An Apology Might Help, Congressman

I have been trying something different, silence. Well, not exactly silence, but I haven’t written about politics lately. Like many Americans, I am weary of the political banter, the finger-pointing, the name calling, the blame game. I thought some time away from the keyboard might improve my gloomy opinion of American political affairs. It didn’t, due mostly to this foolish government shutdown. But, it did allow me some time to consider my role in this mess.

First, allow me to apologize. I am sorry for those times I worried more about being seen as American than about shouldering my responsibility as one, and for those times when I raced to place blame when I should have set to help fix what was broken. There, that felt pretty good.

Don’t worry; I don’t suffer an illusion my voice has some unique and powerful effect on our country’s affairs. I am just another guy. However, my being only one of 320 million doesn’t mean I am not accountable in some small measure for where things stand. We all are. And, we can do something about it. As voters we have the capacity to change things at the polls.

Since long before the invention of the squawk box known as television, Americans have been suckers for silver-tongued politicians who promise more than can ever be delivered. We love tough guys. We reliably react to political attack ads and respond with great fervor when a candidate tells us in well-crafted, thoroughly focus-group-tested language exactly what we want to hear.

Longing for something better is part of the human spirit, but we deny the human intellect when we buy the rhetoric spewed by those more interested in getting the job than they are in doing the job.

Guilty. I have done this.

Too many of those holding elected office in this country today mistake sycophancy for patriotism. They spend their time playing to the cameras to impress party power brokers, corporate leaders, special interest groups, each other and the all too acquiescent electorate. This empowers the elected ones to spend more energy exacting revenge on political opponents than they do solving the shared problems of the people they were elected to serve.

Finding solutions and building a consensus to move forward is what leaders do. We haven’t too many of these. I could end this by saying the fault for this rests with Congress, the President or some group of “them” – that we are victims of a flawed system – but it does not and we are not.

Today’s political quagmire is our doing, yours and mine. We cannot blame some great and powerful “them,” for we are the ones who control our destiny. We elect the “them.”

Every time we recite the partisan hyperbole and poke our fingers in the direction of those of a different political stripe, we feed the monster that is destroying us.

It’s time to move this country forward again. We will do this when we muster the guts to elect people more committed to country than they are to themselves and their party.

Here is what I intend to consider before stepping into the voting booth next time:

1. Leadership over longevity – Our system is broken because entities like the House and Senate perpetuate rules that reward time in office over leadership potential. This destructive practice has placed power in the hands of an out-of-touch group of lawmakers. Term limits aren’t the answer, but voters should evaluate if the incumbent expended more effort perpetuating or ending gridlock. This year, more than ever, too few have been problem solvers.
2. My way may not be the best highway – I need to listen, really listen to what others are saying. The American system is weakened when personalities and basic ideological differences define the debate before it starts. I need to play a role in ensuring competing ideas are aired fairly and openly. And, most important, I need to keep my eye trained on the goal, which is a better tomorrow, not an election victory for my adopted team or candidate.
3. Statesmanship over gamesmanship – I want to encourage and support the candidacies of those who are interested in leading. These people will have flaws and will say things that make me uncomfortable at times. I can forgive them if they prove themselves to be committed to doing the best they can.
4. I will continue to speak up, but only if doing so is helping to move things forward.

Americans have and can do magnificent things when we come together as a people. For many, in and out of office, saying “I am sorry” may be a good place to start.

###

Graham Gillette can be reached at grahamgillette@gmail.com 

This entry was first published as a Des Moines Register online essay.

Obama and Boehner Locked in Fierce Battle for Prom Queen

Our national political climate has degenerated to the point elected officials sound similar to feuding adolescent girls trying to claw their way to the top of the most powerful clique in school.  On second thought, I offer my apologies to adolescent girls for the reference – they don’t sound quite so shrill.

This week President Obama sent a letter to the leaders of the House and Senate requesting a Joint Session of Congress to lay out a plan for jobs and the economy.  Speaker Boehner sent a response asking the speech be moved until the next night.  The Speaker’s spokesman added in a statement that the White House had ignored protocol by not first requesting a date from the speaker’s office.

