By Jennie

I recently saw a news item analyzing the budget bill and concluding that the reduction in spending is much less than the figure that has been touted by the politicians who crafted the bill. This is not surprising, but what interested me (and got me thinking) were the comments in response to the article, the majority of which castigated politicians in the strongest possible terms.

Look, I understand why people don’t like politicians – for one thing, they have power over us ordinary citizens, and it’s not uncommon to resent those that have power over you (especially the ones you didn’t even vote for). Also, politicians frequently stretch the truth, or flat out lie – see the recent egregious example (on the Senate floor, no less!) from Arizona Senator Jon “Not Intended as a Factual Statement” Kyl. I also think that part of the problem is that there’s a narrative that idealizes politicians as, theoretically, public servants who should enter political life because they, well, want to serve the public. This clashes against the reality of politicians as self-serving and power-hungry. American values are not generally incompatible with the desire for power – like the desire for money, it’s seen as part of the American birthright, the acquisition of which is a hallmark of success. But again, we may feel differently when the person in question has power over us – over the laws that govern us and the taxes we pay.

Something else to consider is the fact that politicians, like lawyers (another despised profession), are frequently required (and I do mean required; more on that in a moment) to make unsavory compromises and to put political expediency ahead of personal beliefs. In other words, at least in the minds of some, politicians regularly sacrifice their integrity.

One of the comments that I read plaintively asked: if Democrats claim they want to reduce the deficit and Republicans claim they want to reduce the deficit, why are neither acting to reduce the deficit? The question struck me as sincere, but also as quite naive. (“Naive” is me being nice; I could also call it clueless, or stupid, or disingenuous, or willfully blind.) Does the poster who wrote that really not understand? Does he not see that as much as politicians are part of the problem, it’s we the people, ourselves, who play a big role in our political dysfunction?

To put it in simplistic terms, the Democrat and the Republican aren’t really reducing the deficit because we don’t want them to. Rather, we don’t want them to cut social programs. Or we do want them to cut social programs, but not this or that social program, because our mother or cousin or dog uses it, and it benefits us. Or we don’t want them to raise taxes on the rich, because we’re rich or close to being rich or we hope to be rich someday. We don’t want all this spending on defense, because we’re anti-war or isolationist or just sick of the cost. Or we don’t want money spent on anything but defense, because our enemies are out there and we need to destroy them before they get to us. We don’t want money to go to Planned Parenthood or NPR, or we do. We don’t want this or that group subsidized, or we do. And so on.

We readily accuse politicians of self-interest, but we are guilty of it ourselves. Most of us with a modicum of interest in politics and government have fairly strong ideas about what spending is worthwhile and what is not, and what the government is doing right and doing wrong. If we all agreed, the job for politicians would be much easier. As it is, a politician needs to balance a dozen realities at once: what their constituents want, what their other constituents want, what may advance his or her standing with colleagues, etc. A politician does not have the luxury of being guided by conscience, and we have not elected him to do so. We’ve elected him, usually, because we think he will follow the dictates of our conscience, or at least will value what we value.

We sometimes wonder why there are no truly good men or women in the upper echelons of politics. It’s true that “power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely,” but it’s not just that politicians become corrupted along the way. It’s that the ones with the “integrity” – the ones who held true to their values and did not bend or compromise them – those are the people who were maybe elected to city council but lost their bid for mayor. Or maybe they made it to mayor or state legislature, but they couldn’t make it further. Because we the people didn’t vote for them. Enough of us did not share their values, whether their values were conservative or liberal.

I’m not advocating that any of us vote for zealots that we don’t agree with, simply because they are true to their beliefs. I actually think such people can be dangerous – I don’t trust people who are incapable of considering the idea that they may be wrong. What I am advocating, for those of us who want a better class of politicians, is that we put self-interest aside, at least a little bit. We need to be willing to compromise and sacrifice, and to not see the former as craven and the latter as weak. We need to accept the idea that we might not be right about everything. We need to learn to show a modicum of respect rather than the reflexive contempt we have come to feel politicians have earned simply because they are politicians. After all, we elected them when we show contempt for them we are really showing contempt for ourselves and our political system. Don’t we deserve better?

Written by Kimberly

Have you ever been in mixed company in a social setting where the conversation took a turn toward politics? What about when someone brings up religion or mentions that they go to Church at a social engagement. How do you feel when education becomes the main course at the table of your neighbor’s dinner party? What is your gut reaction?

My gut reaction is to head for the hills as fast as I can. However, if I am unable to politely excuse myself, I sit there running images of banging my head up again the wall or poking my eyes back in my head till my eyelids flip inside out.

There are some people who feel comfortable engaging in playful dialogue discussing what government should do differently – till it becomes a heated debate due to a strong opposition of their views. There are some people who feel justified in speaking about God and are quick to tell you that you’re going to hell in a hen basket if you don’t turn your life over to him – that usually sets the stage to start a blood bath in a holy war if anyone challenges this one. There are some highly evolved people who will exclude others from discussions because they think they won’t comprehend the conversation – till they realize there’s nobody left to listen to them.

I’m not saying that I don’t have opinions, I do. I’m not saying that I don’t voice my opinions, I do. But I’m learning that the best times to speak out is not when I’m in a social environment with mixed company. Nobody ever wins when zoning in on these subject matters – they are unwinnable. Someone always ends up angry, sad, embarrassed, belittled, ridiculed…and on goes the list. Perhaps if I want my voice heard I should direct it toward the Government, the Church and the Board of Education.

I’m not making any promises but the next time I’m asked what my opinion is on politics, religion or education at a social get-together…I’ll be saying, “No comment.” I think I’ll stick to the less controversial subjects like plastic surgery.

“Never argue at the dinner table, for the one who is not hungry always gets the best of the argument.” – Anonymous