Reclaiming Independence through Independents

Or: We’re Sick and Tired of Common Sense Ideas tossed off as “non-starters!”

October 17, 2014 could have been a bit of a watershed for readers of the Washington Post. The Post published an interesting convergence of ideas in what otherwise might have been viewed as three diverse columns by Michael Gerson, Catherine Rampell and Fareed Zakaria:

“Ebola challenges America’s ability to adapt”, by Michael Gerson, typically a conservative perspective. [1]

“Is sex only for rich people?” by Catherine Rampell, typically a Millennial (and often progressive) perspective. [2]

“Obama needs to dial back his Syria strategy” by Fareed Zakeria, typically a global and politically moderate to liberal perspective. [3]

These three seemingly disparate pieces are worth reading together, with an eye towards synthesis and integration, terms we rarely hear in our politics anymore. We won’t describe the contents of the columns, other than to say even though each of these authors comes from different points on the political spectrum, their arguments are persuasive and reasonable (certainly in the spirit of Public Reason we discussed last time).

Our “watershed moment” occurred as we discussed the futility of centrist politicians presenting reasonable and common sense options given the lack of “public reason” in our current political system. We thought about how we can and must do better in the exchange of ideas in this nation…that’s the power of public reason.

These three excellent columns, and the fact that they are practically useless within the context of the train wreck that now passes for American public policy, should cast a spotlight on the need for a way around the polarizing Democratic and Republican Parties. The way our two parties “work” together today is placing our American Experiment at grave risk.

With a little intellectual curiosity and imagination, taken together, these three Post columns suggest how to bring about meaningful and effective change and get America back on track, relying on a handful of states to elect Independent and Centrist candidates.

The November, 2014 election offers the seeds of a “work around” to the current mess. The candidates we mention here may not be optimal…they rarely are. Many might even say they are flawed by ambition or wrong-headedness. Admittedly, we don’t know because we only distinguish them by what we can read in the magazines and papers…these candidates aren’t on the ballots of our home states. But these candidates do potentially represent our future. For this, we urge objectivity and “public reason” to the voters who can elect these candidates.

We strongly recommend the voters of Kansas, South Dakota and Georgia (and maybe even Kentucky) consider voting for the candidates who actually appear to offer an independent streak. Greg Orman in Kansas and Larry Pressler in South Dakota are officially on the ballot as Independents. Imagine how powerful it could be for our Senate for these gentlemen to caucus with the other two Independents in the Senate – to be a strong voice for a Center of America which cares less about politics and more about our nation. Those four Senate voices and votes could be huge.

For example, consider how amazing it would be to hear that these four Independents refused to vote for the present leadership of the Senate—Republican or Democratic. This could set the stage for the beginning of a change our nation so desperately needs.

Rick Weiland is the Democrat in the South Dakota race. He may also be a good change as it appears he may have an independent streak, as well. In a sense, he is appealing since the national Democratic Party has shunned him for not being Harry Reid’s pick. However, we find it hard to not encourage a vote for a viable Independent whenever it is an option given the urgency of our current state of affairs.

We also include Georgia and Kentucky because we believe Michelle Nunn, even though she is running as a Democrat, to be very centrist. And, we feel we have to consider Kentucky also. Allison Grimes’ election would displace one of the current polarizing leaders of the Senate and send a message that the status quo is no longer acceptable. In a world of Independent thinking, we’d like to see both Nunn and Grimes say that they are disinclined to support present leadership of the Senate, as well. That would be courageous and independent…and maybe even what voters really want to hear.

We’ll also note that we have a lot of respect for Lamar Alexander and Susan Collins, Republicans from Tennessee and Maine for their centrist approach, but unfortunately they would almost certainly vote for the would-be Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell.

These hopefully independent thinkers and would-be legislators who are unfortunately affiliated with one of the two currently dominant parties could make a difference if they only showed more concern for America than their party. We believe Nunn and Grimes are more apt to do that compared to their highly partisan opponents.

But, even four Independents would make a difference if they can somehow remain as independent and strong as the current two have. Four Independents might also attract some of the independent nature of those in the major parties who decide America comes first!

