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

I currently serve as the director of several departments – the Department of Pet Peeves, the Department of “Just Saying,” the Department of Inquiring Minds Want to Know, and the Department of Good Quotes Worth Remembering.

I have chosen to leave the latter department closed for a few weeks, but, now, despite the heat, I am opening the department again.

So here goes.

TENSIONS OVER THE INFRASTRUCTURE DEAL IN WASHINGTON, D.C.:  The Washington Post’s Catherine Rampell writes this:

“President Biden’s bi-partisan infrastructure deal was on, and then possibly off, and now seems back on again.  But there are at least three major issues that could still blow things up.

“Biden announced last Thursday that he and a group of 10 bi-partisan senators had hashed out a deal on infrastructure.  Almost immediately, there were clues that the White House was anxious about how this compromise would play with the Democratic Party’s left flank.

“One red flag was the apparent attempt to inflate the size of the package.”

So, Rampell noted that Biden, only two hours after endorsing the deal, created a quagmire by saying that he would only support and sign the deal if Congress passed other issues on his agenda, issues that would appeal to the left.

Soon, recognizing the dissonance, the Administration tried to walk back the threat, but some Democrats in Congress wouldn’t let it die, which risks the entire infrastructure package.

Rampell also posts three additional risks for the package:  The size of it, what else the Biden Administration and Democrats want, and how to pay for it.   

MORE ON CRITICAL RACE THEORY: Also in the Washington Post, columnist Eugene Robinson writes this about “critical race theory,” a notion that is getting a lot of media attention these days:

“Republicans’ hissy fit over critical race theory is nothing more than an attempt to rally the party’s overwhelmingly White base by denying documented history and uncomfortable truth.

“This manufactured controversy has nothing to do with actual critical race theory, which, frankly, is the dry and arcane stuff of graduate school seminars.  It is all about alarming White voters into believing that they are somehow threatened if our educational system makes any meaningful attempt to teach the facts of the nation’s long struggle with race.

“The Republican state legislators falling over themselves to decide how history can and cannot be taught in schools — and blowhards such as Senator Ted Cruz from Texas who warn that children are being taught “every White person is a racist” — know exactly what they’re doing. They seek to create a crisis where none exists in hopes of driving up GOP turnout in next year’s midterm elections.”

COMMENT:  If you want to read more about the critical race theory subject, go to Atlantic Magazine.  There, writer Adam Harris performs a service by providing background on a theory that has moved from academic circles to political controversy.

TRUMP AND LAWYERS:  Washington Post contributing columnist George Conway writes this about former and disgraced president Donald Trump and lawyers:

“Donald Trump could never really count on the lawyers.

“No matter how many cynical or craven congressmen, toadying aides, grifting consultants, unhinged activists, disinforming talking heads and deluded cultists he may have had, Trump still needed the lawyers. He needed serious members of the bar to provide at least some semblance of a legal justification for his attempted self-coup.

“They never did.

“Nearly six months after Jan. 6, as Trump’s private business stands on the verge of indictment, we’ve been learning more about how lawyers stood in the way of his attempt to commit the ultimate abuse of public trust during his final days in office.”

RATING AMERICA:  In the Wall Street Journal, retired executive editor Gerard Baker asks this question:

“This July Fourth, that sacred day when we commemorate the hijacking of the American continent by a gang of white supremacists in a desperate bid to hold onto their slaves, I have a question for progressives:  What do you want this country to be?

“I understand the many frustrations with its flaws.  We all have those.  I understand anger at the myriad inequalities and injustices. The work of progress is never even close to complete.

“But is there anything that would actually make them love this country? Do they understand why so many people—not only in America—admire it?”

COMMENT:  I don’t always agree with Baker, but this time, I do.  He is right.  America has flaws.  But reasonable people in this country – yes, there are some left – are working to support and make improvements.  Of necessity, that requires looking backward to assess failures – including, for example, in race issues where there is so much more to do — but it does NOT require denigrating the country that has played such major role in supporting freedom.

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

There is an old saw in the lobby game that says what this blog headline touts — “if something good happens, take credit for it.”

An overstatement, no doubt, but there is a case to be made for the words because if the reverse is true – something bad happens – you get credit, read debit, for that, too.

