Government service was a noble calling when I was young.
The military kept our country safe, and public works agencies
built roads, dams, and water works. Our policemen and firemen protected our
neighborhoods, our courts meted out justice, and social service agencies helped
our neediest citizens. “G-Men” tracked down Commies and terrorists. Laws that
protected workers, stimulated the economy, and safeguarded our natural
resources were enacted by legislative bodies that found compromise to get
things done. And, our court systems safeguarded the Constitution and made sure
that justice was served.
The Erie Canal, our transcontinental railroads, the
Interstate Highway System, eradicating polio, and putting a man on the moon,
ensuring Civil Rights…these things happened when people, through government,
worked together toward a goal.
I am disheartened in my old age to realize that government
has become a dirty word in America. Politics used to be called “the art of the
possible”, but, today, it seems like politics serves no purpose other than to
divide people and stifle cooperative works of any kind, lest “the other guy”
gets credit for something good.
I devoted more than three decades of my life to public
service, first in the military, and later working for local government. During
that time, our county (Riverside, in southern California) evolved from rural to
urban. My role was as a land use planner to start, then infrastructure
planning, and later infrastructure finance as Deputy C.E.O. Problem solving,
inventing new solutions, working with politicians and property owners to
improve neighborhoods and helping develop a diverse economy were my roles.
At the time, I felt like I made a difference, and that my
work was appreciated.
However, if I were a young person today, looking toward a
career, I probably wouldn’t choose public service. Who would want to be the
butt of jokes or thought of as an impediment to society? That’s the propaganda
being continuously broadcast to the public today: government is the problem,
not the solution.
Of course, the poisonous atmosphere created by today’s crop
of divisive politicians makes traditional governmental models unworkable.
Nothing gets done, yet taxes still get collected.
Mass murders are on the rise, the divide between the rich
and poor is growing, our public infrastructure is crumbling, medical costs are
skyrocketing, and foreign respect for the United States is plummeting. Who can
blame the public for losing confidence in government? Is it any wonder why
about one-third of eligible voters don’t bother to show up at the polls?
It’s funny to me that our government intrudes on people’s
freedom where it shouldn’t and takes a “hands off” posture where it should.
I think about death more now than I used to, as the Grim
Reaper stalks my retirement community. Many relatives and friends of mine have
deceased, some of them in not such a dignified manner. There came a time in
many of their lives where they would have rather succumbed quickly rather than
be kept alive, suffering horribly and hardly knowing who they were. Euthanasia,
which is perfectly legal to “put down” a terminally ill or suffering animal, is
illegal for human beings (we’re also animals!) almost uniformly throughout the
United States, the Land of the Free.
Probably the purist expression of freedom should be one’s
“right” to make decisions about their own life (and its ending). Why do our
politicians allow doctors, clerics, insurance companies, and drug companies to
make this all-important decision for us? I guess I’m just too old to understand
this.
Our physical environment is humanity’s most precious
resource. And, yet, our government does so little to protect it.
My background is in planning; i.e. looking far forward,
determining trends, examining alternative outcomes, and devising solutions…not
as much for our generation but, rather, for our descendants. Society needs
people who do this, and it is a proper, and almost indispensable, function of
government. Responsible political leaders must be looking three or four chess
moves in advance, while the populous is focused on the here and now. Society
cannot afford political and governmental myopia.
And, yet, as my life nears its end, I am amazed and saddened
that our government is focusing on immediate economic gratification rather than
facing and significantly addressing climate change caused by human actions. The
proof of the problem is overwhelming, the outlook is bleak, and the urgency to
do something significant is real, yet our government would rather pretend there
is no problem, attack our climate scientists, and purposely attempt to thwart
serious efforts by almost all other countries to make a difference in this
matter. Why are politicians gobbling up the disinformation on this issue? Why
are our citizens, for the most part, not insisting that our government take a
leadership role?
Sad to say, but it’s probably because modern society is not
as serious as my generation or my parents’. “Live for Today!” seems to be the
motto.
Problem-solving has gone out of style in this country. It is
easier to blame someone for a problem than to actually do something about it,
and it’s easier to kick the can down the road than to pick it up. “Let the next
guy handle it” seems to be the answer.
Or, like the current Administration, just pretend the
problem doesn’t exist. (Or, sadly worse, spend time and gobs of money attacking
problems that don’t exist.)
Sharp young people with energy and ideas don’t want anything
to do with government. I notice that almost all of the candidates running for
President in 2020 are old farts like me. Where are the young lions, like Teddy
Roosevelt and John F. Kennedy? Why can’t one of our experienced, creative
C.E.O.’s like Bill Gates or Jeff Bezos give it a shot? Why must we voters
always have to choose between a bunch of septuagenarians peddling old ideas and
pie-in-the-sky solutions?
Speaking of old gasbags, I just heard the news that popular radio
broadcaster Rush Limbaugh has advanced lung cancer. I wouldn’t wish that fate
on anyone. I’m probably next.