In a more “independent world,” we would love to see Nunn, Grimes and even some of the current Republican candidates, running and legislating as Independents. In reality, we understand that it’s almost impossible to win as an Independent. After all, we see the national Republican machine rushing to the aid of Pat Roberts and Mike Rounds in Kansas and South Dakota. That’s what party politics does.

We can only hope the voters of Kansas and South Dakota at a minimum will seize this opportunity to vote to secure “a way around” our present political disaster. We so desperately need these voters to exert some independent influence in the Senate and in their home states and reinvigorate the flow of good ideas and solutions for our nation.

Yes, we are so tired of common sense approaches being non-starters. Four Independents who believe in the original Independence of our nation and our politics could make a real difference for America!

Originally posted by Carl and Chuck Hunt, 10/19/2014.

[1] The Gerson piece is focused on learning lessons at the federal level, on both sides of the aisle.

[2] The Rampell piece is focused on leveling the playing field about sex education across all parts of our population, taking the politics out of such an important and pervasive topic.

[3] The Zakaria piece is focused on getting strategy and rhetoric aligned and reducing the political influence on another tricky Mid-East situation.

Thomas Paine: IT Legend of the 70s (1770s, that is)

by Carl W. Hunt

In the 21^st Century, we “moderns” tend to view technology, and most specifically information technology, as both the harbinger and the facilitator of a revolution in life. Search companies help us find information immediately, hardware companies deliver incredibly fast processing and presentation capabilities and software companies find ways to make information easy to store, access and manipulate. The revolution in information technology has been astounding!

What hasn’t been so astounding or particularly revolutionary is what this information really says and how it touches us as Americans who are still part of a great revolutionary experiment started 238 years ago. Apart from the scientific insights that modern IT has packaged and presented to a more widespread audience, and the promise of revolutions in medicine, transportation and robotics, where are the great ideas about social change? And I don’t mean Facebook or Google+!

The ideas and concepts that have been pushed around through modern IT haven’t been nearly as revolutionary as those of one Englishman who did as much as any Founding Father to set America on an enduring and revolutionary course of its own. [i] Of course, this revolutionary master of IT in the days of the Founders is Thomas Paine. [ii]

Thomas Paine in his role as an early information technologist and yes, revolutionary, is a merger that we need today more than ever. America and its “revolution” in IT could use someone who could think about America’s future and articulate those ideas in ways that haven’t been before: that was a hallmark of Thomas Paine.

Common Sense: We Still Need It!

Source Data Below.

Perhaps where we’ve erred the most in recent years in establishing and maintaining good governance in America is by letting it get too complex, too big and too convoluted. In Common Sense, Paine wrote “I draw my idea of the form of government from a principle in nature which no art can overturn, viz. that the more simple any thing is, the less liable it is to be disordered, and the easier repaired when disordered.” If we revisited and even “rewrote” Common Sense today, that principle of simplicity would endure, even in a nation of over 318 million.

But, we would still have government lest anarchy prevail, a point that Paine also made. Government is more than a necessary evil, as Paine wrote about the British government (and government in general), and we would do well to follow his “common sense” advice about how we move forward with our own government today.

Paine originally wrote that representatives of the people to the government should be direct representatives, thereby giving the electorate more say in those that governed them. In a nation closing in on 320 million people, that won’t work as well today as it might have in 1776, but that’s where “common sense” IT could come into play.

Back in April, Chuck and I wrote about Harnessing the Tools of Collaboration. Our nation has made dramatic progress in pioneering and implementing collaborative IT tools that have started to change government for the better.

Unfortunately, these tools haven’t changed politics for the better. Government, as an abstract entity outside politics, is poised to harness the tools of collaboration. Politics harnesses the tools to seek gain for the party’s objectives and enhance reelection potential. In America, the government and politics coevolve and today, politics have been the dominant force. I think Thomas Paine would say that’s just not “common sense.”

It’s way past time to go back and reread Paine and the Founders to see how Common Sense guided the formation of our nation and made it possible to get through our very rough first century and endure through this century.

What’s Holding Common Sense Back Today?

