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 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 a Congressional press secretary in Washington, D.C., an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and 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.

When Senator Bob Corker took on President Donald Trump a few days ago, he hit on what could very well be an apt description of the Trump White House.

He called it “an adult day care center.”

Of course, Trump was incensed and engaged in tweet-combat with Corker whom he belittled even as the senator was set to make good on a pledge not to run for more than two terms.

Despite Trump, the Washington Post took on the task of checking out the day care center analogy and, through confidential conversations with 18 White House aides, confirmed at last part of the description of a White House operation where a president is impulsive, impetuous and difficult to manage.

Here is a summary of some of the Post’s findings about aides spending a significant part of their time devising ways to rein in and control the president.

• During the campaign, when President Trump’s team wanted him to stop talking about a certain issue — such as when he attacked a Gold Star military family — they sometimes presented him with polls demonstrating how the controversy was harming his candidacy.
• During the transition, when aides needed Trump to decide on a looming issue or appointment, they often limited him to a shortlist of two or three options and urged him to choose one.
• Now in the White House, when advisers hope to prevent Trump from making what they think is an unwise decision, they frequently try to delay his final verdict — hoping he may reconsider after having time to calm down.
• “If you visit the White House today, you see aides running around with red faces, shuffling paper and trying to keep up with this president,” said one Republican in frequent contact with the administration. “That’s what the scene is.”
• One defining feature of managing Trump is frequent praise, which can leave his team in what seems to be a state of perpetual compliments. The White House pushes out news releases overflowing with top officials heaping flattery on Trump. In one particularly memorable Cabinet meeting this year, each member went around the room lavishing the president with accolades.

By contrast, the president’s chief of staff, retired military general John Kelly, said he was not brought into the top job to control anything (or say anything), but, rather, to manage the flow of information to the president “so that he can make the best decisions.”

According to the Washington Post report, Kelly also praised Trump as “a decisive guy” and “a very thoughtful man” whose sole focus is on advancing American interests. “He takes information in from every avenue he can receive it,” Kelly said. “I restrict no one, by the way, from going in to see him. But when we go in to see him now, rather than onesies and twosies, we go in and help him collectively understand what he needs to understand to makes these vital decisions.”

Still, Corker’s analogy, the Post says, underscored the uneasy atmosphere within the West Wing, where criticism of the president’s behavior is only whispered.

It is a fact that all White House staffs adjust to the style of a president. There is no choice. But, in this case, the perceptions flowing from the Post story tend to underscore the sensitive nature of Trump who responds to every perceived slight with a tweet-crusade of his own.

With all the tall tasks on the nation’s to-do list, one can only hope that Trump avoids his I-been-hurt-by-what-say tendency and gets about completing items on that to-do list – as along as one or more of them do not involve going to war with North Korea, Iran or some other nation.

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 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 a Congressional press secretary in Washington, D.C., an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and 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 hate to cite Senator Ted Cruz as being smart about anything, but he said something the other day that rings true.

Without legislative accomplishments on health care or tax reform (the latter is still pending), he said Republicans could face a bloodbath in the 2018 mid-term elections.

He’s right and guess what? Democrats know that, too, which is one reason why they will be working to stop any Republican legislative achievements.

They’ll likely contend that Republicans did that to them when they were in charge, so it’s fair that one bad turn deserves another bad turn.

Think about that. Getting even never ends.

Which is one reason why Congress can never get anything done.

Things only got worse this week when President Donald Trump signed an executive order eliminating cost-sharing subsidies that helped low- and moderate-income Americans afford health insurance. About 50,000 eligible Oregonians, for example, stood to lose about $48 million a year in federal assistance.

ObamaCare was a new federal entitlement, which is almost impossible to remove or limit and it was a bad piece of legislation when it was passed seven years ago without one Republican vote.  But Trump’s action smacks of the get-even mentality.

Worse, Democrats were incensed and said they will hold Trump and the Republicans hostage when the time comes later this year and eearly next to try to avoid a government shutdown.

As an aside, last Friday Oregon insurance regulators said they had figured out a way to increase a different federal health insurance subsidy – premium assistance payments — that could more than cover the loss of the cost-sharing payments for many Oregonians.

