It is time to govern

Now that the elections are over, it is time to put away the rhetoric and focus on governance. This used to be how it was done, until we segmented the news into various markets. The past twenty years or so, we seem to govern off the campaign rhetoric rather than facts and collaboration has become a dirty word.

As an Independent voter, who has been a member of both parties, the governing off rhetoric and lack of collaboration need to stop. Neither side owns all the good ideas and both sides have some bad ones. And, we need to focus on the underlying truths and facts rather than tweets and who wins a public relations battle over an issue. Process matters – when politicians deviate from process, it is for political reasons.

In this spirit, here are the issues that this voter thinks we should focus on. Many voters have voiced agreement on some of these, but some issues just don’t get due attention.

– we should stabilize and shore up the ACA which most Americans favor: funding commitments to insurers will stabilize premiums, as will expanding Medicaid and considering the expansion of Medicare down to age 55, 60 or 62.

– we should ditch the harmful tariffs and work with our allies and the WTO to pressure China to stop the intellectual capital theft. Tariffs hurt consumers and producers, especially our farmers.

– we should address infrastructure needs which are many, doing so as we have done in the past with a blend of business, venture capital and federal, state and local government funding.

– we should recognize that the two biggest threats to our planet per the World Economic Forum are our water crisis and climate change, which exacerbates the first issue: strides have been made, but we need to reassume our global leadership role on climate change and focus on measures to address both.

– we should add more governance around gun control issues: Gun-owners and non-gun owners have voiced agreement on measures that would help. It should be noted most gun-owners do not belong to the NRA, so the NRA’s political activism against reasonable change should be noted, but not over-emphasized.

– The deficit and debt are building to a point of huge reckoning. It has been eight years since the Simpson-Bowles Deficit Resuction Committee report was shelved. It was shelved because it recommended $2 in expense cuts to every $1 in revenue increases. It was shelved because neither party had the political courage to roll up their sleeves and make tough decisions – we cannot get there with only expense cuts or revenue increases, needing both.

– We should stop the lack of civil discourse and beating up on the media. The media’s role is vital to our democracy. Pay attention to where your news comes from. Be wary of opinion disguised as news. Tweets are not long enough to show context or subtlety and are an easy way to misinform, as a result. To this end, it is vital for our democracy to return to appropriate Congressional oversight. We are not a kingdom.

If anything, we must have our politicians work together. The crime bill the President is pushing and that passed the House is not perfect, but is a bipartisan effort. It makes steps forward. Let’s make needed improvements and get something done. And, that is what Americans want most from our politicians – stop the grandstanding and get stuff done.

 

 

Advertisements

Two hopeful stories

Jeff Jackson and Nora Trotman are both running for the same State Senate seat in North Carolina, currently held by Jackson. By itself, that is not newsworthy. What is newsworthy is the civility that both are exhibiting during the campaign. It is a much needed breath of fresh air,

As reported last Sunday in The Charlotte Observer in an article entitled “Running a ‘positive’ campaign for state Senate,” the Democrat Jackson tweeted praise for Trotman, his GOP opponent. Per the Observer, he noted, “It feels like our divisions are growing deeper each day. So, let me just take a moment and commend my opponent on running an honest, positive campaign. She’s a good person and deserves your consideration.” He also included her photo and a link to her website encouraging people to find out more.

After some national attention, which brought a positive tweet from Rachel Maddow, Trotman responded with “A lot of people are running against each other rather than to represent their district…Happy our race is an exception. We need representatives not politicians!” In an interview with the Observer, she added “It’s important to have two people who really want a positive campaign and not attack each other.”

We need more stories and attitudes like Jackson and Trotman exhibited. Let me layer on one more story I heard on NPR this weekend. A piece of advice was shared from an old interview of Mister Rogers when we are facing a terrible tragedy.

The advice was being shared after the horrific shooting at the Pittsburgh temple which killed eleven people last week. Mister Rogers said in the old interview what his mother had taught him. She said “Always look for the helpers” during times of tragedy. Look for the emergency technicians, doctors, police, firefighters, and citizens as they do their best to help others during the tragedy. These people will give you hope when we need it most.

I heard these words while I was driving my car. They made me want to pull over and listen with more intent. To illustrate his point even more, the Pittsburgh shooter was taken to the nearest hospital and was nursed back to care. The hospital CEO and many of the staff are Jewish.

