Tag: ideal

Limitations of Politics

Warning: Undefined array key "adf" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 69

Warning: Undefined array key "sim_pages" in /home4/hpvcxhmy/public_html/wp-content/plugins/similarity/similarity.php on line 70

photo credit: RSzepan

Over the course of my writing here I have been asked why I focus so much on political issues and not so much on promoting a moral society. I think it’s a great question and I have thought much about it. The short answer is that my focus on this site is on the political system and how it impacts society as well as how we can have a positive effect on the system that is currently in place.

For some time now I have found myself falling back in private political discussions to the position that all the best efforts and intentions with regard to political activity are no more than a bandaid over the ills of society and that true progress and stability in society are utterly dependent on the underlying morality or righteousness of the society being governed. It is exactly the same with a wound: a bandaid can help keep it clean and impede further infection but real healing is an internal function of the body. From outside the body the most we can do is create an environment that is conducive to healing.

Tags Elevated, ideal

General

Political Paradise in Two Paragraphs

Post author By David
Post date April 2, 2010
17 Comments on Political Paradise in Two Paragraphs

I have never read a more precient statement about how politics should work – even in an imperfect world – than this comment by Charles:

I don’t think we should abandon partisanship, but we need to abandon incivility and mindless unfounded attacks. I don’t want conservatives or liberals to change their principles, or to compromise them to gain short-term political points. I want them to confront the many serious problems that we have in this country and articulate their proposed solutions. Instead of focusing on who is scoring points or who is ahead in the polling or who made the most recent boo-boo, let’s focus on policy ideas and substance.

Our media is unwilling to do its job. There are no serious long-term investigations, no serious analysis of policy ideas, and no holding of our elected officials to account (except for sexual misbehavior of course). All those things are too expensive and don’t bring in enough revenue. Having some partisan hack shouting down anyone opposed to him or inviting a parade of other partisan hacks to spout off incoherent, uninformed nonsense is both cheap to produce and profitable. It’s time “we the people” stopped listening to this. We have a political system to fix, an economy to fix, a pointless war machine to stop. We need to learn to work together not revel in transient “victories” over our political opponents.

If 60% of voters could come to believe this and act/vote accordingly our political culture would be healed almost overnight.

Tags comments, connections, ideal

General

Legislator as Advocate

Many times during campaigns for legislative offices voters and candidates alike portray officeholders as leaders. I think this is a mistake. A more accurate portrayal would be of officeholders as advocates. Their job is one where they speak out for positions and principles, but it is not possible for a legislature to be made up entirely of leaders. Obviously some legislators will be leaders, those who are able to rally other legislators to support the ideas and positions they are advocating but all legislators should be advocates while only some of them will be leaders – that is one of the primary differences between the legislative and the executive branch.

Voters may prefer that their legislator be a leader, but they must insist that their legislator be an advocate. If they choose a leader who cannot be an advocate they will be frustrated and disappointed. If they choose someone who is an effective advocate for them and their positions they will be satisfied. If they are able to have a legislator who is effective both as an advocate and as a leader then they should feel very fortunate.

Tags discourse, ideal, leadership, legislature

General

Legislator as Negotiator

Politics is the art of the possible.

So said Otto Von Bismarck in 1867 and he was surely right. One of the challenges for an idealist is that compromise is a necessary and appropriate component of the political process. It happens within parties and it happens within legislative bodies. In both cases compromise is necessary because all decisions in those settings affect a number of people who are in a variety of life situations and hold varying goals for themselves and their communities and good decisions cannot be made without addressing the concerns and perspectives of those various parties. Some dislike this reality – and certainly some use it as an excuse to abandon all principle, but the ability to recognize when and how compromise is appropriate is an important skill for any good legislator.

Obviously the ability to analyze and communicate with colleagues and constituents is a critical prerequisite for a legislator to be an effective negotiator. The real challenge once the analysis and communication abilities are in place is knowing how to balance the ability to negotiate with the understanding of what values or positions are non-negotiable. A legislator should be a good negotiator, but they should not be a chameleon or even a contortionist.

Part of their negotiation must be that there is a core which is immutable – one that they have communicated to constituents. The constituents should be able to depend upon this core of principle to predict how their legislator will represent them and the legislator should be able to articulate how their actions during negotiations conform to those core principles. Once the core of principles has evaporated in the face of their legislative record constituents should be quick to replace their legislator – and a legislator should expect no less from their constituents.