So, it is that I read the following paragraphs in the Wall Street Journal this morning:

“WASHINGTON—President Biden walked back comments tying the fate of a roughly $1 trillion bi-partisan infrastructure agreement to a separate, Democrat effort to pass a broad anti-poverty plan, recommitting to the bi-partisan deal after Republicans threatened to withdraw their support.

“Biden said Saturday that his earlier comments ‘created the impression that I was issuing a veto threat’ on his proposal, ‘which was certainly not my intent.’

“The bottom line is this: ‘ I gave my word to support the infrastructure plan, and that’s what I intend to do.  I intend to pursue the passage of that plan, which Democrats and Republicans agreed to on Thursday, with vigor,’ he said in a statement.  Biden will travel to Wisconsin on Tuesday to discuss the merits of the agreement, according to a White House official.”

Now, no doubt it was my blog yesterday that prompted the new Biden position.  My words were, of course, compelling.

In yesterday’s blog, I used this quote from the Wall Street Journal:

“Politicians in Washington renege on their bi-partisan promises all the time, but what are we to make of a deal in which one side admits it is pulling a bait and switch from the start?

“That was the astonishing news Thursday as President Biden and Speaker Pelosi endorsed a bi-partisan Senate infrastructure deal even as they said the price of their support is getting the rest of their agenda, too.”

With Biden’s new position – he reiterated his support for infrastructure deal without conditions – there is little doubt but that I should get credit for the emerging bi-partisan deal.

Okay.  Just let me have my few moments of glory.

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

Here’s a new buzz-phrase:  Critical race theory.

It is a phrase that is being used by many on the left to indicate that everything in this country around race and the U.S. is completely racist through and through.

Or, I guess that’s what it may means.

But, many Republicans dispute the contention and, thus don’t like what the phrase has come to mean.

Over the past few months, and particularly through June, hosts and anchors on Fox have ramped up the conversation about the theory.

The concept has been around for more than 40 years, according to EducationWeek, but it has become a major programming theme on Fox News only in recent months as parents, buoyed by conservative activists and groups, have vocally opposed the teaching of the theory — or something similar to it — in schools throughout the country. Republican-led state legislatures have voted to outlaw it.

Whenever the phrase is used by the left, it is not necessarily defined.  And those who use the phrase don’t want a discussion.  They, apparently, want all of us to salute.

Three columns dealing with the theory have caught my attention recently.

In the Washington Post, Dana Milbank wrote that “critical race theory (at its core, the belief that racism in America is systemic) has been around for decades in academic circles without attracting much attention — until Fox News took it up last summer.”

Typical.  Fox News is the apparent source – a bad one – for a new political horse to ride.

Milbank continued:  “As The Post’s Laura Meckler and Josh Dawsey report, a Fox News guest, Christopher Rufo, declared that critical race theory had ‘pervaded every institution in the federal government’ — and Trump and his allies took it from there.  

“The irony, of course, is that Republicans are now proving that systemic racism exists — and they, along with Fox News, are the primary offenders.  With their united stand against the voting-rights bill…they’re the ones reducing Americans ‘to their racial identity alone.’”

Retired Wall Street Journal senior editor Gerard Baker also dealt with the issue.

“I learned economics from a Marxist,” he reports.  “It was the height of the Cold War, a critical moment when the survival of the West seemed in doubt, an age when many people, even those under no illusions about the unfolding terror of Soviet communism, wondered whether capitalism’s days might be numbered.

“(My tutor) was first and foremost a teacher, an intellectually insatiable pedagogue with a desire to foster among his students a hunger for a broad understanding of the discipline.”

Think of that.  A requirement for critical thinking.  Not a requirement to accept one train of thought.

Baker goes on to suggest that critical thinking on all counts “is the essence of a liberal education:  The nurturing and development of independent minds by erudite teachers of various ideological persuasions through exposure to the widest range of intellectual inquiry.”

And it is in peril, he contends.

“The crisis engulfing our institutions represents the struggle for ascendancy of an ideology that is literally the antithesis of the educational values that have driven the West’s unrivaled economic, social and technological progress for the past few centuries.