And, at the same time, despite that development, Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum says she will join a lawsuit to prevent Trump’s plan from hurting low-income Oregonians. The other states are Kentucky, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, North Carolina, Illinois, New York, Washington, Vermont, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia, Minnesota, New Mexico and Iowa.

So, the back and forth continues, with no end in sight.

The risk is that all of this getting even business makes it look like American democracy doesn’t work anymore. Perhaps true.

From one person in the cheap seats, what’s needed:

• Elected officials of goodwill, good intent and intellectual ability who will rise above partisan politics to produce solid middle-of-the-road results.
• Politicians who will rise above the current motivation, which is always about the next election.
• A president who does not yell and scream at every supposed criticism, but keeps his or her eye on the final, it-benefits-all result.
• Voters who will choose officials who say that, once elected, they’ll work for the common good, not their own next election….and who say their motive will not be to get even in response to any suspected slight.

Too much to expect? Perhaps.

But, unless we find a new way of doing the public’s business, we’ll continue watching our democracy slide into the abyss.

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 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 a Congressional press secretary in Washington, D.C., an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and 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.

Columnist Leonard Pitts Jr. wrote a thoughtful piece this week questioning whether the old standard of being a FACT mattered anymore.

His proposition? No.

Pitts related a story from his past when a reader wouldn’t believe the facts he wrote, then added this about his own perceptions: “That was when I first fully understood that we had entered a new era wherein facts – those things that once settled arguments conclusively – carried all the weight of goose down. These days, you may prove your point to a fare-thee-well, use The New York Times, a study from Harvard, federal statistics, but the skeptical reader will still brush it all aside like a blurry Polaroid of Bigfoot.”

Pitts says he is not sure “truth is something all of us value.”

He points to such examples of so-called truth as these:

• Michelle Obama is a transvestite? Sure.
• The military plans to conquer Texas? Okey-dokey.
• Vaccines cause autism? Well, all righty, then.
• Hillary Clinton is running a child molestation ring? OK. Out of a pizza joint? Why not?

“That’s just a sampling of the crazy that has gained purchase in American minds. So while it’s fine to engage today’s news consumers, I think our long-term salvation lies in their kids, in teaching them the lost art of critical thinking. That should be a priority in our schools. Because the status quo — facts-free ignorance — is unsustainable.

“Yes, there is always room for improvement in how news media do their jobs. But it is important to understand that the disconnect media face does not stem from failure to report the facts. Rather, it stems from some people’s failure to want them.”

In all of this, I believe one of culprits is social media, for all of its potential benefits. When social media posts pervade society, as they now do, many consumers believe what they read, such as the crazy examples above.

They don’t exhibit the critical thinking to work to distinguish between fact and fiction.

Beyond Pitts’ point about educating kids in the art of critical thinking, I propose several “don’ts:”

1. Don’t rely on just one source for getting and assessing information.

In one example, which affects my daily life, I make sure to read the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post, not to presume that facts lie expressly in one direction, but, rather, to assess viewpoints from both the right and the left.

In your own world, rely on multiple sources before you make decisions about what you think.

2. Don’t assume that you automatically have or know all the facts.

It’s easy for all of us to assume that we know what’s true and that we have all the answers. But, I say, test your views in discussions with others, not just those friends and neighbors whom you suspect may agree with you.

3. Don’t jump to quick conclusions based on what you read or hear.

We all have a tendency to want conclusions, to want clarity in our lives amidst all of the confusion and noise. But, it makes more sense to avoid quick decisions and test your emerging views with others whom you trust.

I have tried this example in such areas as (1) health care policy (where I spent 25 years representing a major health provider in the Northwest) and (2) political contributions in state and federal races.

On the former, I have learned a lot from my long-time partner, Gary Conkling, still the president of the firm he and I founded, CFM Strategic Communications. He challenged me to think about current health care issues from a different perspective than just my own.

In another case, one of my golfing buddies, Kevin Turner, has prompted me to think again about the Citizens’ United federal court case, which enables political contributions from business interests. Kevin’s comments to me are still resonating – and that’s good because contemplation is one aspect of critical thinking.

In neither of the above cases, did the conversations produce final “fact” conclusions on my part, but they did prompt me to avoid jumping to conclusions.

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 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 a Congressional press secretary in Washington, D.C., an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and 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.