Lacey Chabert, Lindsay Lohan, Rachel McAdams and Amanda Seyfried in the movie Mean Girls (2004)

OK, Buffy should have passed a note to Missy in English class asking permission to hang out after school before asking Missy in front of everybody at lunch if they could hang out after school to plan the Fall Dance.  I mean, really, duh, everybody knows this is not how things are done in Seventh Grade.  Missy didn’t want to hang out on Wednesday and now it was all, like, out there in front of, well, everybody.  How embarrassing!  (Sorry, seventh graders, for bringing you into this.)

The House has been on recess for five weeks (five weeks!) and Wednesday is their first day back.  The White House wanted to address Congress on what Republicans and Democrats alike have been screaming should be our collective top priority, jobs, for months.  The first day of class, whoops, session after summer vacation seemed like a good time to start the debate.

The little drama started because a Republican presidential debate is being held the same night.  Undoubtedly, White House staffers giggled about how they were going to step on the other kid’s party.  But, after weeks, if not months, of being pounded by the GOP for not appearing serious about the economy, one could see why the Obama Administration might want to get out in front and set a tone for the coming legislative debate.  However, I do not doubt there was some sniggering about the timing in the West Wing.

I am not an expert on the rules of protocol governing Congressional/White House interaction and I do not want to be.  It seems to me the inherent pomposity interferes with progress more than engendering it. The President did not ask the Speaker before he asked the Speaker. (Yep, it has come down to this.)  The presidential hand has been slapped and the speech has been moved until Thursday.

Fall begins with the stagnant stench of acrimony wafting over our nation’s capital. Republicans are falling over themselves to discount the plan President Obama will outline next week even before they hear it.  And Democrats are desperately trying to position Republicans as disinterested in doing anything to help the country in hopes they will pick up Republican seats in the 2012 election.

Most of us grew up and left junior high having learned along the way that name calling and game playing were best left on the playground.  Unfortunately, many who did not learn those valuable lessons got elected to office.  What we need now in Washington are adults interested in finding common ground and working through the difficult problems America faces.

Here’s hoping the President will lay out a well thought economic plan next week and the Republicans will listen to it, find areas on which they can agree and work with their Democratic colleagues to find compromise on the areas on which they do not.

Maybe they can start by all sitting together at lunch on Friday and talking about who the hottest pop star is these days.  After all, Friday brings school cafeteria pizza and tater tots!

###

Graham Gillette can be reached at grahamgillette@gmail.com

This entry was first published as a Des Moines Register blog entry.

Dear Washington, It’s time to reach deep

Dear President Obama and Members of Congress:

Like you, I am outraged. Our country has piled up too much debt. I know many who have sat where you do had the political luxury to blame somebody else for the problems the country faced and leave much of the mess to be solved by the next group to take power. Sorry, but you do not serve in such times. You must do the job you were elected to do.

Former Presidents and Congresses took us to war, did their best to avert economic calamity and tried to set the United States on a course to broad prosperity. And, yes, hindsight shows some of their decisions were wise and a few were something less. Regardless of their intentions, good or otherwise, the paved American road has led us up a mountain of debt. It is up to you whether we begin the coast down, or we drive off a cliff. If you are having difficulty making the decision, here’s a hint, the cliff option will end badly. You do not really have a choice. Raise the debt ceiling – the sooner the better.

Unfortunately, too many of you are singularly focused in placing fault at the feet of your opponents in a self-serving attempt to sway voter support for your party. Most of us are tired of this foolishness. Your countrymen need for you to act as patriots. Set aside your personal ambition, stand shoulder to shoulder with your fellow Americans and get to work building the nation the next generation deserves.

The U.S. faces challenges and threats we could not imagine a decade ago. If you continue to abdicate your duty by standing at microphones telling us “it is time to eat our peas” or likening the other side to Jell-o, our national crisis will mount and these threats will become all the more ominous. Every day you do so, the American future seems to dim a bit.