Perhaps the single greatest inhibition to a return to “Common Sense” in government today is a stark lack of courage. Our laws in 2014 are a hodge-podge of patches that sometimes don’t even reflect the original problems they were meant to address: Tax, Transportation and Immigration laws being three of the worst collections of such “fixes”. Our elected leaders, mostly in Congress, refuse to address fundamental rewrites of these laws that reflect 2014 rather than 1914 (1814?) for fear of electoral backlash…gutless only begins to describe these “leaders” who somehow keep getting reelected! [iii] Add to that a tendency to bring more people into government to write, interpret and enforce these patchwork laws, and government gets even more complex. There’s no “common sense” here!

Another inhibition to a return to “common sense” approaches to government is a media that’s divided even more than our Congress, pandering to intellectual and geographic divides in an “arms race” to be more popular or sell more ads than their competitors. Okay, this is the American way, but without some level of “common sense” applied to the media, the American Way may disappear into islands of disconnectedness and lack of concern for a national entity that made the freedom of the press possible in the first place. Come on, media…get your act together and use some “common sense” to promote America rather than tear it down!

Source Data Below.

From a material standpoint, our systems of production and consumption have ceased to follow any recognizable pattern of “common sense” as well. Chuck and I already beat on this idea in past blog posts and the FAPITCA Platform, so there are only a couple of pointers in this post: here and here. But, Thomas Paine noted an interesting contrast about society and government that applies, writing that “Society is produced by our wants” (the essence of our production and consumption of both goods and ideas) with government serving as a constraint by “restraining our vices.” [iv] This indicates that government does in fact have some (at least a limited) role in moderating production and consumption so that the wants of society do not destroy all the resources that could be consumed in meeting those wants. That’s just “common sense” too!

If these appeals to look at America in the light of Thomas Paine as a revolutionary IT legend make sense, we’re way behind the power curve and we need to rebuild some “common sense” into American government now! To make these changes, and include a modernization of Common Sense, it’s worth going back and revisiting a blog post I wrote in April called A Narrative for our Nation and our Promise. The authors of the National Strategic Narrative provide some deep insights on how to move forward…these guys got it right and best of all, they used “Common Sense.” I think Thomas Paine would agree.

Originally posted by Carl W. Hunt, 8/22/2014.

[i] Chuck and I wrote a bit about Thomas Paine as an influential thinker of the American Revolution who appreciated the sacrifices and commitment of the Continental Congress in 1776, contrasting it to what he might think about today’s Congress. Unfortunately, Congress’s contributions to the American people have only been on the decline since we wrote that post in February.

[ii] Speaking of mastery of the IT of the time, Paine’s Common Sense sold over 500,000 copies in 1776, still the largest selling book in proportion to the population in American history, which was estimated at 2.5 million at the time. That’s some legendary IT there!

[iii] Obviously, President Obama did address Health Care in his first term, but neglected to embrace the input of the opposition party. This shortcoming has only been exacerbated by the political divide that makes it almost impossible to address the shortcomings in a sensible…”common sense”…fashion.

[iv] The actual quote from Common Sense, in context is: “Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness POSITIVELY by uniting our affections, the latter NEGATIVELY by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher.” Paine went on to write that “Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil” but it is necessary in any event. A key premise of FAPITCA has been that government is necessary, but it does need to be done right, and in recent years it has not been done right. Also, remember that Thomas Paine was a revolutionary who successfully raised the issues but did not accomplish much at all when he was placed in positions of authority to fix the problems he identified (including government positions in England, France and of course, America)! As America has often been able to do, we must find and leverage the strengths of our people, in the right ways at the right time.

Image Sources:

Common Sense: Source: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Commonsense.jpg#mediaviewer/File:Commonsense.jpg

Lewes, UK Tavern Sign: “White Hart Paine plaque” by Sussexonian. Licensed under Public domain via Wikimedia Commons; http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:White_Hart_Paine_plaque.jpg#mediaviewer/File:White_Hart_Paine_plaque.jpg. This commemoration of Thomas Paine is particularly significant in that Paine lived and developed many of his original ideas while living in Lewes, Sussex Country, UK, working for the local government…Lewes, DE, named for its UK sibling, is the author’s home.

