Vote wisely, or not at all. Part 2

We the People are the HR department of government. Take that job seriously. Do it well.

photo by Pixabay

(In the previous post I discussed the history of self rule, what we euphemistically refer to as ‘democracy’. The world has changed a lot since the beginnings of the USA’s democracy. And so have our responsibilities as voting citizens. Vote wisely, or not at all, Part 1 )

We the People decide who will operate our governments.  Elected officials are not our leaders, they are our employees.  When you think about it, We the People are the HR department of our governments.  We interview and select the most qualified people to head up departments.  They, in turn, hire the people who get the job done. OK, then, what qualities does an HR department need to look for in a candidate?  Their race?  Not hardly.  Gender?  Nope. Their age?  Perhaps.  After all, older people are generally more experienced, and we want experienced people making our laws and administering them. With age comes wisdom, they say.  But we know that’s not always the case. Youth can bring fresh, valuable perspective.  Let’s keep age on the table. 

How about education?  That depends.  Education in what? No one is expert at everything.  What expertise do we need for the positions we’re filling?  We’d best be very mindful of that, but it will be on a case-by-case basis.  There is no ‘one size fits all’ education. 

What about personality?  OK, what about it? Should our candidates for office all be friendly?  To what end?  Does friendly trump competence?  Does kissing hands and shaking babies trump a no nonsense attitude of keeping the nose to the grindstone and seeing things through? Does changing with the trends trump commitment to a plan of action and seeing it through? I’d say we should not be so concerned about how warm and friendly our candidates are, and instead go with competence. I was an actual employer once, and the candidates who tried to sell me on their warmth and charm as a cover for their lack of competence, didn’t get hired. 

So, we’ve discussed the types of people we would consider hiring, but what are the job requirements?  If cars need repairing, the job requires mechanics.  A hospital needs doctors.  Auto repair shops don’t need doctors, and hospitals don’t need mechanics. Great skill and experience, in the wrong field, eliminates the candidate from consideration. We have to examine the job requirements before we think at all about which person to hire. Do you ever do that?  Do you think about the job requirements of, say, the state attorney general, before you consider the candidates?  If you don’t, you must. 

Mayors, governors and the president are the CEOs of government. They need executive skills. The executive doesn’t make all the rules, although they may make some of them, but only to the extent that the Board authorizes it.  (We’ll talk about the Board later.) The executive needs to keep all the various departments coordinated and ‘on the same page’.  Yes, the executive needs to be friendly, but he also needs to be prepared to kick butt.  A good executive would fire his best friend, if that’s what is best for the organization.  And he would not HIRE his best friend, unless it was best for the organization. The executive must put himself last, not first, but maintain command.  It’s a tricky position, no doubt about it. Few can do it well.  We the People must be VERY thoughtful of who we put in these positions.  If our applicant seems too willing to play to our egos, too willing to make promises that can’t be kept, then it’s probably better to pass them over.  Better to consider a candidate who clearly has depth of knowledge and who gives realistic assessments of what can and can’t be done. And a good candidate does NOT play one faction against another.  The good candidate would never presume ‘We are right, they are wrong’. That is exactly what we DON’T want. 

The Board (legislatures, congress) makes the rules and sets the policies. The board is not intended to be a uniform body in which all agree with each other.  What would be the point of that?  The Board should be a disparate representation of all interests. No, not just one, not just two; ALL interests.

That being the case, it is possible that a faction or two will gain an upper hand and try to gain more control than it has a right to.  A good Board member will not take unfair advantage.  A good Board member recognizes that democracy is not automatically just or good.  Democracy works when just and good people administer it. For that matter, any government can succeed, when just and good people administer it. Any government fails when unethical power hungry people administer it. As We the People consider candidates for this position, we should be keenly sensitive to any sign that a candidate prefers factionalism. Having a point of view is one thing. But stridently insisting on one group’s interests, even to the point of denigrating others, is a no go.  Do NOT hire that person. 

The judiciary is the referee. Are the rules that the Board created being followed?  SHOULD the rules be followed? Is the CEO administering those rules properly and even-handedly? Is the person who has been charged with violating the rules inherently guilty, or are the rules themselves faulty? Perhaps some of both. How severe should the punishment be?  Certainly, the judicial ruling must not demonstrate ANY bias for or against any group whatsoever.  After all, the judiciary is the final defense AGAINST factionalism. Without that defense, with a judiciary that plays politics, we have anarchy. We the People, or segments among us, seeing that they have no recourse in the courts, will find other means to seek justice.  We DON’T want to see how that plays out. 

So, We the People have a tough job, the toughest job of all.  Invariably, we will have the governments that we deserve.  We hired them. Be selective.  Be VERY selective. The candidate who is in your face all the time saying, “Vote for me! Vote for me!” could well be a very poor choice. The candidate who plays to your ego, your biases, your insecurities, is a VERY poor choice. In truth, the candidate you feel MOST aligned with may be just the person that you do NOT want to select. 

I said in the previous post, there was a time when each family needed to be largely self-sufficient. There was little in the way of a back-up system.  Government wasn’t as all-encompassing as it is now. Now, most people can do little for themselves.  We hire and we are hired. We are interdependent as never before.  That can work well, or it can go down in flames, taking us all with it. It can work if we all put in at least a little more than we take out.  It will fail, if we all take out a little more than we put in. We the People are hiring.  Be selective.  Be VERY selective.  

Political ideology can be very varied.  That doesn’t necessarily make anyone right or wrong.  But ALL elected officials (and citizens) should live and act by these same standards; honesty, integrity, rationality, and respect for opposing viewpoints. As I frequently say, ‘Question everybody and everything, but first and foremost, question yourself!’ 

---

Comments?