This department, one of two I direct (the second is the Department of Pet Peeves), is open again for business. It has been closed for several weeks as I waited for my laptop to be released from the repair shop.

Operating these days without a laptop? Tough.

So, these quotes, with my comments:

From the WSJ editorial page:  “The Little Sisters still need relief in court, which the new rule should make easier, but the regulatory change will launch a crush of new lawsuits from groups like the ACLU. That so many resources in government and so much litigation are necessary to allow nuns to practice their faith is a testament to the toxic identity politics that corrodes American life.”

Comment: Protecting religious freedom should be a priority for Congress and the Presidential Administration. But, when Democrats were in charge, they did not fear to infringe on that freedom. Now, it appears those now in charge are returning to a more balanced regulatory approach.

And, know this, which I report based on my 25 years as a lobbyist representing, among others, Providence Health System, a health care company, including an insurance arm, with a dotted-line affiliation with the Catholic Church. That insurer and all others domiciled in Oregon cover contraception, not because some in the State House thought it was a good political idea, so passed a law, but, rather, because it was good health care business.

From the WSJ letter to the editor column:  “Instead of paying players, take away the bloated college recruiting budgets and the labyrinthine recruiting rules for those sports. Players who want to earn an education and play sports will find the right school as they used to without the lure and corruption caused by the interface with big-time sports. Those who really don’t want to go to college should go to the new minor leagues and get paid. The colleges and the players will be the better for it.”

Comment: Though I am a sports fan, this letter writer makes a few good points about the excesses of college sports. One wonders when reason will return.

From the WSJ editorial page:  “…repealing the regulatory overreach of the Obama Administration is the first crucial step that is already paying dividends in less economic uncertainty and more confidence in the reliability of the future electric grid.”

Comment: This quote relates to the plan by Environmental Protection Agency Director Scott Pruitt to do away with an Obama Administration excess, imposing a so-called “clean power plan,” without both-sides processes to produce a reasonable plan. I say it’s about time reason and balanced prevailed in environmental law and regulation – and Pruitt is making a decent start on the goal.

From my friend on the golf course over the weekend:  “How do you feel about getting rid of Citizen’s United, the ruling in the case that gives one person the ability to buy a result in the political process?”

Comment: This friend was serious in his question, and so was I in my response. From my view, Citizens’ United could go away (it protects the right of businesses to invest in politics) IF unions, especially public employee unions, were also barred from making huge political contributions. Again, balance should be the goal.

From former U.S Senator Phil Gramm, now with the American Enterprise Institute:  “Given that the top 10 per cent of income earners in America pay more than 71 per cent of federal income taxes and do most of the saving, investing and innovating that fuel America’s economic growth, it’s hardly surprising that a tax reform proposal to stimulate growth would reduce the marginal tax rates of high-income Americans. What is astonishing, however, is the difficulty advocates of tax reform seem to have in defending their proposal against the attack that it benefits the rich.”

Comment: Gramm was a solid senator who practiced his politics from the middle. In this piece, he makes good points about the reality of tax reform and fallacy of just taxing the so-called “rich,” which is what Democrats want. I wish for the good old days of Ronald Reagan when tax cuts fueled economic growth, thus money for the U.S. Treasury.

From Michael Gerson writing in the Washington Post:  “All of us who interpret events for a living look into the abyss of tragedy and tend to see reasons for what brings us comfort. For some, it is passage of a law. For others, support for a religious or philosophic belief. The alternative, after all, is impotent silence. Some of these insights from the abyss may be profoundly true. But they are mainly about us.

“What matters more is the grief and loss of families, and the defiant remembering of each life. This will be the proper focus of the next few days.  That said, I do come at these events from a religious perspective, as some of the victims surely did, and as some of their loved ones surely do. The Christian faith involves a whisper from beyond time that death, while horrible, is not final — that the affirmations of the creeds and the inscriptions on tombstones are not lies. And for many, this hope is a barrier against despair.

“Yet faith also encompasses something deeper and more difficult — what theologian Jurgen Moltmann has called “God’s terrible silence.” In that silence, only the scarred God, the weak and victimized God, the God of the cross seems to communicate. Not in words, but in a shocking example of lonely suffering. Christians turn to a God who once felt godforsaken, as all of us may feel in the nightmare of loss.”

Comment: No more needs to be said or written.