“Critical race theory—and its various post-modern cousins—is not some interesting interpretation of social and political history that we are free to examine, embrace or discard.  Its proponents do not seek to frame a critique of modern America to be tested alongside alternatives.

“They insist that a traditionally liberal approach to evaluating the merits of competing ideas is itself an outgrowth of an illegitimate system of oppression.  Rejection of their critique is the product of false consciousness, since critical thought is itself invalid, the product of white male hegemony.”

The third writer on this subject is Washington Post columnist, Michael Gerson, one of my favorites.

He wrote this:

“Though our nation is beset with systemic racism, we also have the advantage of what a friend calls ‘systemic anti-racism.’  We have documents — the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, the 14th Amendment — that call us to our better selves.  

“We are a country that has exploited and oppressed Black Americans.  But we arealso the country that has risen up in mass movements, made up of Blacks and Whites, to confront those evils.  The response to systemic racism is the determined, systematic application of our highest ideals.”

Gerson is right. 

We have the wherewithal to inveigh against racism – and work hard to remove racist thoughts and actions from ourselves.  And we can do so without denigrating this country as the “critical race theorists” want us to do; we can consider all viewpoints on all issues, then reject some and accept others.  And recognize the good points in OUR country. 

It is one trait of a civilized culture.

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

That was the headline in a Washington Post editorial this morning – and I agree with it.

At one point post-Donald Trump, I vowed never to write about him again.  I have broken the vow on a couple occasions and am doing so again, given what is at stake.

He so defamed the office of President of the United States that he deserves to remain defeated.  Still, though, he talks of rebounding.

And, for the life of me, I cannot understand why folks – even some of my friends – can stay tethered to Trump, apparently believing that he should rebound.

Here’s the detail of what the Post wrote:

“Many Republicans want the nation to ignore and forget President Donald Trump’s poisonous final months in office — the most dangerous moment in modern presidential history, orchestrated by the man to whom the GOP still swears allegiance.

“Yet,” the country must not forget how close it came to a full-blown constitutional crisis, or worse. Tuesday brought another reminder that, but for the principled resistance of some key officials, the consequences could have been disastrous.

The House Committee on Oversight and Reform on Tuesday released emails showing that the White House waged a behind-the-scenes effort to enlist the Justice Department in its crusade to advance Trump’s baseless allegations of fraud in the 2020 election.

“On December14, 10 days before Jeffrey Rosen took over as acting attorney general, Trump’s assistant emailed Rosen, asserting that Dominion Voting Systems machines in Michigan were intentionally fixed and pointing to a debunked analysis showing what ‘the machines can and did do to move votes.’  The email declared, ‘We believe it has happened everywhere.’

“Later that month, Trump’s assistant sent Rosen a brief that the president apparently wanted the Justice Department to submit to the Supreme Court.  The draft mirrored the empty arguments that the state of Texas made to the court before the justices dismissed the state’s lawsuit.

“Piling on the pressure, then-White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows also dispatched an email asking Rosen to examine allegations of voter fraud in Georgia.  A day later, Meadows apparently forwarded Rosen a video alleging that Italians used satellites to manipulate voting equipment.  These were just some of the preposterous White House emails claiming fraud in arguably the most secure presidential election ever.

“To his credit, Rosen rebuffed the White House’s entreaties to deploy the Justice Department’s vast powers on behalf of Trump’s lie, adding his name to the roster of honorable state and federal officials who showed fidelity to truth and duty at that crucial moment.

“Given Mr. Trump’s reckless actions after losing the 2020 vote, and the violence they spurred, the newly released emails are unsurprising.  But consider that fact for a moment:  It is unsurprising that the president of the United States leaned on the Justice Department to help him try to steal an election.  The country cannot forget that Trump betrayed his oath, that most Republican officeholders remain loyal to him nonetheless — and that it could be worse next time.”

The country should never forget the damage Trump did to the United States – and, thus, he should stay where he is, sequestered and out of touch…so “it cannot be worse next time.”

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

Lawmakers at the Capitol are churning toward the end of the current legislative session and the process recalls fond and not-so-fond memories for me during the 25 years I worked as a state lobbyist.