One of my mantras is “kindness is not a weakness.” It reveals an inner strength which is foreign to some who feel they must run roughshod over others to prove their mettle. Let’s celebrate the words and actions of Rogers, Jackson and Trotman.

 

 

That Jesus saying

That Jesus saying. You know the one I am talking about. In my bible it says something about “do unto others.” What I told my kids quite often is the paraphrase “treat others like you want to be treated.”

We should aspire to be like this, but we are human and fall short of this goal. Often, we recognize this and make amends or feel poorly about ourselves for offensive behavior.

Even when we vehemently disagree with someone, we should approach them the same way we want to be approached. The best way to discuss differences is through reasonable dialogue. Facts help. Listening helps even more. A colleague used to ask “help me understand,” as a way of starting dialogue when he had a hard time understanding where someone was coming from.

We must not emulate the coarse behaviors exhibited by the President of the United States. When we do, truth and civil discourse suffer. This kind of behavior sows seeds of division. It also harms our country damaging our reputation and trustworthiness around the world.

We must not follow the suggestions of Congresswoman Maxine Walters to harass members of the President’s team. That is not how she would want to be treated and is a very slippery slope. And, unless a patron is causing an uproar, service providers should not decline service because they disagree with a patron’s politics. That is also a slippery slope.

As an Independent voter and former member of both parties, neither party has all the good ideas and both have some bad ones. We must listen to each other and work toward solving real problems. We must reach out to our politicians, but do so in a civil way. People can be strident in their opinions without being a jerk. I reach out to leaders often with this modus operandi in mind.

My blogging friends Jill and Gronda published excellent posts on this subject yesterday. I would encourage you to read them. Let me leave with this thought to remember along with Jesus’ powerful words courtesy of an old boss. “You have two ears and one mouth. Use them in that proportion.”

Use that filter before you speak

In my efforts not to curse, the above title is a euphemism for what I would prefer to say. My message is to those who have decided to bypass any filters and say the most inflammatory things.

Two public figures – Johnny Depp and Kathy Griffin – decided that they should make suggestions about the demise of the President. And, a Democrat official was appropriately fired for making a statement about how he was glad Representative Scalise was shot because of his role in passing unfavorable legislation.

There is no call for these comments or actions. I fully understand the President has incited, promoted and condoned violence against others. He has failed to call out violence against minority groups, but has a quick comment for when a Muslim may be the perpetrator. This is not right, either.

So, let me be frank. One set of actions does not condone the other. Further, being violent or speaking of violence makes one’s argument poor. It is hard to argue issues when these uncivil remarks and actions get in the way of dialogue.

We need to remember we are all Americans. That is the most important tribe. It is well within our rights to disagree with leaders and others, but please be civil. Treat others like you want to be treated. If you call someone an idiot, then you should not be surprised if they return the favor.

I am annoyed with Democrats and Republicans

This post may be offensive to some of my followers, but I appreciate your comments should you disagree. As an Independent voter who left the Republican Party in 2006, but did not choose to rejoin the Democratic Party, I want our leaders to solve our problems and work together. We have gotten progressively worse with partisanship and that is not good, as we are attempting to solve problems with party rhetoric and not data and or common sense. Both sides are to blame, but I find more fault with my more recent former party given their support by a more active misinformation base parading as a mainstream news network.

Like many people, I do not fit into a nice compartment. I am fiscally conservative and socially progressive. I have these beliefs we need to pay for things and every citizen has equal rights and opportunity. Per Teddy Roosevelt, they need a ‘square deal” and like his cousin Franklin, they need a “fair deal.” I guess I want our leaders to be better stewards than they have come to be with our money and rights. What many have failed to realize is my rights are just important as yours, and vice versa. The right to do something does not include the right to squelch another person’s rights. Think about this last sentence, as folks advocating religious freedom laws seem to miss the subtlety of this point.

Using a recent example, I cite the approval of our new Supreme Court Justice, Neil Gorsuch. This man was not perfect, but he seemed to have a pretty good set of experiences. Yes, he is more conservative than I would prefer, but he was nominated by a Conservative president. That is how this works. My question to Democrats is Gorsuch more horrible in their minds than the next few in consideration? Why force the Republicans hand in blowing up the 60 vote rule? I fault the GOP as well for blowing up this rule, as we now could get a more extreme person on the Court. And, that is not what this Court needs in m view. So, between the two actions, we have thrown future stewardship out the window.