From Leonard Pitts in the Miami Herald: “Donald John Trump is a man whose cognitive and moral deficits would, in a sane country, render him unfit to clean toilets at a reasonably respectable strip club. But he became president. And as Ta-Nehisi Coates argues in the new issue of The Atlantic, he was elected largely because of his racism – not despite it – having run on an implicit promise to restore white primacy after eight years of the black interloper Obama.”

Comment: Again, no more needs to be said or written.

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 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 a Congressional press secretary in Washington, D.C., an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and 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.

Those of us who have watched the health care debate in Congress may be glad that it appears to be over.

But is it?

There have been name-calling and recriminations that don’t reflect well on the ability of those in Congress or the Presidential Administration to govern this country. That could mean that nothing will happen to improve health care policy.

The bad news started when the Obama Administration and Congress, then under control of the Democrats, imposed what came to be called ObamaCare, without one Republican vote.

There are those who forget that ignominious start as they have watched Republicans, now in charge of Congress and the Administration, commit the same mistakes made by the Democrats – a Republican plan to repeal and replace ObamaCare without one D vote.

If you want a democracy to work, this is not the way to achieve it.

Better if smart minds in Congress – yes, there are some on both sides of the aisle – would set aside differences, get into a room with a circular table and design a new health care system for this country.

One reason this would be difficult is that ObamaCare has become a new federal entitlement. People who receive care under a nearly unworkable system want to preserve that care. So any change prompts horror stories about people who would lose what they now have under this federal dispensation.

But, I say set that aside and design a new and better, middle-ground system.

For my part, I always have maintained that the best first step would be to require everyone to buy health insurance just as we require every driver to buy automobile insurance. Such a mandate might not fare well in Congress, but it would be a beneficial first step to real reform, giving everyone a stake in the outcome.

Many other tenets of reform could follow, but again for my part, I am more interested for now in the process, not the product. Get both sides in a room, use experts and come up with middle ground proposals.

Scott Atlas, a senior fellow at Stanford’s Hoover Institution and author of “Restoring Quality Health Care: A Six Point Plan for Comprehensive Reform at Lower Cost” ( Hoover Press, 2016), wrote a thoughtful piece in the Wall Street Journal a few days ago to set out three examples of policies that could be part of any new plan – if one actually can be developed by a Congress that tends now to be focusing on tax reform, not health care.

Here is a summary of Mr. Atlas’ suggestions:

• First, equip consumers to consider prices.

“Critics always claim this is unrealistic: Are you supposed to shop around from the back of the ambulance? But emergency care represents only 6% of health expenditures. For privately insured adults under 65, almost 60% of spending is on elective outpatient care. Likewise, nearly 60% of Medicaid money goes to outpatient care. For the top 1% of spenders—a group responsible for more than a quarter of all health expenditures—a full 45% is outpatient. Giving consumers an incentive to consider price when seeking such care would make a huge difference.

“ObamaCare moved in the opposite direction, shielding consumers from having to care about prices. Its broad coverage requirements and misguided subsidies encouraged bloated insurance policies, furthering the misguided idea that the purpose of coverage is to minimize out-of-pocket costs. When the insurer picks up nearly the entire tab, patients have little reason to consider costs, and doctors don’t need to compete on price.”

• Second, work strategically to increase the supply of medical services to stimulate competition.

“In large part, this means deregulation. Lawmakers should remove outmoded scope-of-practice limits on qualified nurse practitioners and physician assistants. That would enable them to staff private clinics that would provide cheaper primary care, including vaccinations, blood-pressure checks, and common prescriptions. In a 2011 review, 88% of visits to retail clinics involved simple care, which was provided 30% to 40% cheaper than at a physician’s office, while keeping patients highly satisfied.”

• Third, introduce the right incentives into the tax code.

“Today employees aren’t taxed on the value of their health benefits—and there is no limit to that exclusion. This creates harmful, counterproductive incentives. It encourages higher demand for care and minimizes concerns about cost.

“Similarly, ObamaCare’s premium subsidies and the tax credits proposed by Republicans artificially prop up high insurance premiums for bloated coverage that minimizes out-of-pocket payments. This prevents patients from caring about the bill, which reduces the incentives for doctors and hospitals to compete on price. If health-care deductions are maintained, the tax code should cap them and limit eligibility to HSA contributions and catastrophic premiums.”