My former colleagues in the firm CFM, now called CFM Advocates, have described the end this way:

“Legislative leaders are wrestling with a unique problem as they enter the final phase of budget deliberations.

“Simply put, they have too much money.  With a surprisingly rosy economic forecast and an influx of federal coronavirus relief funds, Oregon finds itself in a position to set aside large reserves, fully fund existing operations and invest in one-time projects and improvements across the state.

“The issue is that, with the perception of additional funds, comes an exponential increase in request for those funds.  So far, lawmakers have approved an additional $300 million for schools.  They are also preparing a massive $400-500 million investment package dedicated to addressing behavioral health, mental health and the homeless crisis.

“In addition, Houser Speaker Tina Kotek is championing $650 million toward affordable housing.  

“At the same time, lawmakers must dedicate funds to mitigate future wildfires while addressing the catastrophic damage from the 2020 wildfire season – and they are preparing to invest upwards of $920 million toward recovery efforts.

“Other one-time projects are gaining traction, like potentially expensive city water and wastewater investments totaling nearly $23 billion over the next two decades which lawmakers could buy down with upfront investments today and upwards of $200 million towards water infrastructure projects.”

See!  More money makes it hard to adjourn, given all the wish lists.

So, here is a quick summary of end-of-session memories for me:

ONE HOUR NOTICE:  A few days ago, legislative leaders enacted a typical end-of-session mechanism – requiring only a one-hour notice for meetings of committees.  Usually, the requirement is 24 hours.

The one-hour construct is meant to indicate that things are driving toward the end.  In the past, it meant that lobbyists like me walked the hallways to monitor bulletin boards to find out whether bills important to our clients had been scheduled or not.

Now, in a virtual legislature, lobbyists are not allowed in the building; nor are citizens.  Which means everyone has to check on-line sources to see the emerging one-hour notice schedule.

PACKING THE BUDGET:  When a legislature convenes in Salem, there is only one action that must be taken:  Approve a state budget that balances expenses with revenue.

Tough stuff for government.

For some good reasons – and some bad ones – the federal government has no such balanced budget construct.

In Oregon as a lobbyist who focused on state spending, the last few weeks of a session always involved a lot of to-ing and fro-ing over budget decisions.  I worked hard to find legislative champions involved in the Joint Ways and Means Committee processes to advance the cause of my clients.

Things usually come together at the end in what is called “the Christmas tree” budget bill.  The image is a reference to budget allocations that function as ornaments on a tree.

It always was a way to prompt – read “force” – legislators to agree to end the session.  Give them what they wanted in the way of spending — or say “no,” then adjourn.

For a lobbyist like me, waiting with baited-breath for the Christmas tree was a big deal.  For anything pending near the end, it was important to see whether your favored budget allocations for clients had made it or not. 

HOPING FOR “SINE DIE:”  Say what.  What is sine die?

Here’s how the dictionary defines the term:  “Something done sine die has no definite date or period to resume.  It’s legalese for “indefinitely,” and Latin for “without day.”  If a meeting ends with no set day to get back together, it’s adjourned sine die.”

As a lobbyist, when I saw sine die resolution produced in writing, I knew the end was near. 

At the moment, the sine die resolution for the current session is pending at the Capitol.

Did the Legislature do its job this session?  It’s too early to tell.  And, the judgment, of course, depends on your expectations, as well as your political perspectives.

A few weeks after the session we’ll be in a better position to judge success or failure of the 81^st Legislative Assembly.

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

This is nearly a truism in politics:  When one party is in charge in the federal government or a state capitol, it is easy for those in charge to go too far to advance their cause. 

Which gives the other side an opportunity to catch up or take control on their own.

If you are in charge, the moral is to use your majority in a smart way rather than in a way that gives aid and comfort to the other side.  Further, those in charge should find a way to take bi-partisan actions that will encourage voters who want good government.  That could pay off politically.

Consider two examples.

The first is the Biden Administration, along with Democrat leaders in Congress. 

There is an emerging consensus that the president and Congress are moving too far and too fast toward what, in the past, would have been described as “liberal” positions.  Today, the political lexicon calls it moving too far left to the abode of Senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders.