It is time to settle this matter. The first step is raising the debt ceiling. This will stop the needless hysteria your inaction has caused. Next, get to work developing a plan to reduce the debt. The United States government is huge. There are countless ways to make it smaller.

Don’t be fooled. The solution has little to do with which party takes the White House and Congress in the election of 2012. We do not need a Democrat or Republican majority to move us forward. We need Americans who are willing to put partisanship aside and commit to working together. I am asking for each of you to reach deep inside and find what is required for you to become one of those Americans. It’s kind of important. The future of our nation depends on it.

Sincerely yours,
Graham Gillette

###

Graham Gillette can be reached at grahamgillette@gmail.com

Other recent blogs by Graham Gillette

Rand Paul’s Memorial Day Salute

There seems to be an incessant buzz in America these days caused by our collective carping about the game playing of elected officials.  I have contributed mightily to this noise and have fed it a fair amount through my writing for print media and in this space.  On the eve of the Memorial Day weekend, I am going to do something different and praise one politician for holding his ground and keeping his word.

As Congress scrambled to renew parts of the Patriot Act, freshman Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky took an unyielding stand to force a vote on three provisions of the Act he found particularly objectionable.  Paul filibustered for three days.  In the process, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid berated Paul and, in an outrageous display, even accused Paul of wanting to arm terrorists.

“He is fighting for an amendment to protect the right — not of average citizens, but of terrorists — to cover up their gun purchases,” Reid said.

That is a scurrilous statement for which Senator Reid should be ashamed.  The Republican Leader, Senator Mitch McConnell, was only slightly kinder to his fellow Republican, but Senator Paul did not back down.  In the end, Paul forced votes on his amendments and they all failed.

I have a very different view on many issues than does Senator Paul, but I share his concern about how the Patriot Act impinges individual freedom.  I recognize the threat posed by terrorists.  However, terrorists win a victory when a free society allows even small fissures in the foundation of liberty in fear of things that might happen.  Created in a noble effort to protect the American way, the Patriot Act simultaneously degrades it.

It would have been understandable for Senator Paul to acknowledge he was on the losing side of this battle and to quietly acquiesce.  He knew his amendments lacked majority support.  A simple  “no” vote would have been the easy way out and the leaders of his party might have even rewarded him for sitting on the sideline.  Senator Paul chose another path.  As a result, the Senate and, perhaps in a small way, the country is a little better for having heard a minority viewpoint too often silenced since 9/11.

As you put out your flag this Memorial Day to honor those who paid the ultimate price fighting for our freedom, remember one of the most valuable ideals they died to protect was the right of individual Americans to voice their opinions.  Senator Paul may not have represented the mainstream this week in the U.S. Senate, but preserving his right to speak is important to each and every one of us.

The Senate debate may not have been pretty and the substance of what was said there may only seem significant to a single blowhard with a blog, but America is the greatest nation on earth because we do not silence those who say unpopular things.

###

Graham Gillette can be reached at grahamgillette@gmail.com

This entry was first published as a Des Moines Register blog entry.

Harry Reid, Wrong on Earmarks

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid wants President Obama to “back off” and let lawmakers continue to direct spending to their home districts by allowing legislators to insert pet projects into funding bills.  Reid doesn’t want to give up the power he wields, a power which enables him to bring home dollars to Nevada without having to jump through too many hoops and, this is even more important, a power to use earmarks as enticements to get legislators to vote for other things the Majority Leader wants.  Reid should let the dirty little tradition of earmarking go.

During the State of the Union address, the President said “If a bill comes to my desk with earmarks inside, I will veto it.  I will veto it.”  Reid called this nothing more than an “applause line” and suggested the President was playing to the crowd.  Reid is right, getting rid of earmarks would be popular with voters.  Many cheered the President’s remarks.  And, Reid and the President know, it is easier for the President to threaten a veto of an earmark laden bill than it is to actually veto a popular bill that has a few small, financially insignificant pork projects hidden within.  The President has drawn a line in the sand with his veto threat.  He now needs to make good on it.  Here’s why:

Earmarks may seem like "pencil dust," but they are part of a bigger Congressional problem.

