alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; or (2) otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.”

Argument #2: Trump lacked the requisite intent to break the law or to act corruptly, because he believed that he won the election and was only taking steps to vindicate his rights as the supposedly victorious candidate.

The intent question is a complicated one, Marcius writes.  “The indictment repeatedly asserts that Trump knew he lost the election and sets out a mountain of evidence to that effect — his own statements, the conclusions of his top advisers, the unanimous findings of numerous courts.

“At the same time, it recognizes that Trump had every right — whether he was lying or merely deluded — to argue that he had won. He just didn’t have the right to use illegal means to effectuate that victory.” 

Argument #3: Trump relied on advice of counsel in pursuing his quest to remain in office.

Marcus writes that former attorney general, William P. Barr, has said “I don’t think that dog is going to hunt” – and she agrees with Barr.

“Reliance on advice of counsel is an affirmative defense available to Trump, but the lawyer actually has to be acting as the counsel (there’s no evidence that, for example, Trump retained John Eastman for this purpose) and, even more important, that reliance has to be reasonable. “

Argument #4: The federal civil rights statute under which Trump is accused of conspiring to interfere with the right to vote does not cover the conduct at issue here.

The Reconstruction-era law [18 U.S.C. 241], originally used against groups such as the Ku Klux Klan, prohibits conspiracies “to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person … in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States.”  

The indictment alleges that Trump and co-conspirators sought to interfere with “the right to vote, and to have one’s vote counted.”

So, what all this indicates is that we’re in for a long fight over what the law means and how Trump will be affected by it.

Now, I know there is a precept in law that you are “innocent until proven guilty.”  Thus, I guess, Trump deserves that protection.

But, in the court of public opinion, different than a court of law, Trump has proven himself unworthy of support.

If it weren’t so serious, it is almost comical to see Trump want to run the government he sets out to destroy at every turn.

Marcus concludes:

“If Trump knows anything, it’s how to manipulate the legal system to his advantage, which in this case means throwing up a lot of arguments to see what will stick, in the hope, above all, of delaying a trial.

“After all, Trump’s winningest legal strategy would be to return to office and order the prosecution dismissed.”

Perish that thought.

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

The headline on this blog says it all.

Donald Trump is now under at least four indictments for criminal conduct and more could be coming.

Still, he wants to be president.  And, for me, there is little question but that he should be prevented from running for the office.

What could happen is that Americans could vote for and perhaps even elect a felon to the nation’s highest political office.

If it happens, what would that say about our values?  Not much.

As indictments keep coming, Trump turns them all into fundraising opportunities, though recent statistics show that he has spent a lot of what he has raised on defending himself in court, not on campaigning for president.

For him, the two – fending off indictments and campaigning – are one and the same.

Washington Post associate editor Ruth Marcus had it right when she wrote in the Post under the headline I borrowed for this blog.  Here is how she started her recent column:

“United States of America v. Donald J. Trump is the most important indictment in the nation’s history.

“And the caption of the case says it all.  Most federal prosecutions have the government defending the interests of society writ large — against drug trafficking, or corporate fraud, or gun crimes.  This prosecution is different.  The United States is defending itself, recoiling against an effort to undo the democracy that Trump swore an oath to protect.

“’The indictment tells the story in clear, unsparing terms. ‘The Defendant lost the 2020 presidential election,’ it states at the start, 45 pages that unspool a story that is at once familiar and newly shocking.  ‘Despite having lost, the Defendant was determined to remain in power.’”

I continue to be troubled about how this narcissist continues to believe he should be president…again.  I suspect one reason is that, if he wins, he would pardon himself and many of his allies who helped him try to overturn the country on January 6.

More from Marcus:

“The former president now stands accused — not by political opponents, not by opinion columnists, but by a duly constituted grand jury that has heard the evidence against him.  As the indictment spells out, Trump tried to commit a crime against democracy.  The country and its voters are his intended victims.

“Trump’s lawyers will almost certainly mount challenges to the legal sufficiency of these claims, but these charges do not have the air of a prosecutorial stretch.  Special counsel Jack Smith, for instance, held off, as expected, from charging Trump with seditious conspiracy, which would have required evidence that he intended the violent overthrow of the government.”

Regarding a charge of sedition, I was surprised that, at least for the moment, Trump escaped such a charge.

What is sedition anyway?

Well, the definition is simple and straightforward, this:

“Incitement of discontent or rebellion against a government; any action, especially in speech or writing, promoting such discontent or rebellion.”