Are these critical spokes in the health care wheel? Perhaps.

But, at least this indicates that there are steps worth considering before we end up with a single payer system, which is the next step liberals and the Democrats want for this country.

It may sound good, but it also would drain the federal treasury without injecting any of the kind of health care disciplines listed above.

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 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 a Congressional press secretary in Washington, D.C., an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and 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.

Anyone who has gone through the agony of putting down a dog knows how difficult it is.

For dog lovers, that is.

And, I am one, along with my wife Nancy.
About 10 days ago, we reached a consensus decision, with advice from others (including our friends and dog lovers, John and Rosemary Wood), that it was time to put down our dog, Hogan, who had been with us for more than 13 years.

We got Hogan, a pure-bred Poodle, when he was a puppy. We did so to give me a walking partner shortly after my “episode,” which is the word I prefer over heart attack…but it was that, a heart attack.

Through the efforts of my wife and my son, not to mention my cardiologist and all of the health professionals at Salem Health, I managed to survive. But I had to give up running and the game of squash, so the challenge was to find a walking partner.

Along came Hogan – and we settled quickly on his name after getting separate advice from our two children who both suggested the same name. It is after the great golfer, Ben Hogan, not, I add quickly, Hulk Hogan.

So, Hogan came into our lives and quickly became our best buddy.

We walked day-after-day in our neighborhood and Hogan loved the treks, especially when they involved the golf course where he thought it was his right to chase squirrels.

I also took him along when I played, though only at times when the course was not busy. Hogan would stay in my golf cart until I gave him permission to jump out and run around, an activity he loved. The squirrels were in danger!

About six years ago, Hogan came down with a disease called Cushings, which affects some dogs, some horses and some humans. The disease, which has few cures, involved a tumor in our dog’s pituitary gland.

Without a cure, we put Hogan on daily medication and he survived well, losing some of the early incontinence, which was one symptom of the disease.

But, by hindsight, Cushings was the beginning of the end for Hogan, though it took a few years to become a real problem. He lost his hearing and much of his eyesight. He also would tend to walk around in a circle, always moving around to the right, one evidence, our vet said, of the tumor that still resided in his brain.

Our view was that it was best for Hogan for him to go down, though I have to add that adjusting to the reality of his loss was far more difficult for me than I thought it would be.

The vet, Dr. Kris Hallden, who presided with us over the process of putting Hogan down, was very kind and compassionate in that process, for she loved Hogan, too, have treated his Cushings for years.

There is a hole in our home which now can only be filled by a new dog. So, we are looking for one who won’t replace our best buddy, but will, we hope, fill a similar spot in our lives.

Looking forward to a new relationship dominates my thoughts these days because it is one way to get past Hogan’s loss, even as I retain so many positive memories of his huge role in our lives.

The face on my phone is a picture of wife, Nancy, and Hogan, so, in that way, too, I remember him fondly.

I shared this story a few days with my best friend and former pastor, Morris Dirks, who lost his best buddy, Berkeley, several years ago.

Morris believes Berkeley is in heaven and, soon, he said, will be looking for Hogan, for he will be there, too.

And, yuou live on in my heart, too, best buddy!

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 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 a Congressional press secretary in Washington, D.C., an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and 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.

Most days, we hear new sad stories about international air travel, which it could be said by this old person, is getting more and more difficult.

My wife and I just returned from a cruise in the Mediterranean from Barcelona to Barcelona and, while the cruise was wonderful on the Oceania ship, the Riviera, the trip there and back was a nightmare.

Here’s how it went.

We started out by diving to the Portland Airport for a quick flight to Seattle. No problem, right?

But then, after we left the departure gate in Seattle, there was a mechanical problem on the airplace, so, obviously, it had to be fixed. Our plane wandered around on the ground trying to find an open gate, eventually finding a berth and the problem was fixed after about half an hour, allowing us to head off to Philadelphia.

We barely made our connection there – one reason we did was that the captain was late and that helped us — and then we were the 20th plane in line to take off — yes 20th!  That took an hour sitting on the tarmac.

But, we made it over the Atlantic and it was good to be on our ship in our stateroom where, finally, we could stretch and sleep.