While Senator Reid and those wishing to protect their precious earmarks will dismiss the amount of money earmarks represent compared to the rest of the federal budget (slightly more than three-tenths of 1 percent of federal spending), earmarking is an abuse of the process.  It doesn’t take a Nobel Laureate to understand that the federal budgeting process is broken.  The ability of a few people (Democrat and Republican leaders both) to control what goes into the federal budget and keep the process largely hidden from view is counter to the principles of good government.

Earmarks may not represent a large portion of the federal budget, but earmarks are a potent weapon used by those in power in Congress to manipulate a system that often puts the will of the people behind the of the will of lobbyists, and political party powerbrokers.  Without earmarking, Congress will have to follow a more orderly an open budgeting process.  More important, it will equalize the power balance in Congress.  By eliminating the funding of pork projects, one mechanism leadership uses to strong-arm legislators into falling into line will be removed.

Many in office for a long time see the federal budget process as unchangeable.  They don’t see fixing something as seemingly insignificant as three-tenths of 1 percent of federal spending as worthy of their time.  I am sure Senator Tom Harkin has often wished he could take back his 2002 comment that the extra $6.3 billion needed to pay for the farm bill he supported was “pencil dust” in the cost of federal programs. He has taken a lot of flak for it over the years.  But, comments like these show the danger those who deal in the staggeringly large numbers of the federal budget face.  They let the system overwhelm them.  In the farm bill case, $6.3 billion may be small compared to the whole budget, but, like earmarks, the U.S. will only be able to fix its budgeting fiasco by breaking the budget into smaller chunks and fixing what is broken there.  The best most logical place to start is earmarking.

Presidents have wanted to put an end to the perk of congressional power that enables power-brokers in Congress to hide pork projects in legislation for decades.  I remember cheering President Reagan during a campaign stop in Tampa, Florida in the early 80’s when he demanded the President be given the line item veto so he could veto an earmark without having to kill the whole bill.  He was right then.  President Obama is right now.  But, if President Obama fails to stand up to Senator Reid and the rest of the Congressional club, Americans will still be clamoring for budget reform decades from now as the federal government is surrounded by a mountain of budget pencil dust.

###

Graham Gillette can be reached at grahamgillette@gmail.com

This entry was first published as a Des Moines Register blog entry.

The Don’t Ask Games

Senator Susan Collins of Maine just took to the Senate floor and said this about the defense authorization bill, “There was such a clear path for us to be able to get this bill done and I am perplexed and frustrated that this important bill is going to become a victim of politics.  Sen. Lieberman and I have been bargaining in good faith with the majority leader.”

Before I address the fact that this bill includes a repeal of the ban on members of the military who admit they are gay from serving their country, let’s think about what Senator Collins just said.

She and Senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut have been negotiating with the Democrat Leader in the Senate on the bill.  Last night it was rumored that Collins was advocating and might have won 15 Republican amendments to the bill be included in return to 10 offered by Democrats.  Perhaps it is a fair trade, but generally 15 to 10 is a lopsided outcome.

In any case, today Senator Harry Reid is pushing the bill without the compromise and this may doom its passage.  Senator Collins says there was a clear path to get the bill done, but that it was becoming a victim of politics.  I assume she said this because the political bargain she and Senators Lieberman and Reid had hammered out behind closed doorswas not going to happen.  Such deals are the definition of bad politics in the first place.  She just thinks it is bad when she doesn’t get the politics she likes.

If the bill is a victim of politics, Senator Collins, it is clear there is a pretty narrow list of suspects who are the likely perpetrators of the crime.  Consider yourself on that list.

Now, Senator Reid is driving ahead with the bill even though doing so may kill it.  Odd.  The elected representatives in Washington continue to play games on issues like Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.  It is shameful that an issue as important as this gets lumped in with a take all or nothing package like the defense appropriations act.  Vote on the spending and vote on DADT.

It is time to stop the secret negotiations and political gamesmanship that Senators Collins and Reid play.  Vote to repeal DADT.  Fund our military and open a door and a few windows in the Capitol.  A little fresh air and sunshine, and fewer backroom deals would do the place some good.

