Authentic, Common Sense Leadership Needed Now More Than Ever
Has the United States of America truly fulfilled the founding fathers' vision of an independent nation when we Americans continue to elect State and National leaders who, faster than a Freshman Legislators' Orientation Session, become clearly dependent leaders?
When political parties take higher priority, what happens to "We, the People?"
Are those closed-door orientation sessions in reality an Invasion of the Body Snatchers-esque procedure performed upon our clear-minded virgin leaders' brains to scoop out the common sense grey matter and replace it with blue or red?
What "matters" most when we elect our leaders? Is it their desire to serve and act on behalf of their Party, or their demonstrated ability and priority to serve the People?
Authentic independence starts with independent review and thought. It continues by acting with the courage necessary to ask the right questions of the right people, researching the proper sources in order to get a clear understanding of the problem at hand, and work on intelligent, common sense, honest solutions.
Politics and good governance go hand in hand. Notice, I said "politics," not "partisan politics." There is a very big difference, yet it's very easy to equate the two. In most small- to mid-sized towns, partisan politics doesn't play a major factor in making decisions on the home front. These local leaders - who interestingly by and large are volunteers - have yet to be tainted by the poison of partisan politics. Of course, unless a fool is at the helm of a campaign, it doesn't cost $25,000 or more to run a local campaign. Once big money becomes a factor, now the party begins. Money plays a major factor at a State and National level, and thus, competition for the money grab becomes paramount, if the leader is to stand a chance.
The challenge for the leader is to remember that one cannot serve two masters. The People need to come first - even through the heat of battle. That is expecting a great deal of our leaders, but since when was it a crime to expect MORE from our best and brightest?
So, in many ways, we are truly independent on the home front - where it affects us the most. This is a good thing. However, as we go up the governance ladder, independent thought and common sense take a senseless beating. Oftentimes, legislative bills are so convoluted and mitigated to a pulp when they finally escape the politically-driven gauntlet committee they entered, the bill's original author removes his or her name from the record!
We have elected some of our greatest independent thinkers to important positions - from local officials to State Legislatures, Congress, and the President of the United States. Yet, when we look at the calendars of who gets unbridled access to our State and National leaders, it's the political advisors, fundrasing professionals and media mavens - not the People - who often crowd the date book.
(Author's note of disclosure: I am a fundraising and campaign advisor.)
When leaders first enter office, a new factor enters the leader's psyche (and inbox); and it's often in the form of a politically-driven talking points memo, to make sure he or she is singing from the same sheet of music - be it red, or blue. Wheeling and dealing takes center stage, leaving independent observation and non-partisan problem solving back at the hometown train station, on haiatus.
Maybe it's time We the People figure out how to take back our government and elect truly independent politicians to govern our well-being and put the People first; not the Parties. Maybe it's time we elect a few School District or Library Board Members to seats in Congress to show the political hacks how AUTHENTIC leadership really works.
Maybe then we'll return to the course of fulfilling our founding fathers' vision of independence. We need to get back on track. The track we're on now is more of a treadmill - rather challenging to make progress running still.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 11
Independence doesn't take a beating, it is self interest that rises to the surface.
Independence exist when you are more about believing and doing what you think is best. Political, for that matter career or social, rise is determined by how you appeal to the wider audience. At the local level people are better able to know the individual and rely on their view of the person. At the broader level people are more driven by how others, such as the media, portray the person and what they plan to achieve. The individual, therefore has to work at framing themselves in such a way that limits their being described in the extremes (people don't like extremes, and the media loves extremes). If the independent person is less sensitive of how they are portrayed, the person who wants to rise is very sensitive.
I don't see politics as a poison, rather it is the mechanism for people to inter-act and get things done. I have to admit, I don't see that now or for years that we have been getting the best the system could provide. I do feel that is because of the success the system has provided us.
With regard to who gets access to our elected officials, isn't any more part of the system than whether a person stays independent. People give access to those that who they want, if they want. Though it is easier, more efficient, for them to have a meeting with a union lobbyist than it is to meet with many union members they choose who they give access to.
I believe that individually we may not be getting from government and the political process what we want, but as a mass we are getting what we accept.
POLITICS: The art or science of government or governing, especially the governing of a political entity, such as a nation, and the administration and control of itsinternal and external affairs.
My issue is NOT politics on the governance side. It's how things get done. It's the lifeblood of government itself. My issue is with the level of PARTY influence upon our individual leaders - "partisan politics" which we all know cannot be separated from governance; HOWEVER, I do indeed feel PARTY INFLUENCE CAN AND SHOULD BE mitigated.