This is exactly what Trump did and continues to do.  He should have faced such a charge, as have some of his sycophants.

I suspect he escaped because such a charge would have roiled the country anew and, though prosecutors disavow including political perspectives in their decisions, they may have in this case. 

This conclusion from Marcus:

“Speaking of the voters, can we dispense with the idea that the proper and sufficient punishment for Trump’s behavior should be at their hands, at the ballot box in November 2024, if it comes to that?

“Where, exactly, was that deep respect for the will of the voters when Trump, as the indictment sets out, was conspiring to prevent their will from being respected when it came to the 2020 results?

“As to supposed (but unproven) double standards, how could it be fair to have more than a thousand of those whose behavior Trump incited face prosecution and let the individual behind it all go uncharged?

“If Trump’s behavior is allowed to stand, if it is not called out for the crime that it appears to be, the message to future presidents seeking to retain power at all costs would be:  The coast is clear.  Do what you need to remain in office.

“Prosecuting Trump on these charges is a grave, even perilous, step. Condoning his behavior by ignoring it would be far worse.”

Agreed.

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

One thing I learned when I was a lobbyist in Oregon for more than 25 years was this:

Be hesitant to boast about achievements in one legislative session because another one is just around the corner.

So, if you consider golf for just a moment, my boast is this — the industry avoided any calamities in the most recent Oregon legislative session, which concluded on June 25.

The chief result:  Legislators did not consider an aggressive takeover of municipal golf course land to turn it into housing.

That’s important because such a tactic emerged in the last couple years in California.  As a lobbyist, I learned that both bad ideas and good ideas often move north and south along the West Coast.  So the “land takings” issue could have moved north.  It did not.

Avoiding this result in Oregon was especially important because it occurred – or, more accurately, did not occur — even though more housing was a major issue at the Capitol.  For example, it was a major priority for Oregon’s still-new governor, Tina Kotek.  But she didn’t go after golf course property to achieve her objective.

At one point during the session, some legislators got on their high horse and advocated doing away with two private golf course properties in Washington County (Pumpkin Ridge and the Reserve) and turning those properties into housing.  That, they said, was a way to avoid taking farmland for housing.

The idea, which generated headlines, was only a one-day story.  It appeared that generating media coverage was the goal because the screwy had nowhere to go.  Of course, no surprise to learn that these legislators did not talk with the private golf course owners about their idea.

Otherwise, for golf, there also were no negative environmental or land use proposals in the session.  A proposal to subject small engines, such as those on golf course, also died.

So, this is where the golf industry will be content to lie:  Tout the economic benefits of golf, along with important recreational opportunities, and leave it at that.

The industry will continue to keep its eye on future issues because the Oregon Legislature meets again for a short session in February 2024 and a long session in 2025. 

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

Remember the old phrase – if you are in trouble in a hole, stop digging?

Well, Donald Trump forgot it.

And, all the recent Trump episodes recall arguably the worst criminal proceeding in the United States – Watergate.  Ask Trump, and he no doubt would be proud of the comparison.

Washington Post Associate Editor Ruth Marcus wrote this in a new column:

“The allegations in the latest indictment of Donald Trump hold up, the former president is a common criminal — and an uncommonly stupid one.

“Everyone knows, as the Watergate scandal drove home:  The cover-up is always worse than the crime.  Everyone, that is, but Trump.”

More from Marcus:

“According to the superseding indictment handed up late Thursday, even after Trump knew the FBI was onto his improper retention of classified information, and even after he knew they were seeking security camera footage from the Mar-a-Lago storage areas where the material was kept — in other words, when any reasonably adept criminal would have known to stop digging holes — Trump made matters infinitely worse.

“The alleged conduct — yes, even after all these years of watching Trump flagrantly flout norms — is nothing short of jaw-dropping:  Trump allegedly conspired with others to destroy evidence.”

Marcus reports that, as “set out in the indictment’s relentlessly damning timeline, Trump enlisted his personal aide, Waltine Nauta, and a Mar-a-Lago worker, Carlos De Oliveira, in a conspiracy to delete the subpoenaed footage.”

“But this,” she adds, “— the alleged conspiracy to destroy the security footage — is the epitome of obstruction, stunning in its brazenness.

“There is an argument, depressing but not unreasonable, that none of this matters, legally or in the court of public opinion.  The unlawful retention of documents and obstruction case against Trump appeared strong when they were first made public more than a month ago.  And the new Mar-a-Lago charges are unrelated to the impending indictment of Trump for his efforts to undo the results of the 2020 election.”