###

Graham Gillette can be reached at grahamgillette@gmail.com

ADDED AFTER INITIAL POST:  SENATE DADT VOTE FAILS
This entry was first published as a Des Moines Register blog entry.

Precedent for Sen. Grassley Supporting a Partisan Staffer with Little Court Experience

I listened to Senator Chuck Grassley’s opening statement at the Elena Kagan hearing yesterday. Kagan has been nominated by President Obama as the next Associate Justice on the Supreme Court of the United States. The Senator clearly spelled out his concerns about Ms. Kagan’s lack of judicial and non-political legal experience. The Senator appears to face an unprecedented dilemma in deciding whether or not to support the nomination of a lawyer who spent a portion of her career advising politicians.

Senator Grassley expressed this concern to Kagan by saying, “what is lacking from your background is any experience on a state or federal court, or much experience as a practicing lawyer. We don’t have any substantive evidence to demonstrate your ability to transition from a legal scholar and political operative to a fair and impartial jurist…it’s our duty to confirm a nominee who won’t come with a results-oriented philosophy or an agenda to impose his or her personal politics, feelings or preferences from the bench. It’s our duty to confirm a Supreme Court nominee who will faithfully interpret the law and Constitution without personal bias.”

The Senator scored a few points. If you are wondering if any previous political nominees to the bench were able to win over Grassley, you do not have to look too far back for an example of one who did. Elizabeth Crewson Paris was nominated in 2008 by President George W. Bush to a fifteen year term on the United States Tax Court. For the eight years leading up to her appointment, Judge Paris provided political and legal advice to Senator Grassley and the Republicans serving on the Senate Committee on Finance. In her role as a partisan staffer, Judge Paris regularly provided legal advice that was surely every bit as political as that offered by Ms. Kagan during her year serving President Bill Clinton.

At the Paris hearing on April 17, 2008, Senator Grassley said this of Elizabeth Crewson Paris, “Working in a truly bipartisan manner, she knows that nothing gets done in the Senate that is not done in a bipartisan way, so she consequently never hesitates to offer her guidance to any staffer or member, regardless of political affiliation.” Grassley then apologized and left the hearing to work on the farm bill. He was obviously satisfied that this Republican staffer could be fair and that her lack of courtroom experience could be overlooked. Perhaps, he will be able to attend all of Ms. Kagan’s hearing and be convinced the same can be said about her.

Senator Grassley closed his remarks to Elena Kagan yesterday by saying, “your relatively thin record clearly shows that you’ve been a political lawyer. Your papers from the Clinton Library have been described as showing ‘a flair for the political’ and a ‘flair for political tactics.’ You’ve been described as having ‘finely tuned . . . political antennae’ and ‘a political heart.”

I had the opportunity to work with Judge Paris when she was a Senate staffer. The same attributes could be applied to her. There have been few Senate staffers more familiar with tax law than she and even fewer as skilled in the art of politics. Senator Grassley was able to see a way around such concerns when one of his own staffers sat in the confirmation hot seat. Maybe, he will be able to do the same with Elena Kagan.

This entry was first published as a Des Moines Register blog entry.

Sen. Bayh’s View from the Ivory Tower

U.S. Senator Evan Bayh (D-Indiana) has announced he will not seek re-election. He has served the people of Indiana as their Secretary of State, their Governor and, since 1998, as Senator. Mr. Bayh has dedicated a major part of his life to public service. I salute him for that. However, his ivory tower announcement for walking away is a little hard to take.

In announcing his decision, Senator Bayh said, “for some time, I have had a growing conviction that Congress is not operating as it should. There is too much partisanship and not enough progress — too much narrow ideology and not enough practical problem-solving. Even at a time of enormous challenge, the peoples’ business is not being done.”

If the rest of you will excuse me, I am going to address Senator Bayh directly at this point.