Another recent example is the effort that fortunately failed to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act. Republicans decided to work without Democrats to do this and their party bickering caused it to fail. It also failed because it was a horribly crafted and rushed bill. Since most Americans want to keep Obamacare, but improve it, why did the GOP waste time and not work with Democrats to fix it? The President even blamed Democrats for this bill’s failure, yet they weren’t even at the table. That is a shame.

Stewardship is an important word to define what is lacking. We need our leaders to be better stewards of our country than they have become. Both parties do not lay claim to all of the good ideas and both can lay claim to some bad ones. So, why not set all the rhetoric aside, study real data and real causes, and come up with informed, bipartisan solutions through civil discourse. Right now, in my view, our Congress and President’s inability to do this are a threat to national security. Please be better stewards. We need you to be.

 

 

 

The enemy is incivility

We are about to inaugurate a President who is the most unpopular President-elect in over forty years per more than one survey. Yet, he is our future President and our fortunes as a country are tied to this man.

I hope he is successful where he can truly help America and the planet. And, when he is headed down a perilous path, it is our right to take issue with his actions or lack of decorum.

But, it is our duty to raise issues with civility and a focus on the issues or the actions. The enemy is not our fellow neighbors who may passionately disagree with our position. We should treat each other with civility and expect the same in return. I welcome feedback that focuses on the issues and not me personally. Name calling and labeling are the tools of a lazy arguer or a child. When I see or hear labels, I am less impressed with the argument.

Earlier this week, we celebrated a true American hero for all races, Martin Luther King. He advocated for civil disobedience, when some of his proponents argued for more forceful action. He was heavily influenced by Gandhi, who practiced the same kind of discourse in both South Africa and India to successfully improve the rights of dark-skinned people in those countries.

It is more than OK to disagree with our leaders and each other. But, we must treat each other with dignity and respect. And, quoting an old boss, we have two ears and one mouth – we should use them in that proportion. Listening will significantly improve civil discourse.

Of all the people…

I had an old boss who was not only a great storyteller, he had funny lines to give little digs that sounded nice at first. He would do this to avoid saying something overtly negative, but get his point across. A good example is as follows, “of all the people in the world, he certainly is one of them.”

Another example is “he was talking about you, so I started to defend you, but recognized he was making some good points.” This one is more teasing of a friend than it is getting in a dig, but it can be used for either.

In my previous post, I spoke of civilly offering your differing opinion in the manner in which you would like to receive such. That is a goal, but sometimes we are dealing with insufferable people who, in short, think only their opinions have merit and you are stupid not to believe as they do.

Try as we may to offer our counter opinion, it is not heard. much less heeded. Often the purveyor will double down calling out more names or labels. As I have said many times, I don’t mind people disagreeing with me, but offer valid points and not labels.

This weekend, a blogger who is a consistent name caller followed his modus operandi on another blog. He started with an insulting label and comment denigrating the blogger and ended with more slams, even adding that intelligent people agree with his point implying that if you do not, then you are obviously not intelligent.

He actually did a disservice to his main argument, which was reasonably stated, even though I mostly did not agree with it. Yet, by bookending it with snarky comments and labels, his reasonable discourse was overshadowed. Plus, by being consistent in his labeling and snarky comments, he has earned a reputation that does a disservice to what he has to say.

So, I responded to his point where he said intelligent people agreed with him, by saying I guess I am stupid and shared why I disagreed with his point citing others who felt the same. I do not like to be flippant like this as it is not representative of how I want to receive feedback, so I apologized later for my tone, but not my point. Yet, that does not condone his tone or denigrating of a blogger who does her homework.

I do my best to stay informed using reliable news sources. I try to support my opinions with corroborating data or citing leaders or experts who feel likewise. Yet, at the end of the day, my opinions remain such, no more, no less. I will do my best to not call someone’s opinion stupid, but my and other opinions deserve similar respect.

Or, as another boss once said, “I am not going to pee down someone’s leg, but he should not pee down mine.” I just need to practice what I preach by giving feedback like a want it and not smelling like urine.