Which is too far for many Americans.

Thus, it is possible Democrats may lose control of the U.S. House and Senate in the mid-term elections next year.  Biden, after those elections, will have two more years in his first term.

Further, Wall Street Journal commentator Daniel Henninger suggested that Biden has “bungled his first crisis.”   By that, Henninger was referring to a comment from former White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel who said, “you never want a crisis to go to waste” if you involved in politics.

A crisis, Emanuel said, is “an opportunity to do things that you could not do before.”

For Biden, the crisis is the pandemic and, in that and other “crisis-type” issues, the Administration has chosen to “go big.”  It is a tactic that could cost them the smart middle – voters who wanted a relief from Donald Trump and a return to a “normal” president who focuses on getting things done in a bi-partisan fashion without resorting to Twitter diatribes.

Henninger wrote this. “The questions are everywhere this week: Has Biden wasted his crisis?  Are the Democrats on course to lose the House next year (and not beyond imagining, the Senate)?  Is the Biden agenda disappearing up the flue of Joe Manchin’s chimney (a reference to Senator Manchin who won’t give up supporting the filibuster, which requires 60 votes to pass anything in a 100-member Senate).?”

“My short answers,” Henninger adds, “are yes, yes and yes.”

In the second example, I cite the Oregon Legislature.  Control now is firmly in the hands of Democrats.  The fact is that it may not be possible for the Legislature to move too far left because Democrats are likely to retain control of the Legislature, as well as the Governor’s Office, for the foreseeable future.

It’s a function of the fact urban legislators control the process, illustrating that there are still “two Oregons” – the urban one and the rural one.

Just ask several Eastern Oregon counties that want to become part of Idaho because leaders in those counties have said “they don’t recognize Oregon any longer.”  The fact is that secession probably will not be possible, given all that is involved, including an act of Congress.  But, still, the instinct to leave persists.

Meanwhile, legislators are driving toward the constitutionally mandated end-of-the-session under the leadership of two Democrats – House Speaker Tina Kotek and Senate President Peter Courtney, with the Democrat governor, Kate Brown, holding court in her middle-of-the-Capitol office for two more years.

Kotek could decide to run for governor in two years after several terms as House Speaker.  Courtney, for his part, could recede into the sunset as the longest serving legislator in Oregon history.

Still, going too far always risks building a majority that can be sustained, as well as one that can appeal to voters who want success, not just extremes.

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

An incident in a pro golf tournament last week underlined an important general question facing this country:  What drives resistance to vaccines?

No one knows the answer for sure, but pro golfer Jon Rahm got a dose of reality last week.

After the third round of the Memorial Golf Tournament in Ohio, Rahm got the bad news.  He had tested positive for the virus.  And, thus, he had to withdraw from the tournament. 

Trouble was he had a six-shot lead and could have gone on to win a tournament the pros love because it pays homage to the best golfer ever to have the played the game, Jack Nicklaus.  [Yes, the rating of “best” in the previous sentence is mine, and there are those who will debate the ranking.]

Back to question.  Why hadn’t Rahm just gotten the vaccine to preserve his playing privileges?

I don’t know and I suppose there might have been some kind of reason for his failure.

But, to go beyond golf, resistance to the vaccine is a national issue.

In the Wall Street Journal, William Galston wrote about the issue in a column that appeared under this headline:

Eight in 10 Democrats have at least one dose, compared with about half of Republicans.

His column started this way:

“As public concern about the pandemic continues to decline, the Biden Administration is pushing hard to meet its goal of vaccinating 70 per cent of adults with at least one shot by the Fourth of July.  More than 60 per cent of the country is already vaccinated.

“Still, reaching that goal will be challenging. Monthly surveys by the Kaiser Family Foundation show that about 20 per cent of the population was staunchly opposed to getting vaccinated at the beginning of the year and remains so today.  As the share of Americans who say they are in “wait and see” mode has declined to only 12 per cent from 31 per cent in January, the pool of new possibilities has shrunk.  Mass-inoculation centers are being phased out in favor of a strategy bringing shots to trusted messengers—such as the new campaign to organize 1,000 barbershops in black neighborhoods.”