Tags campaign promises, civic participation, communication, ideal, legislature

General

Legislator as Analyst

Earlier this year at a town hall type breakfast meeting I had the chance to ask Senator Bennett what he considered to be the most important task of a Senator. I was not very impressed with his answer that the most important thing was to try to see the future clearly. I still argue that keeping their oath of office is what all the actions of an elected official should revolve around, but upon further reflection I think I have a better understanding of what he meant and it was closer to acceptable for me. His third item in the list of of most important jobs was that they should do their homework. I think that what he was trying to get at was that legislators need to study the information that is available to them and then make wise decisions about how to deal with whatever information is available. After all, that is the whole point of a representative form of government – voters are essentially selecting someone who will have access to more information than most of them with the expectation that the elected official will make a better than average decision with that more comprehensive information.

While that task of analyzing information to make decisions should be anchored to keeping the oath of office it is truly one of the most important tasks of a legislator. As an analyst, a legislator must always be seeking as much information as possible on the issues they are called to decide upon. They should seek that information from their constituents as well as all the official sources of information that are brought before them (such as task forces and committee reports). Their job is to take all that information to put together as accurate a picture as possible of the reality they are dealing with and then make as wise a decision as possible with that understanding.

Tags civic participation, ideal, legislature

culture

Liberty is . . .

If I am pursuing liberty it seems reasonable to try defining what “liberty” is. Let me start off by saying that I chose the name very carefully and in the years since then I have confirmed many times that I chose correctly – liberty is what I am pursuing, and nothing short of liberty will satisfy me.

The primary (top) dictionary definition of liberty is:

a. The condition of being free from restriction or control.

b. The right and power to act, believe, or express oneself in a manner of one’s own choosing.

c. The condition of being physically and legally free from confinement, servitude, or forced labor.

I would like to add my own working definition of what liberty is. Let me preface that list of what liberty is with a couple of statements of what liberty is not:

Now for what liberty is:

Liberty is hard work
Liberty is personal responsibility
Liberty is the freedom to make choices
Liberty is attainable only on an individual level
Liberty is compatible with all universal laws (laws of physics, laws of human nature, laws of economics, etc.)
Liberty is the highest goal a person could achieve

Finally I would like to state that there is no such thing as purely political liberty except in the sense that it is possible to live in a society that promotes/provides political liberty while personally making choices that curtail ones own personal liberty. This means that in order to achieve political liberty we must be willing and able to attain personal liberty in other areas of life through our use of personal choice and accountability – anything less than that is simply freedom.

Tags goals, ideal, liberty, thoughts

General

Legislator as Fundraiser

When it comes to raising money to run a campaign an ideal legislator needs to understand the real value of money in politics. They need to accept that a serious campaign will require more money than they can personally supply (unless they have significant personal wealth). They need to be comfortable asking people to support them financially – that requires not only being comfortable making the request, but also confident in the message they are promoting in their campaign. On the other hand, an ideal legislator should never fall into the trap of thinking that money can overcome the absolute necessity for them to be putting in hard work on the ground making their case among the people who will be casting their votes.

Here is where I know some people will disagree with me. I contend that a campaign even for federal offices can be financed entirely through personal donations by people residing within the jurisdiction of the office being sought. Contributions from businesses should be refused. Businesses and industries that are part of the district for the office being sought should make any desired contributions through the individuals within those companies. Money from Political Action Committees should not be given to specific candidates. Committees that wish to help a candidate should spend their own money in whatever way they feel will best help the candidate without the candidate ever receiving any money from them. “Abc PAC” can endorse a candidate, can buy booths saying they support that candidate, can make and distribute literature and other advertising materials for the candidate, but should not write a check to the candidate. Anything they produce should never have the candidate saying that they approved the message – in other words, the PAC and the candidate should be independent of each other with full right to voice their support of the efforts of the other.

Personally I would prefer that a candidate never run a campaign on debt although I am not ready to say that I could never support a candidate that uses debt to help finance their campaign. I would say that no good candidate should ever carry debt from one campaign to another. If they have not paid off their expenses from a previous campaign (for the same office or another office) they should not be running a new campaign.

I know that there are people who would argue that this ideal is not feasible in our current political environment and I am open to thoughts on what can and should be done, but please don’t just shoot down my ideal without explaining why we should not desire it.

Tags campaign promises, campaigns, change congress, ideal, money

General

Legislator as Candidate

My experience with many campaigns – especially for any office higher than state legislator – is that the majority of them spend their time talking about a) the fact that they need your money to run the campaign, and b) the fact that whoever they are running against is not the right person for the job. Few of them talk about the seat they are trying to fill, or the issues that are relevant to that position.

All the time spent soliciting money is time not spent promoting the candidate. It is universally understood that campaigns need funding and the candidates do have to mention that at times, but when that is the primary focus of the campaign it indicates a shallowness of purpose that seems to degrade the office they are seeking. Requests for donations should always be the sideshow of the campaign message.