There are means available to we citizens (aka, the "People," mentioned in the Declaration of Independence) to choose to impose our OWN power to reduce the influence of parties upon our government.
The Republican Party is NOT government. The Democratic Party is NOT government. The Libertarian Party, Green Party, Communist Party, etc. - they are each independent, legal corporate entities, granted special access to our governing leaders (and visa-versa) to organize and influence the outcomes of elections and policy.
Parties are in many ways unions, and like unions, they have a specific agenda. There are philosophical and ideological agenda items; there are logistical agenda items; there are clearly financial agenda items; there are power-seeking agenda items. These organized unions have their OWN elected leadership, not elected by the public, of course, but by party faithful, to act as a means to support specific leaders in their efforts to win mass approval.
The parties by and large only act on a LOCAL level to arrange for meetings with people of influence and affluence in order to support state and national candidates. The higher the pricetag for the campaign, the more pressure that candidate feels upon his or her shoulders (or neck) to deliver something back to "da fambly."
Our parties and their advisors have a place in the political arena. It's in the back seat. They're driving shotgun right now, and that is where we, the People belong.
Duane, your comment:
"we may not be getting from government and the political process what we want, but we as a mass are getting what we accept."
Brilliantly put. 100% agree. I wish I could have said it so succinctly.
So it's time we start expecting more; and stop accepting less.
It seems we are on a common wave length. I agree that we need to expect more. I am looking for the means or mehtods for facilitating the public to do this without creating a new "part". What I would like to develop is a tool(s) that would allow the describing some primary expectations, development of metrics that all could use to measure how officials perform to those expectations, and to public score the officals. The metrics would be such that 7 of 10 would be able to (using the tool) view an official and score them the same.
I believe that there is a performance index protocol that migth make that happen. And I think that leadership would be one of the elements to be measured.
I do vlaue the two parties. I think that they perform a valuable function in proving a vehicle for people to use for gaining office, and that they can be an effective screening mechanism.
A means to score an official that would have public credility could mitigate at least some party influence following election.
I'd move for removing currently specific, legal rights/duties from the Parties themselves, and handing them back to the People, where it belongs.
For instance, in the case of a GOVERNING LEADER at any level who chooses to resign or retire mid-term, I would repeal the power of the POLITICAL PARTY HEAD to simply appoint a new person to the position to take over! We the People did NOT elect the Political Party Boss! Why should he be granted sole power to appoint a replacement?
This is a MAJOR MEANS of maintaining political PARTY power (as opposed to political GOVERNANCE power, which is good and necessary). A NEW ELECTION must be called to replace open seats due to death, resignation, retirement, etc when a successor is not automatically triggered.
This is one seemingly minor step, yet in reality, a MAJOR step toward returning the balance of power to the People, not the Party heads.
See, we in America are CONFUSED by the word "politics," which has become synonymous with the words, "partisan politics." They are different, and have vastly different purposes, yet fall under the same Capitol dome. Hence the confusion.
He had planned to work with his fellow young turks to shake things up and reform Congress; but after his first two years, he decided not to run for reelection. In those two years, he had realized that the Congressional system was so entrenched that it was impossible to the new members to change anything.
Simon said that he would rather receive a donation of one dollar each from a million contributors than receive a million dollars from a single contributor. His campaign committee then printed up masses of campaign buttons that said, "Committee of 1,000,000".
We then converted the site into a cultural arts center, and now get over 40,000 visits a year to its events.
Paul Simon was an honorable man, and an authentic leader. The trademark bowtie will not be forgotten.
What I have found and read is that what we measure we change/improve. If we can give people a criteria for how their performance is they will intuitively do things to improve their score, people will have a standard by which to compare candidates rather then rely on snippit commercials or the talking heads on TV, and it allows the country to identify 5 or 6 personal traits that they feel are important for a candidate/office holder.
A preformance index allows us to move subjective traits into an objective score. That score could also help mitigate the medias bias to exagerating evens and people to get audiences.
My desire is not to wiehg the issues, you hear enough of that in the campaigns, raehter it is to focus on the candiate.
Using the Presidency as an example, what personal traits do you think a candidate shold have? Using 5 of those traits we establish a way to rate them from 1-5 (with a desription for each level), then each candidate would be rated for each trait and compared. The voters and the candidates know what is expected of them and how they stand, indepenednt of party, media, advertisements, etc.
As much as I like to think that I can filler the wheat from the chaff, I still get destracted by the events and what is being spout each day. SO I would like to see a tool (that a team of thoughtful peole developed) that I could use as tool for staying focused and helping me decide. And even a means to holding officials somewhat accountable.
I think the mehtod to develop it is their, do you think it wold have any value?