Some Americans insist on seeing Trump as the beleaguered victim of partisan prosecutors. 

Marcus concludes:

“…drip by drip, count by count, obstructive act by obstructive act, the seriousness of this situation comes into focus, the stakes of the next election become clearer.  Trump in office was willing to do whatever it took to remain in power. T rump out of office was willing to do whatever it took to keep ;my boxes.’  One demonstration of narcissistic entitlement bolsters the other and deepens the urgency of holding this man to account, once and for all, and for all that he has done.”

I believe there are at least two ways to make Trump account for his gross misdeeds.

One is for the courts to hold him accountable. 

The other is for Trump to lose the election, if, in fact, he becomes the Republican nominee.

With penalties for crimes and another election loss, perhaps he’ll go away.  Or, if not, perhaps he’ll keep digging until the hole is too deep to escape.

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

No, I am not taking you to Disneyland to hear that famous song, “It’s A Small World After All.”

I am just reporting what happened the other day when my wife and I were in Oliver, British Columbia, Canada, to watch a girls’ golf tournament, including a team from Oregon.

So, on the first day of the tournament, I was walking along with a woman from Wyoming.  Her daughter was in the same group as the girls from Oregon.

We greeted each other and I learned this:

We grew up about 15 blocks from each other in Portland, Oregon and she attended Madison High School, as I did.

Of course, the fact is that I was quite a few years ahead of her at Madison.

But think of the odds:  We drove eight hours from Oregon to watch the tournament and she flew in from Wyoming.

Small world.

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

I write this headline because my wife and I are up here in Oliver, British Columbia, to watch the 2023 version of the Girls Junior America’s Cup golf tournament.

And the site is a First Nation (that’s how you say Native American in Canada) golf course, which goes by this name – Nk’Mip.

So, pronunciation matters — and we have learned that it is “Inca-Meep.”

While here, you must pronounce names right just as you do if you are in Oregon – it’s not Ory-Gun, and, in the Willamette Valley, it’s not Will-a-Mette.

As for girls junior golf here, there have been two rounds so far, with one to go.  Oregon’s junior girls team stands in 9^th place after Wednesday, not bad out of 18 teams from the Western states, Canada, and Mexico.

And, the good news so far after round one:  Oregon’s Natalie Yen shot a great round – 69, three-under par – to share the individual lead after the first day.  She followed that up with an even par 72 and stands atop the leaderboard by three strokes.  Plus, each of Oregon’s other three players beat their first round scores.

We came here to watch how the tournament is run because it is Oregon’s turn to serve as host in 2026 and I also am glad to say that my home course, Illahe Hills Golf and Country Club, has agreed to serve as host course.

It will be great fun to showcase Illahe to the world in 2026 – or, at least, to part of the world.

Speaking of the world, this annual tournament involves teams from 16 Western states (including multiple teams from California), and two countries – Canada and Mexico.  So, in all, there are about 75 players, along with captains and co-captains for each team.

Here’s a quick summary of the history of the event off the Girls Junior America’s website.  It dates to 1978.

“In addition to founding the Washington Junior Golf Association in 1977, Joan Teats also founded the Girls Junior Americas Cup (GJAC) in 1978.  The boys enjoyed a version of this tournament for many years, and being “all about the girls,” Joan decided it was time to create a similar tournament where girls could showcase their team talents for college coaches.  

“Charter members of the GJAC tournament:  Northern California, San Diego, British Columbia, Southern California, Arizona, Washington, Oregon, Southern Nevada, Idaho, Alberta, and Northern Nevada.  GJAC has grown since then to 18 teams, all located in the Western part of the US, Canada and Mexico.”

Some impressions of this year’s event at Nk’Mip so far:

• The tournament itself appears to be well run, with only one deficit I have seen so far – the on-line information is sketchy at best, not to mention hard to find, so I may ask my grandchildren for help.

• On-line access is an issue for family members of the girls who are playing since families rarely travel to tournament sites.  They will have to scramble to find overall results.

• I also learned something new – families are encouraged not, yes NOT, to attend the tournament.  That is so, I was told, to enable the players to focus on golf, not relating to families in the gallery.

• Still, at this event, there are family members on-site, including a number who have flown to Canada.