Limbaugh has been the loudest voice of conservative
Republicans for probably 40 years, back when the terms “conservative” and
“Republican” actually meant something in a positive sense. Fiscal
responsibility, balanced budgets, and strong commitment to our military
alliances were cornerstones of the conservative Republican platform.
Back in the 1980’, Limbaugh would spend his entire broadcast
each day laying into “tax and spend” Democrats and “liberals” who were
mollycoddling the Russians. He was the Senator Joe McCarthy of our generation,
identifying dastardly plots right and left. Limbaugh orchestrated a 30-year
campaign against Hillary Clinton, beginning when she was a governor’s wife,
accusing her of all manner of skullduggery, cronyism, and, even, murder. Even
now, when the defeated lady is retired from politics, Limbaugh continues to
lambaste her for imagined scandalous acts.
I think it was Rush Limbaugh who elevated the term “liberal”
to dirty word status in America.
It was as if Limbaugh was denigrating education,
particularly a well-rounded one. And, he probably was, as he didn’t graduate
from college, and his target audience was a vast horde of ill-educated
“redneck” listeners who were mad about such things as gun control, abortion,
taxes, non-Caucasians, regulating Bureaucrats, uppity women, and anything else
he could blame on those pointy-headed, “liberal” Democrats.
I guess “liberal” was simply his term for anything that he
didn’t consider “conservative”.
Limbaugh was awarded a Presidential Medal of Freedom last week for helping America regress back into the Dark Ages of shortsightedness, spending like drunk sailors, and hatred of anything that isn’t pasty white. I guess that’s what “conservatism” has come to mean.
Who knows where this country is headed? We’ve got a
narcissistic bully winging it in the White House, surrounded by a third-rate
crew of sycophants who pretend that they don’t see and hear the damage being
done. And, on the other hand, we have the Democratic opposition which doesn’t
seem to be offering any alternatives that are novel or substantive, and whose
Presidential candidates are unexciting.
The recent Iowa Democratic primary caucuses were bungled by
Party officials there, which doesn’t reflect too well on the Democratic Party “leadership”.
The candidates that did well in Iowa are a gay mayor of a Midwest town and an
80-year old Socialist who makes run-of-the-mill “liberals” look like old time
conservatives.
President Trump must be drooling in anticipation of the 2020
election; it’s his to lose.
I was raised in a staunch conservative Republican family; my
Dad was a Barry Goldwater fanatic in 1964. However, in Presidential elections, I
typically try to see what the country needs at the time (i.e. if it’s too far
conservative, I vote for the more liberal candidate; if we’ve swung too far to
the left, I go right). I try not to get too focused on personalities, but,
rather, on the realistic policy initiatives that the candidates favor.
I have voted in Presidential elections since 1968 and I liked
Nixon, Nixon, Carter, Reagan, Reagan, Bush (Sr.), Clinton, Clinton, Bush (Jr.),
Bush (Jr.), Obama, Obama, Clinton. So, thus far I’ve voted for 7 Republicans
and 6 Democrats, all of whom prevailed in the election except Hillary Clinton.
I probably would have voted Republican in 2016 except that Donald
Trump had a bunch of goofy ideas, pandered to racists and religious nut jobs, and
went out of his way to insult vast swaths of American citizens. Hillary Clinton
was offering four more years of Obama-style leadership, which wasn’t
earth-shaking. The government probably needed to swing to the right, but I just
couldn’t hold my nose strong enough to vote for Trump.
Predictably, Donald Trump has been an embarrassment as President. As expected, his Administration has reversed decades of “liberal” policy, which was needed, to some extent. However, in the process of running the government like an arm of his private Trump Organization, he has undermined our Constitution and acted publicly like a petulant juvenile. He might be the most corrupt President of all time, and he publicly flaunts it. It’s almost scary to think what excesses he might display if elected to a second term.
A Democratic Party nomination of Bernie Sanders would be a
Trump wet dream; the President wouldn’t even have to campaign for re-election.
The same is probably true if a gay man is nominated. As Jerry Seinfeld used to
say, “Not that there’s anything wrong with that!”, but, really, all of Trump’s
MAGA folks and most of the other people of faith in the U.S. would probably place
undue focus on Mayor Buttigieg’s sexual preferences. So, those two potential
nominations spell a catastrophic defeat for Democrats in 2020.
Who else is there? Ex-V.P. Joe Biden, a couple of ex-lawyer/female
Senators (Warren and Klobuchar), and two billionaires (Steyer and Bloomberg).
I have not followed the early campaigns of these folks. Biden has some baggage and seems too old for the job, Bloomberg’s seems to be a vanity campaign, and I’m generally distrustful of District Attorneys (i.e. Klobuchar’s old job). Warren and Steyer seem like smart, decent people with scruples; I might consider them if they get nominated.
But, if Trump faces off against Sanders, I’m stayin’ home.