The Platform, Part VI: The Honor of Public Service

This final post on the FAPITCA Platform comes “straight from the heart.” Both of us have worked for government throughout our career. Carl started as a Houston, Texas police officer at age 19, while Chuck began his service to the nation as a Presidential Management Intern for the US Bureau of Land Management  at age 24. Carl completed a 30-year career in the United States Army in 2006 and Chuck continues to work in the federal sector after almost 30 years of service. Our sister served 20 years in the US Air Force and is still a public high school teacher.

Fortunately, in spite of politically-driven attacks on American governance (often by so-called government servants of the more “conservative” party), many still serve America working for the various levels of government: our nation is better as a result. Americans working on behalf of America, providing services to other Americans and foreign visitors makes our nation stronger and more representative of who we are. To be sure, we can always work for America more efficiently and more objectively, but Americans working for America is a good thing.

Representing Americans as elected leaders in office is also a great service, and even though we’ve been critical of our federal legislators in this blog, we also honor their service when performed in the intended role rather than exploitation of the profession for personal power or gain. While helping to draft the United States Constitution, Benjamin Franklin talked about “the classical republican ideal of ‘disinterested public service’”…and hoping that “‘every member of Congress’ (would) consider himself rather as a representative of the whole, than as an agent for the interests of a particular state.” Franklin, also foreseeing the role of political parties, knew how important public service on behalf of all Americans was, having been in that capacity for much of his professional life. [1]

Our nation and our citizens require and should demand honorable public service to make America great. This service may take place in many forms, including government, academia and industry that supports our economic growth and fairly promotes access to equal opportunity for all qualified to serve. [2] Without this level of service, our nation would likely fall into the ruin of corporate greed and corrupt political “leadership” that far exceeds what we consider problematic today. We’d be a lot worse off without dedicated service to our nation.

There are threats to effective public service, however. Most of these threats are politically motivated in an attempt to define what is acceptable governance and public service. Since the Reagan era, conservative politics claim government is too big, too inefficient and too generous to Americans and immigrants who are unemployed, homeless or who do not have access to a reasonable level of education. This side tends to favor lower taxes and less government interference in Americans’ lives. [3]

Liberal politics tend to support collection of more and “fairer” taxes, the creation of more opportunities for education and employment, and a government of sufficient size that it can adequately oversee what should be a balance of receipts (of taxes) and expenditures (legislatively approved obligations). Of course, conservatives also claim they want balance in the budget, as well, as long as that balance includes intense scrutiny of public servants and the funds they discharge. We agree…it’s hard not to agree with the idea of reasonable scrutiny and oversight.  It takes capable, inspired Americans to manage the day-to-day delivery of critical government services: clean water, safe drugs, social security payments, national and border security, etc., and provide daily internal scrutiny and oversight.

Both sides say they want balance eventually, but rarely accomplish this balance as there’s always some emergency like a war or recession that demands the budget objectives be delayed “temporarily.” This condition in America is no longer an “emergency” however, but more the way of life in an America that is fighting to be competitive in a globally rising community that includes, among others, China and India.

If this is the case, however, it seems as though we need more and better trained public servants to govern in this new normal, however, not less. We need our best involved in government and service to America!

The budget and fair administration of receipts and expenditures is really only one part of good public service. Another part is good old fashioned “customer service,” whether accomplished by sworn government officials or not; this involves dedication to our nation and concern for our fellow citizens, including fair access to equal opportunities to succeed as Americans and legal immigrants.

This is where things seem to be falling apart these days. As a nation of Americans we’ve quit worrying about the opportunity and income gaps and the advantages of closing those gaps on behalf of our nation. Instead, we’ve been thinking largely about ourselves and what’s in it for us. Service, unless it has an immediate benefit to us as individuals, is for someone else to worry about and to deliver.

Here’s the bottom line: if we are constantly condemning public service and those who dedicate themselves to it; if we fail to take care of our fellow citizens and ensure they have opportunity to compete and even become great public servants, academicians or business people; and if we fail to challenge the growing gaps between the wealthy and the rest of us, how can we ever hope to remain a great nation and a meaningful example to the rest of the world?