Congressional dysfunction is hardly a revelation, Senator. This institution’s failings are well known to many Americans out here in the real world. You say partisanship is the major obstacle in the way to accomplishing the business of the people. The petty politics of the parties is only part of the problem, sir. The bubble surrounding elected Washington was created not by parties, but by people primarily concerned with protecting self.

You wax on about the congenial era when your father served in the Senate and wish we could return to those simpler days. You talk as though some hard to detect virus infected the hallowed Senate Chamber destroying the civility which once dwelled there. Civility isn’t dead, Senator. It has been banished to the Capitol basement because so many of those who have been elected lack the courage to overlook partisan loyalty and do what is right. It is takes courage to criticize the Senate of which you are a part. It takes something less to criticize the Senate with a parting shot as you walk away.

Civility will return when members of Congress eschew partisanship WHILE they serve. I am happy you see the problem of partisanship now. I just wish you would have seen it sooner and done something to change the culture of Washington before throwing up your hands and leaving.

On CNN this weekend, Senator Bayh blamed “tribal” politics for the gridlock that is paralyzing Capitol Hill. He is right, to a certain extent. Americans need to treat politics a bit more seriously than the baseball fan who picks a team and pulls for it as it races for the league pennant. Civility will return to the body Mr. Bayh is leaving behind the day those who work there focus less on scoring points on the other team and spend more time doing the job at hand.

This entry was first published as a Des Moines Register blog entry.

Partisan Rancor Places Common Good in Harm’s Way

Partisan wrangling has long been a part of the American landscape. Maybe it is natural, but it looks more and more to me like a blight threatening the healthier parts of democracy.

Today, Senator John McCain led his fellow Republican Senators in criticizing the Obama administration for deciding to let the federal courts charge the man accused of trying to bring down a passenger jet bound for Detroit on Christmas Day. I am assuming Senator McCain would prefer the accused be hauled off to Guantanamo without a trial. McCain called the decision to prosecute suspect Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab in civilian courts a “terrible, terrible mistake.”

Justice served is never a mistake, Senator.

Listen, I want the bomber to pay a price for his crime. Like Senator McCain, I also want all the other idiots out there who are in league with the bomber to know we are coming after them. To that end, I want to give our military, law enforcement and courts the tools they need to bring these guys to justice when they catch them. And, let me be clear, I am talking about justice as the word is defined, not as the loaded word it has become because Senator McCain and the cowboys we see in movies see justice as synonymous with revenge.

Justice; 1) fairness or reasonableness, especially in the way people are treated or decisions are made 2) the legal system, or the act of applying or upholding the law

Revenge; 1) the punishment of somebody in retaliation for harm done 2) something done to get even with somebody else who has caused harm

We Americans have developed a system of governance based on fairness and respect for human rights. Granted, we often fall short in carrying this out, but we still tend to a better job than everybody else in the world and we should never stop trying to do better. If we give up pursuing justice and abandon our legal system because we are angry and want simple revenge, the terrorists will have stolen one of our most valuable possessions. We will have taken a step closer to being like them, zealots who believe they have the right to kill, maim and imprison at will in the name of their cause.

The United States courts are perfectly capable of handling the underwear bomber case and meting out justice. They did so in the case of Richard Reid. In 2003 the so-called shoe bomber and self-admitted member of Al Qaeda was convicted by a U.S. federal court and sentenced to life without patrol for attempting to destroy a commercial aircraft in-flight by detonating explosives hidden in his shoes. The underwear bomber deserves the same, but my opinion on that doesn’t matter. What matters is that our courts have the ability to do the job. Senator McCain needs to climb down off his political soapbox and let them do so.

The reason Senator McCain and other Republicans who were silent about the federal court handling the trial of the shoe bomber in 2003 are voicing objections in this case is to score political points against a Democrat President. This political game playing is disappointing coming from men and women who so proudly wear patriotism on their sleeves and it tarnishes America’s image. Let’s cut the politics, embrace justice and focus our efforts on rooting out the evil people who are out to do us harm.

The best course to beating the terrorists and tyrants of the world is the one that seeks justice and steers clear of retribution without righteousness.

This entry was first published as a Des Moines Register blog entry.