A symptom of a healthy republic is the willingness of good and decent people to offer themselves for public service. Emphasis on “service.” In my time in the Virginia General Assembly, for instance, I observed there were three kinds of people who populated elective office.
First, there were those who “wanted to be something.” They were seeking a form of self-actualization or some sort of accomplishment held dear to their hearts. Those sentiments are not altogether bad. Many of this sort worked hard, took their service seriously, and were good and decent people. Some of them, however, were largely observers of legislative activities, enjoying the positions they had attained, but not entirely engaged with the legislative process. Yet they were quite pleasant to work with.
Then there was a second group. Those who “wanted to be something else.” They were immediately revealed by their rhetoric and actions. Beyond the matters a legislator should attend to—those dealing with core Virginia issues—they were off and about talking about national ones, not missing a chance to suggest how they would be suited for higher office. This was a small group in the Virginia General Assembly, but one that often coached the rest of us about why we should attend to matters of little consequence to the job at hand. They saw their election to the General Assembly as the calling card for service in the next higher echelon of government. There is nothing evil in that. But it missed a key lesson of life that I learned as a soldier: do well that which is before you and “next” will take care of itself.
The third group—most people I served with—were those seeking election not to be something, but rather to do something. They really wanted to do the work of legislating on the matters at hand. They understood that Virginia was not in the business of fixing the Federal government, ending wars, or repairing society at large. To be sure, they would occasionally submit bills that strayed into these areas but were nonetheless sincere in thinking that they were dealing with Virginia matters as well. Generally, I found this group to be very much focused on making Virginia a better place to raise a family, operate a business, and all of that within the intent and purpose of our Constitution.
All in all, I found my service among these different—albeit honorable—groups to be a wonderful experience. My only regret was encountering a very few in 16 years whose integrity was in question. And the way I handled that unpleasantness was to ignore them completely.
All of this makes me think about those who want to be our President. It’s hard not to think about this as platoons of people—particularly on my side of the ideological aisle—are announcing their intent to be our president. As such, when I look at candidates, I tend to seek out those who are less interested in being president and more interested in doing something our nation needs. Some arrayed before us put “being” ahead of “doing” and they are rapidly falling to the bottom of my list. So, what am I looking for?
First, I want a President who loves and respects our Constitution, not one who would bypass it to satisfy personal or political gain. The Constitution is not a random list of suggestions. It’s the law of the land, not a political can opener.
Second, I want a president who understands—like it or not—that the US has genuine national security goals that accrue from our position—both historically and practically—in the world as the greatest nation among all. We have many threats, China chiefly. But there are others that must be addressed clearly, firmly, and consistently.
Third, I want a president who understands the internal threats that in many ways are greater than those from abroad. The attributes that make America great are our republican form of government, our free-enterprise system, and our traditional values. All these are under attack today internally, and we need a president who will address the health of our national fabric. Yet, such a president must not make the mistake of thinking that he or she can repair this damage by executive orders that amount to legislative fiat. But a president can use the “bully pulpit”—a term coined by President Theodore Roosevelt—as a position from which to press his or her agenda. This is the proper way to make a case for change and influence action to fix problems appropriate for legislation.
In my lifetime, no president did this better than Ronald Wilson Reagan, who accomplished so much even while Congress was in the hands of the opposition party.
I’m looking for him or her, a doer.
0 Comments