• The event, overall, is treated a bit like the Ryder Cup, though that comparison is a stretch.  There is a procession to open the event as teams march in while introductions, name-by-name, are announced. Then, the teams listen to welcoming speeches, which, mercifully, were brief this time around.

• Because the event this year is on a First Nation golf course, there was an early emphasis on singing and dancing by First Nation representatives – and I thought it was exactly appropriate as a way to herald First Nation heritage here in Canada.

• As you drive into the course, you see flags from all states and provinces displayed on the road.  The captain from the State of Washington – this, she said, is the only tournament at which she volunteers all year – said the entry always sparks emotion for her.  Just seeing all the flags will do that to anyone who cares.

• The local head golf pro here made a solid set of remarks in the opening ceremony.  My paraphrase takeaway  – “Remember these days, players.  This could very well be a highlight for you during your life as you recall good golf and solid friendships.”

Good points.  The emphasis on creating something memorable goes for all of us.

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

I write this headline because my wife and I are up here in Oliver, British Columbia, to watch the 2023 version of the Girls Junior America’s Cup golf tournament.

And the site is a First Nation (that’s how you say Native American in Canada) golf course, which goes by this name – Nk’Mip.

So, pronunciation matters — and we have learned that it is “Inca-Meep.”

While here, you must pronounce names right just as you do if you are in Oregon – it’s not Ory-Gun, and, in the Willamette Valley, it’s not Will-a-Mette.

As for girls junior golf here, there have been two rounds so far, with one to go.  Oregon’s junior girls team stands in 9^th place after Wednesday, not bad out of 18 teams from the Western states, Canada, and Mexico.

And, the good news so far after round one:  Oregon’s Natalie Yen shot a great round – 69, three-under par – to share the individual lead after the first day.  She followed that up with an even par 72 and stands atop the leaderboard by three strokes.  Plus, each of Oregon’s other three players beat their first round scores.

We came here to watch how the tournament is run because it is Oregon’s turn to serve as host in 2026 and I also am glad to say that my home course, Illahe Hills Golf and Country Club, has agreed to serve as host course.

It will be great fun to showcase Illahe to the world in 2026 – or, at least, to part of the world.

Speaking of the world, this annual tournament involves teams from 16 Western states (including multiple teams from California), and two countries – Canada and Mexico.  So, in all, there are about 75 players, along with captains and co-captains for each team.

Here’s a quick summary of the history of the event off the Girls Junior America’s website.  It dates to 1978.

“In addition to founding the Washington Junior Golf Association in 1977, Joan Teats also founded the Girls Junior Americas Cup (GJAC) in 1978.  The boys enjoyed a version of this tournament for many years, and being “all about the girls,” Joan decided it was time to create a similar tournament where girls could showcase their team talents for college coaches.  

“Charter members of the GJAC tournament:  Northern California, San Diego, British Columbia, Southern California, Arizona, Washington, Oregon, Southern Nevada, Idaho, Alberta, and Northern Nevada.  GJAC has grown since then to 18 teams, all located in the Western part of the US, Canada and Mexico.”

Some impressions of this year’s event at Nk’Mip so far:

• The tournament itself appears to be well run, with only one deficit I have seen so far – the on-line information is sketchy at best, not to mention hard to find, so I may ask my grandchildren for help.

• On-line access is an issue for family members of the girls who are playing since families rarely travel to tournament sites.  They will have to scramble to find overall results.

• I also learned something new – families are encouraged not, yes NOT, to attend the tournament.  That is so, I was told, to enable the players to focus on golf, not relating to families in the gallery.

• Still, at this event, there are family members on-site, including a number who have flown to Canada.

• The event, overall, is treated a bit like the Ryder Cup, though that comparison is a stretch.  There is a procession to open the event as teams march in while introductions, name-by-name, are announced. Then, the teams listen to welcoming speeches, which, mercifully, were brief this time around.

• Because the event this year is on a First Nation golf course, there was an early emphasis on singing and dancing by First Nation representatives – and I thought it was exactly appropriate as a way to herald First Nation heritage here in Canada.

• As you drive into the course, you see flags from all states and provinces displayed on the road.  The captain from the State of Washington – this, she said, is the only tournament at which she volunteers all year – said the entry always sparks emotion for her.  Just seeing all the flags will do that to anyone who cares.

• The local head golf pro here made a solid set of remarks in the opening ceremony.  My paraphrase takeaway  – “Remember these days, players.  This could very well be a highlight for you during your life as you recall good golf and solid friendships.”

Good points.  The emphasis on creating something memorable goes for all of us.