Then, more bad news. We left Barcelona on Monday this week for an eight-and-an-hour flight to Newark.  Plus, the night before I got a very bad cold, so it was a tough trip all around for me and wife Nancy who had to sit next to me enduring my coughing bouts.  We got to Newark on time, then had to wait for a couple hours to catch our flight to Seattle — yes, Seattle again, not Portland.

That went okay, too, I guess, but it was more than six hours from Newark to Seattle and I was coughing all the way.

Once in Seattle at about 7:30 p.m., we hoped to be able to catch a Horizon flight down to Portland, but all of them were full until ours at 10:05 p.m.  Plus, once we boarded that plane, we had to wait a half hour for the pilot to arrive, again sitting on the tarmac with nothing to do but twiddle our thumbs.

We made it home at about 1 p.m., more than 24 hours after leaving Barcelona.

When I relayed this situation to one of my friends, he said I should count my lucky stars that I was not booted off the plane on one of these trips. Point made!

Another friend said that, given all of these problems with international air travel and others like them, he was not interesting in heading overseas anytime soon.

After being home for a couple days, still recovering from being sick, I agree – no more overseas trips for me. We’ll see if I make good on the pledge.

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 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 a Congressional press secretary in Washington, D.C., an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and a private sector lobbyist. This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.

The definition of fake news escapes me. Or, at least there could be several definitions.

It is a relatively new term these days and often is on our minds because President Donald Trump always talks about it.

I think there are several definitions.

1. THE LITERAL ONE

Fake news is distributed by many interests that, literally, make up stuff, then disseminate the material as attachments to websites, as news releases, and in other ways.

It is clearly material made up out of whole cloth, but, depending on the size of the distribution, it can affects public perceptions.

2. THE CONCOCTED ONE

This relates to what I consider to be staged events that are designed to gain publicity, either a picture on the front page of a newspaper or a few seconds on local TV news.

Examples are demonstrations on the front steps of the Capitol in Salem in favor of one thing or another, which are staged to gain news coverage. Consider demonstrators angling for more funds for a priority – say K-12 school funding.

To achieve the objective, what advocates ought to do is testify before Joint Ways and Means Committees considering how to allocate state general (and lottery) funds. Or, they should meet one-on-one with key legislators. Deliver advocacy messages without regard to whether they generate news – fake news – coverage.

The same can be said of public employee unions which demonstrate on Capitol steps or sit-in in legislative hallways to advocate for more for themselves. They may make the evening news, but not much else.

Standing around at the Capitol won’t get the job done.

I relayed this perspective a few days ago to a friend of mine who disagreed strongly, contending that those on the steps were expressing their Constitutionally-protected right of free speech.

Point made. But my point is that such demonstrations only produce short-lived news coverage, not results at the Capitol. So, in that way, to me, they constitute fake news.

3. THE “I DISAGREE WITH IT” ONE

This tends to be what Donald Trump means when he labels something fake news. If he disagrees with it, then it is fake.

4. THE “CAN YOU BELIEVE IT ONE”

Here, I cite the story from Iowa a couple days ago where Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley wrote an opinion piece for the Des Moines Register that led to speculation that he was starting a run for president.

Can you believe it?

I cannot. And I say this based on my several years of lobbying Merkley when he served in the Oregon House of Representative. He was one of the most sanctimonious legislators I ever have had the unfortunate reality to meet at the Capitol.

He always thought he was the most knowledgeable person in the room. He wouldn’t let anyone of us as lobbyists buy him lunch or a drink for fear we would think he owed us something in return.

Frankly, that offended me. For him to think that I was so crass as to believe in such a quid pro quo was way beyond reason. But it was Merkley.

When he defeated U.S. Senator Gordon Smith, I was sickened by the outcome. Smith landed on his feet as CEO of the National Association of Broadcasters while Merkley, incredibly, began serving in Senate where he has carved out a reputation, mostly, as a critic of Trump.

I rate Merkley-for-president as “fake news” because I cannot believe it is real.

In all of this, the best attitude is healthy skepticism. Don’t believe, at least at first blush, everything you read, hear on the radio or see on TV. Recognize that what you read, hear and see requires a sense of perspective. Form opinions on the basis of a variety of sources rather than just one.

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 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 a Congressional press secretary in Washington, D.C., an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and 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.