Galston suggests that the principal remaining obstacle to near-universal vaccination is the large number of Republicans who are declining to participate.

“The partisan gap is astonishing,” he writes.  “More than 80 per cent of Democrats have already received at least one shot, compared with 49 per cent of Republicans.  Twenty-seven per cent of Republicans say that they won’t get vaccinated under any circumstances, and an additional 9 per cent will do so only if required.  The comparable figures for Democrats are 3 per cent outright refusal.”

The vaccination breach is one more illustrattion of deep divides that endanger the American political system.

Galston argues that there are three reasons for vaccine resistance.

• First, many Republicans are visceral if not doctrinal libertarians. They understand freedom as being left alone to make their own choices, and they resent being told what to do.  They implicitly reject distinctions between actions that affect only themselves and those that affect others.  From their perspective, mask mandates restrict freedom, whatever their purported social justification, and so does pressure to get vaccinated.
• Second, an increasing number of Republicans are populists who bristle at what they see as elite condescension toward ordinary citizens.  When medical experts assure us that Covid-19 vaccines are safe and effective, many Republicans wonder how they can be so sure about medicines that were developed so quickly.
• Third, for more than a century, white evangelical Protestants have had a tense relationship with modern science, which they see as challenging core tenets of their faith. They are less likely than other Americans to take “follow the science” as their benchmark.

I disagree, at least in part with point #3 above, I would write the sentence this way — “SOME white evangelical Protestants have had a tense relationship with modern science.”  There is a tendency among writers like Galston is to merge “white evangelical Protestants” into one supposedly collegial group. 

No.  White evangelical Protestants cannot be lumped into one group.  For many, like me, are not ones who have “a tense relationship with modern science,” just as many of us abhor Donald Trump for all the damage he did to our country.

Back to the point about vaccine resistance. 

It is time for Jon Rahm and others like him to get vaccinated to protect themselves – and us.

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

I like words.  More than charts and graphs.  More than numbers.

So it is that I mourn the loss of the original meaning of some words in a society marked today by over-reliance on the Internet, which enables the definitions of some words to change – and not necessarily for the better.

Consider these three examples:

• Gay:  Means being a homosexual person, not just someone who is happy.

• Woke:  Means being alert to injustice in society, especially racism, not just someone who awakens from sleep.

• Pride:  Means being a person who displays confidence and self-respect as expressed by members of a group, typically one that has been socially marginalized, on the basis of their shared identity, culture, and experience.”  Think pride about being gay.  Not just someone who takes pride, for instance, in the general values of the U.S,

So, it is no longer okay to utter this sentence: 

I woke up today feeling pride in my country, which made me look forward to a gay day.

Today, that would mean that I am a homosexual, filled with pride about being so identified, and intending to be alert for racial justice.

So, the message is:  Be careful how use these words today.

No less a vaunted journalistic source than the Washington Post showed up recently with a story on this subject, though the content tended to focus on changes prodded by technology, not by politics, as in the cases I cited above.

“Technological change,” the Post story said, “tends to provoke linguistic and cultural change.  It’s the reason why, several times a year, dictionaries trumpet the addition of new and typically very trendy words.

“But more interesting than the new words, I think, are the old words that have gotten new meanings:  Words such as “cloud” and “tablet” and “catfish,” with very long pre-Internet histories.  The re-appropriation is rarely random; in most cases, the original meaning of the word is a metaphor for the new one.  Our data is as remote as a cloud, for instance; catfish are just as tricky and unpredictable as an online love interest.”

I won’t bore you with a copy of the words the Post lists as having changed, especially through technology. 

But the point is the same.  The meanings of words change. 

For me, gay, woke, and pride are the best examples.

The fix?  Just don’t use the words in everyday language to avoid misunderstanding and misconception, even as you mourn the passing of the old definitions.

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

Analyst William Galston made a good point when he wrote this in the Wall Street Journal a couple days ago:

“The American constitutional system functions well when one political party dominates the government or when two evenly matched parties have enough common ground to make compromises. When both parties are closely and deeply divided, gridlock is the norm and legislative success the exception. With thin margins in Congress, this is the situation Joe Biden faced as he took the oath of office.”