Secondly, I have no reason to trust what Candidate A says about Candidate B unless I have already chosen to support Candidate A – in which case Candidate A is probably wasting time preaching to the choir.

A good legislator should not be spending their time running against an opponent, they should be running for a position. This does not mean that they cannot say anything against their opponent(s) but whatever they say against another candidate should demonstrate why the criticism is relevant to the office they are seeking. This same principle applies to what a candidate says about themselves. It doesn’t matter if a candidate bases their positive platform on “I’m a Republican” or “I’m a Democrat” or “I’m an Independent” or “I’m pragmatic” or “I’m experienced” in all cases what they say should be reinforced with evidence of why what they are (or claim to be) is relevant to the position they are seeking.

If the platform or message of the campaign revolves around anything other than the position they are seeking (even if it revolves around the Constitution) then the message of the campaign is distracting from the purpose that should be driving the decisions of the voters.

Tags campaigns, ideal, message, money

General

Legislator as Campaign Strategist

Post author By David
Post date September 28, 2009
No Comments on Legislator as Campaign Strategist

I had thought to cover the ideal candidacy of a good legislator in a single post but it has become obvious to me that there is just too much to cover in one sitting. On top of that, the campaign is arguably the aspect of being a good legislator where candidates – whether they end up winning or losing – stray from what a good legislator should do.

From a campaign strategy perspective the most important thing that a good legislator should do is understand the system that they are to be working in. I saw what I thought was a good example of this in the Jason Chaffetz campaign for Utah’s 3rd District congressional seat in 2008. For the sake of clarity I would like to say that I was not part of the campaign nor do I live in the 3rd district – I am simply an outside observer who happens to share the same party affiliation.

My observations were of a campaign where they understood the Utah Republican Party rules to receive the nomination and they focused their efforts on getting that nomination. As far as I could see goals of fund-raising were completely secondary to goals or raising support among those who would actually be casting the votes for the Republican nominee in the district – first the state delegates, and then the members of the Republican party when he fell just shy of averting the need for a primary race against Rep. Cannon. Again from my outsider perspective it appears that all other goals were designed and pursued only as a means of reaching and persuading those who would actually be casting the votes. Contrary to what seems to be the conventional wisdom, there is more to it than raising large amounts of money and buying up as much advertising as possible – as proven by the fact that Chaffetz was significantly outspent by Cannon.

The reason that a legislator needs to be a good strategist with a solid understanding of the system is not simply so that they can get elected, but also because those skills are important in working within the legislative body to which they are seeking membership. Again from my outsiders perspective Rep. Chaffetz appears to demonstrate this by the fact that he has been able to garner more attention and influence than I would have expected to see in a freshman congressman in the minority party of the House.

Tags campaigns, change congress, ideal, thoughts

General

A Legislator as a Person

When I assert that anyone who would be a good legislator must have some basic life qualifications I base that assertion on the example outlined in the Constitution where requirements are set for members of the House to be at least 25 years old and members of the Senate to be at least 30 years old. Basic age requirements such as these may be among the few life requirements that are truly objective and quantifiable but I believe they are indicative of a larger (although still limited) set of subjective requirements that must be met by a good legislator. The age requirements set forth are appropriately different for different offices. The purpose of the age requirements is the same – it is intended to promote a level of maturity and life experience commensurate with the duties of the office.

Another subjective requirement of a good legislator include the ability to connect with the people that they would be representing so that they can understand their constituents and relate to them. Obviously they cannot expect to experience everything of concern to their constituents, but the ability to listen and empathize with those they represent. Due to variety among the constituents empathy will not always mean agreement but so long as the legislator feels that they are above the constituents rather than among them they will be unable to accurately and dependably represent their perspective within the legislative body.

The last subjective requirement that I would include is a degree of stability in the life of the legislator. While anyone can have their life disrupted unexpectedly it is unwise to choose a legislator whose life is currently riddled with disruptions. In a stable society the effects of legislation are often long lasting and thus should be protected as much as possible from avarice and caprice. Witness the situation in Massachusetts where the democratic legislature made a law when they had a republican governor that the governor could not name a replacement in the event of vacancy in the seat of their senators. Now a few short years later they have a democratic governor and an actual vacancy – so they change the law rather than wait to fill the seat after a special election as they had prescribed before. It is important that legislators have lives that are stable to give them the best chance at creating laws which will also be stable. A legislator who has a life currently marked by stability will be more likely to plan for the future for himself and for those that he represents.

Tags ideal, legislature, thoughts