Public Service is an honorable profession. In many cases, our governments hire the best, not just those who can’t do anything else. This is equally true among the Millennial generation. [4] These servants don’t seek wealth but rather fair access to opportunity…they deserve our respect and support.

Our government services may not pay as well as the commercial and academic worlds perhaps, but government service offers the chance to serve our great nation in ways that are not possible any other way. If some among great Americans (our best presidents and leaders, members of the military, teachers and many others) had declined to serve, this nation would likely have failed long ago. They were there for us, and we need to be there for our future generations.

Please think about that the next time you are tempted to complain about the “evils of government” that happens when some politically-driven claim attempts to garner votes…that kind of claim really needs to be critically tested. Americans know how to think better than that.  Americans must once again learn to discern and embrace good government, and reject extremist calls for zero…or excessive… government.

Originally posted by Carl and Chuck Hunt, 8/10/2014.

NOTES:

[1] Beeman, R., Plain Honest Men: The Making of the American Constitution, Random House, NY, 2009, page 151. Also, back in February, 2014, we posted Thomas Paine on Honor and the Congress, in which we recounted Paine’s essay “Reflections on Titles,” a piece in which he commented on the honor of those who served in the Continental Congress and drafted and signed the Declaration of Independence. We refer the reader to those pieces for more reflections on honorable public service as an elected official.

[2] In fact, we also honor the “public” service of businesses that do in fact support the American way of life, furthering access to economic and social opportunity…we could not have succeeded in either war or peace without their support (e.g., the accomplishments of industry in World War II). We have a more difficult time “honoring” businesses that hide behind the need to serve their stockholders BEFORE the nation that makes it possible for businesses to exist. To be sure, stockholders provide investment (for their own personal gain), but without the protections that objective, effective government provides, business would have a much more difficult environment in which to thrive as they have in America throughout its history. Businesses which put loyalty to stockholders before the nation that nurtures their growth should really consider their priorities. This is particularly true in the case of businesses that seek to move their headquarters oversees to avoid the responsibility of paying taxes to support our nation. This so-called process of “inversion” strips America of needed support and creation of increased opportunity within our own borders.

[3] This does not seem to apply to many conservative seniors who still want their social security payments and Medicare access, but who says you can’t have your cake and want to eat it, too?

[4] See for example:  Lavigna, B. and Flato, J. January, 2014 blog post: “Millennials Are Attracted to Public Service, But Government Needs to Deliver.” This article noted that “federal agencies were among the most preferred employers for students across main fields of study: the FBI, National Institutes of Health, NASA, Department of State, and Peace Corps all ranked among the top ten, alongside companies like Google, Walt Disney Company, Apple, and Microsoft. Government employers are particularly popular with humanities and natural science students.” Also see: Fournier, R. “The Outsiders: How Can Millennials Change Washington If They Hate It?” which in spite of the name of the article documents how Millennials “in general, are fiercely committed to community service” but they “don’t see politics or government as a way to improve their communities, their country, or the world.” Sigh…again, edge-driven politics are jeopardizing our nation’s future. Fournier’s August, 2013 Atlantic Magazine study indicated that Millennials are increasingly less likely to enter into politics and government, a trend we must all somehow contribute to reversing to ensure our nation’s future. For one bit of recent bright news, see Millennial authors Eric Zenisek and Mike Stinnett in their Fortune Magazine piece, Why millennials should ditch corporate jobs for public service…their conclusion: “It’s going to take a renewed commitment to service to repair our country. Millennials are up for the task.”

 

Thomas Paine on Honor and the Congress

Connecting to the Principles, Part 2

Almost a year before Thomas Paine published Common Sense, he served as the editor for The Pennsylvania Magazine. He was still known as Thomas Pain, his family name, when he published a brief piece in May, 1775, about the use of titles among the aristocracy called “Reflections on Titles.”

Pain, recently emigrated from England, soon changed his name to Paine to distinguish himself as a new “American” free to write about topics that would become increasingly important to the cause of independence from Great Britain. From personal readings in high school and college of Common Sense and his other works, as well as 1776 America’s reactions to Common Sense, most Americans today know how vital Paine was to the cause.