It’s easy to be critical of Congress for inaction and many such criticisms are more than justified as Members of Congress appear to be mainoy interested in their own re-election or subjecting the opposing party to over-the-top criticism…just for “political purposes.”

What gets lost in all of this is the need for concerted, middle-of-the-road action on a host of pressing public policy challenges facing this country.  Which raises a question about whether our current form of government can work at all.

Much of this question resolves around the abhorrent conduct of Donald Trump who, by his own narcissism, turned the country inside out during his years as president and the fact that he may be running again turns my stomach,

To get back to Galston’s analysis, “the past three decades,” he reports, “have been an era of closely balanced parties unprecedented in American political history.  Of the 17 presidential elections between 1920 and 1984, 11 were decided with popular-vote landslides of 10 points or more.  In the eight elections since 1984, not one candidate has reached that margin of victory.

“Democrats held the majority in the House for four unbroken decades after the 1954 election.  Since then, the chamber has changed hands four times (in 1994, 2006, 2010 and 2018).  There is a better than even chance that the House flips again in 2022.

Galston opines that, when control of Congress and the White House are up for grabs in nearly every election, governing in the national interest becomes more difficult.

“The minority,” he says, “is more likely to view issues as opportunities to cast the majority in an unfavorable light, and the majority will be less likely to make concessions.  Because the actions of committee chairman and even individual members can affect the entire party’s chances in the next election, power flows toward party leaders, who enforce ‘message discipline’ and press wavering members to stick with their party.

“Bright-line contrasts with the other party take priority over the more nuanced stances that compromise requires.  Besides, compromises may disappoint the party’s base, making stalwart supporters less interested in voting, especially in midterm elections.

“The time and political space that governance requires are replaced by 24/7 political combat.  Even on issues that enjoy support across party lines, such as infrastructure, the incentive is to score partisan points, not focus on the many areas of agreement.”

Still, there may be cause to hope on several counts.

First, such issues as competing with China and police reform could produce momentum toward compromise, given the importance of those issues.

China stands on its own.  And the rise of that huge nation has produced broad support for investments in new technologies and production processes such as artificial intelligence and robotics to enable the U.S. to compete.  As a result, the Endless Frontier Act, now on the Senate floor, will likely attract a bi-partisan majority.

Further, a bi-partisan, bi-cameral negotiation over police reform has made some progress in recent weeks and, Galston reports that, if a compromise can be forged on the scope of legal immunity police enjoy, a bill could reach the president’s desk by the end of summer.

Second, some Members of Congress may be reaching a conclusion that the cost of continued inaction is too high.  Some of these members came to Washington to get things done and are dismayed by the partisan combat they encounter, which seems to dwarf anything else.

Despite daunting obstacles, many are reaching across the aisle to work with members of the other party with efforts such as the House Problem Solvers Caucus and less formal arrangements such as the Senate’s “G-20” (10 members from each party).

If these conversations yield a clearer understanding of each side’s red lines, even the deep divide between today’s parties may prove surmountable.

One hopes that could be possible.  Otherwise, our way of government may continue to recede.

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

It can be a worthwhile activity to look back on something you have done in your life and reflect on the good times.

Regarding my work in state government from 1979 through 1990, I did that this week with my wife as we drove over to an iconic resort on the Oregon Coast, Salishan Lodge.

The visit, which we have made many times over the years, brought back fond memories of a special occasion at Salishan more than 39 years ago, the Western Governor’s Association conference there.

I had the privilege of handling media relations for Governor Vic Atiyeh as he hosted the event for 14 Western state governors, as well as top representatives of three U.S. territories.

All of this came flooding back to me as my wife and I visited with Mary Arnstad who, 39 years ago, was a key Salishan manager who was in charge of hosting the Western Governors’ event.  She is now back at the Coast as an investor in the Bay House Restaurant, which has re-located from South Lincoln City to Salishan Lodge.

Mary did a great job of hosting us 39 years ago, including arranging for building a parking lot at the end of the Salishan spit, which became the site of a major seafood barbecue for all those attending, except the elected officials who were hosted elsewhere, though they probably would rather have been at the barbecue.

Let me add quickly that everyone attending the conference participated in substance on such issues as natural resources and economic growth, each of which motivated the policies of the governors.