Remember the two solid public servants in this headline?

I do and my recall was heightened the other day when I read a piece by both that appeared in the Wall Street Journal.

Baker, remember, served as Secretary of the Treasury and State in the mid-1980s and early 1990s. He went on to serve as chief of staff for President George Bush. Young was ambassador to the United Nations in the late 1970s, then went on to be elected mayor of Atlanta.

We need more Bakers and Youngs today.

Their piece in the Wall Street Journal, under the headline, “Identity Politics Are Tearing America Apart,” resonated with me as I have watched this country continue to go down into negative political discourse.

A couple key paragraphs set the tone for the piece:

“Somehow, the drumbeat of dissonance seems harsher today. America’s national ideal of “e pluribus unum”—out of many, one—threatens to become a hollow slogan. Jaded Americans are constantly confronted by a deluge of animus from their televisions and smartphones.

“The U.S. finds itself increasingly divided along lines of race, ethnicity, gender, religion and sexual identity. Countless demagogues stand ready to exploit those differences. When a sports reporter of Asian heritage is removed from his assignment because his name is close to that of a Confederate army general, political correctness has gone too far. Identity politics practiced by both major political parties is eroding a core principle that Americans are, first and foremost, Americans.

“The divisions in society are real. So are national legacies of injustice. All can and must be addressed. Those who preach hatred should be called out for their odious beliefs. But even as extremism is condemned, Americans of good will need to keep up lines of civil, constructive conversation.

“The country faces a stark choice. Its citizens can continue screaming at each other, sometimes over largely symbolic issues. Or they can again do what the citizens of this country have done best in the past—work together on the real problems that confront everyone.

“Both of us have been at the center of heated disputes in this country and around the world. And there’s one thing we’ve learned over the decades: You achieve peace by talking, not yelling. The best way to resolve an argument is to find common ground.“

Baker and Young argue in favor of the following ways for Members of Congress and the Trump Administration – and, by extension, those who vote for them – to find common ground:

• First, Congress and the Trump Administration should agree to raise the debt ceiling and fund the government “for there is no benefit to shutting down the government simply because one side does not get all it wants from the legislative process.
• Next, leaders in Washington should focus on infrastructure projects that help the U.S. keep pace with its global competitors, particularly China.

“Floodwaters,” they say, “don’t distinguish between Republicans and Democrats. Nor do rotting bridges discriminate between whites and blacks” – a particularly apt description as the entire nation grapples with the ravages of hurricane Harvey.

• Next, leaders in Washington, D.C, should focus with “laser-like intensity” on the federal tax code which handcuffs American businesses.

Finally, Baker and Young advocate that Congress and the President do more than just act on these pressing issues, as challenging as that may be.

“They also need to set an example to all Americans. Politics is a contact sport, but leaders in Washington need to restrain their rhetoric and practice the lost art of compromise. They should stop pandering to the worst in us and appeal instead to what President Lincoln called “the better angels of our nature.”

Let’s hear it for the good words from James Baker and Andrew Young and, if, by some change, we see middle ground emerge in Congress and/or the Administration, let’s applaud, not castigate, the result.

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 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 a Congressional press secretary in Washington, D.C., an Oregon state government manager in Salem and Portland, press secretary for Oregon’s last Republican governor (Vic Atiyeh), and a private sector lobbyist. This blog also allows me to link another favorite pastime – politics and the art of developing public policy – to what I write.

In a post earlier this week, I commended President Trump and his Administration for preparing for the Harvey debacle and showing up to support Texans.

I suggested that it was a good stroke for Trump to show up personally, but to avoid the hardest-hit areas so his own presence would not make the work of first responders more difficult.

Since my post, I have read a number of pieces which faulted Trump, while he was in Texas, for talking only about responders and the government apparatus of responding rather than expressing sympathy for individual citizens hit hard by the tragedy.

At one point, in a campaign-style moment, he even marveled at the size of the crowed that showed up to see him.

There is perhaps a point in all of this because Trump is never good at expressing sympathy for others, perhaps an illustration of the Trump tendency to focus on himself as the most important person in any room or public space.

But, still, I think Trump deserves credit for his early response to this natural disaster, the first one in his Administration. Showing up mattered a lot, even if he didn’t always say just the right things.