About titles, Paine wrote “Virtue is inflamed at the violation, and sober reason calls it nonsense.” He went on to note “for when men yield up the privilege of thinking, the last shadow of liberty quits the horizon” discussing what he considered to be unthinking and unchallenged acceptance of traditionally granted but unmerited title and rank.

There was one exception Thomas Paine noted about titles and their uses in “Reflections on Titles.” His words, published well before he was known in America as a writer for the cause of independence, praised one specific group in particular. “Reflections on Titles” could serve well to motivate that group’s progeny 239 years later. Paine’s observations honor the body of our nation’s founders who invested so much to create America. Note Paine’s thoughts that should inspire even today:

Modesty forbids men, separately or collectively, to assume titles. But as all honours, even that of Kings, originated from the public, the public may justly be called the fountain of true honour. And it is with much pleasure I have heard the title of Honourable applied to a body of men, who nobly disregarding private ease and interest for public welfare, have justly merited the address of The Honourable Continental Congress.

Paine wrote this brief but timely piece along with a number of other important (or at least interesting!) works that led up to Common Sense. In contrasting those who aspired to titles, mostly from his native country, he of course referred to the assemblage in Philadelphia who eventually pledged “Our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.” The words with which he praised the Continental Congress in 1775 should have inspired generations of Congresses and even state and local assemblies.

Sadly, this admiration from our nation’s past seems less fitting today.

Paine as a Connector to the Public

Paine also noted that the “public may justly be called the fountain of true honour,” an observation that suggests that it was indeed the public who must be responsible to bestow the title of “Honourable” to the Congress, then and now. As a matter of precedence, this would also suggest that the public must be intellectually capable of determining upon whom it would bestow the title of “Honourable”.

It is the general claim of Fulfilling the American Promise in the Connected Age that the public, particularly the Center, is in fact capable of bestowing this title. But one must wonder how many members of the Center today would in fact apply Paine’s definition to the current governing body of this nation.

Part of “qualifying” for the title of Honorable, to modernize the term, is an adherence to a set of principles based on our Constitution, as well as an application of “common sense.” The Constitution (including the Bill of Rights) provides an exceptional framework for governance and serves as a foundation for the principles of honorable governing.

It seems fair to say that all Americans, and certainly the Center, want the people they elect to represent them to be honorable servant-leaders of our nation. The gulf that exists between our political parties today precludes effective governing. The term “honor” is not even part of the dialogue when discussing contemporary politics at the national level. We proposed an initial set of Principles and Objectives in a recent FAPITCA piece that we feel could resolve the current dilemma, enhance the vocabulary and add value to a quest for the return to eligibility of the title “Honorable” to our governing bodies.

It’s worth noting that Thomas Paine was also a master of the connectivity of the 1770s: the accessibly readable pamphlet. He connected by delivering content that appealed to a great many people while still maintaining its intellectual essence. Paine used the language and network of the time to stimulate people to think, share and yes, be inspired to learn more and to intelligently lift America from the “Monarchical tyranny” of the British King and Parliament.

We believe the Center must also become masters of the tools of communication and learning in the current world: the Connected Age. As we noted in the Principles of FAPITCA, as “leaders of America in the 21^st Century, we must leverage the technologies of the ‘connected age’ on behalf of our people to connect and bind us rather than to divide us.” We must apply the principles and lessons from honorable men and women who have gone before us.

When the Center connects to our electoral process and ensures responsible outcomes that help unify us instead of divide us, we get closer to enabling the honor in our elected bodies Thomas Paine praised in 1775. When the Center engages and pressures elected officials to stop listening to the extremists and their lobbyists, honor returns to our political process. At that point, our elected bodies return to being of the people…for the people, to paraphrase Abraham Lincoln in the Gettysburg Address. Our elected officials become leaders once again.

It’s our responsibility as the Center to help our leaders achieve this greatness. It would just be “common sense” to Thomas Paine.

Originally posted by Carl and Chuck Hunt, 2/28/2014

Editor’s note: The next-to-last paragraph of this post was slightly edited on 3/1/2014 for clarity.