That is outlined in a piece by my friend Denny Miles, which is excerpted below.  Denny was Governor Atiyeh’s press secretary and also served as chair of Oregon’s task to host the Western Governors. 

Denny and I were – and are – friends and, for the conference, he asked me to handle media relations, which I gladly did, while I took a few days leave from my position at the Department of Human Resources.

Here are excerpts from Miles’ post:

“The Western Governors’ now operates with a different name and governance model, but in those days, it was headquartered in San Francisco and the organization concentrated on issues related to natural resources and economic matters of interest to Western states.

“’Western’ was defined as everything from Wyoming to New Mexico to Alaska and American Samoa — so it covered a lot of geography.

“The Western governors’ meetings were very non-partisan, in that the governors nearly always had more in common based on geography than differences based on political party.  Often a Democrat governor from Montana was more conservative than a Republican governor from California.

“The host state would raise money for a special fund donated by corporate sponsors.  Sponsors typically would attend the conference and interact with the governors and their spouses during the meeting.  A lot of policy was discussed, the White House always participated, and what seemed most important, everyone always had a great time.

“Salishan was such a great spot for this kind of premier event. It had hosted Western governors before — during the McCall Administration.

“The Pacific Ocean is a great collaborator to have for such an event. But we also had an astronaut from Oregon (Gordon Fullerton), great local entertainment (Stoddard & Cole and The Shoppe), and a lot of great parties laid into the agenda.  We literally took over the Salishan facility, along with several nice hotels nearby.

“As chairman of the WGC, Governor Atiyeh had been looking forward to hosting the Western Governors’ Conference.  We all knew it was going to be right in the middle of a tough election year. Atiyeh always did things in the legal, proper and ethical way.  Given the election-year timing we were especially careful.  Our policies, procedures and practices were vetted through legal counsel Bob Oliver.  This operation would be antiseptically clean.

“In planning for the event, every morning I would meet first with my team of Oregon host staff.  Glenna Hayden handled registration, we had an Oregon State Police captain leading a substantial cadre of troopers, Dave Fiskum was in charge of press relations, and Paul Phillips was the transportation coordinator.  Mellissa Underwood was a volunteer who also helped out.  She had a delightful Tennessee accent that calmed down just about any situation.

“My second meeting each morning was with Salishan staff, led by assistant manager Mary Arnstad.  These folks were pros.  If there was a problem, I typically didn’t hear about it until it had been solved.

“…Salishan had arranged for an area on the spit to be paved and a huge tent installed.  A very efficient shuttle system took guests to the end of the spit.  This special event featured wonderful ‘Oregon bounty’ food and great music.  This specific party was for non-elected participants.  At the same time, all the chief executives and lobbyists were hosted for a very fancy and exclusive party in a private home just a mile south.

“Visualize a huge tent set up at the end of the spit overlooking Siletz Bay and the Pacific Ocean.  I can’t remember how they got electrical power to this end-of-the-road location.  There was a sumptuous buffet and a well-stocked open bar.  Then there was The Shoppe, an amazing country-pop band that kept the place hopping for hours.”

The Salishan governors’ conference was an unbridled success.  The governor was ecstatic.  His fellow governors had a great time.  Chief of Staff Gerry Thompson, still a friend to this day, was very pleased.

“It seemed that at future WGC gatherings the comments were something like, ‘nice enough event, but nothing like what you guys did in Oregon,” Denny remembers.  “I (Denny) remember thinking at our post- event celebratory staff gathering upstairs in the Salishan bar – ‘Gee, I could go out now on a high note.  But I had accepted another, much tougher job, and my start date was just days away.

“Four days later, I moved into the Atiyeh re-election campaign office as the new campaign manager.  The incumbent governor was seriously behind in the polls.”

**********

The rest of the story: As Denny left, I took over as the governor’s press secretary.  The governor won re-election by a huge margin, Denny came back to his press secretary job, and, after pinch-hitting for him, I went on to serve as deputy director of the Oregon Economic Development Department and assistant director of the Oregon Executive Department before moving on to become a lobbyist.

Good to be able to remember 39-years-ago highlights.