We Vote for People Not Issues (or we should)

Our democracy encourages, and it’s critical that we have, a vigorous debate about the issues of the day during the campaign and before the election.  The candidates can and should tell us what their plans are for the future, and what their positions are on the issues.  However, after the election, candidates need to remember that they represent and serve not just the voters who voted for them, but also the voters who didn’t.  In many ways the hardest work begins after the election.

VOTE FOR THE MOST QUALIFIED PERSON. 

My post on July 29, 2014, “Quality and Qualified” listed the following personal attributes that we should look for in legislative and congressional candidates

“Problem solver and action oriented, detail minded and pragmatic, consensus and team builder, trustworthy and credible, and service minded and unselfish.”

That same post listed listed the following personal attributes for President.  The same list would apply to governors of the various states.

“Vision, charisma, pragmatism, consensus building, trust or credibility.”

Whether it’s Washington DC or in the various states, we need the best and the brightest working for us solving the toughest problems in history.  Let’s elect the “cream of the crop.”

Spread the word!  Tell your friends about the Voting Alert Beacons!

. . .  remember that America’s best days aren’t behind her.   America’s best days are ahead of her.  They always have been and always will be.

Dave

Copyright © 2014 by David William Wygant. All rights reserved.  

QUALITY AND QUALIFIED

It matters little how any of us feel about specific issues, if the people we elect don’t have certain important and key personal attributes and skills.  This is true whether we’re electing a new President or members of Congress.  We need to also remember that the attributes and skills required to be an effective President are different (but complimentary) from the attributes and skills possessed by a successful Congressperson.

In my post on January 11th of this year, I highlighted Robert Dallek’s course, TO LEAD A NATION, The Presidency in the Twentieth Century, in which he discusses the reasons why some of the Presidents of the Twentieth Century (Theodore Roosevelt through Ronald Reagan) rose to greatness, while most of us can’t remember who the others were.  

Mr. Dallek identifies several things that the “great Presidents” consistently score high in.  This list of six items includes:  Vision, charisma, pragmatism, consensus building, trust or credibility, and luck.

Before we vote in November this year, and elect a new House of Representatives and one third of the Senate, what if we identify the attributes and skills that a member of Congress should bring to the job.  I propose that the list for a Congressperson includes items in five areas:  Problem solver and action oriented, detail minded and pragmatic, consensus and team builder, trustworthy and credible, and service minded and unselfish.  This list also complements Mr. Dallek’s list for Presidents.  Wouldn’t it be nice if the President and Congress could work together no matter what party they might belong to?  Aren’t personal attributes and skills a good place to start so that at a basic level they will all feel like they want to work together.  

All of us have jobs where our personal attributes and skills were the first things considered when we were hired.  Why would we want to do anything different when we vote (hire) for the people we are asking to do the work that needs to be done for America?

No matter how we feel on the issues, let’s elect quality people who can govern, and want to do the difficult work of governing. As voters, our goal should be to elect a Congress that we can give an approval rating above 20%.  If we elect quality and qualified people to represent us, they will know how to help us sort out the issues.

Remember, when we step into the voting booth in November, lets vote for people who are problem solvers and action oriented, detail minded and pragmatic, consensus and team builders, trustworthy and credible, and service minded and unselfish.

Spread the word!  Tell your friends about the Voting Alert Beacons!

. . .  remember that America’s best days aren’t behind her.   America’s best days are ahead of her.  They always have been and always will be.

Dave

Copyright © 2014 by David William Wygant. All rights reserved.  

Voter Practice for the Next Election

As I’ve written before, the Voting Alert Beacons are basic and easy to understand principles for voters to use to maximize the power and effectiveness of their individual vote.  Connected to this idea is the notion that we should cast our votes with courage and confidence.  Courage that even as we vote individually we vote together if everyone votes.  Confidence, that when we all vote, the best decisions will emerge.

As another election cycle approaches, this is a good time to practice two very important voter skills.  Those skills are:  1) the ability to ask questions, and 2) the ability to listen.  Later, in another post, I will go deeper into the basic candidate skills as laid out by the Voter Alert Beacons.

SYRIA CHALLENGE PRACTICE PROBLEM

For this practice session, let’s talk about Syria.  Over the past several weeks, as you’ve watched your news source there are a number of prominent headlines that have talked about Syria.

• Approximately a year ago, President Obama very publicly declared that if Syria used chemical weapons, they would be crossing a “red line,” and there would be serious consequences.
• Now, the United States is sure Syria has used chemical weapons on its own people.
• UN inspectors have investigated and their results will be released in several weeks.
• Both Russia and China intend to vote no in the UN Security Council to any Syria punishment.
• The British Parliament has voted no to any military involvement with the US in Syria.
• It seems President Obama has decided that something needs to be done militarily.  “A shot needs to be fired across Syria’s bow.”  Now he is looking for support abroad and at home.
• The President has decided he will wait for a vote from Congress on whether Syria should be bombed or not.

Are there any questions we voters should be asking?

 QUESTIONS

It seems like common sense and fair that we voters should expect that anyone who we vote into national office should have skills in four basic areas:  Visioning, Strategic Planning, Leadership, and Team Building.  Given the details of this practice problem, what questions should we now be asking?

Some questions:

1. Given the lessons of history, is there anything that has happened in Syria and the surrounding countries which couldn’t have been predicted?  Is it a surprise that Assad wants to stay in power?  Is it a surprise that he would use his substantial military to destroy any opposition to his rule?  Because he has chemical weapons, doesn’t it seem highly likely he would use them?
2. Given the geopolitical and economic interests of Russia and China, is it surprising that they tend to work against taking effective action in Syria to bring peace and stop the bloodshed?
3. Why did President Obama think that his statement about using chemical weapons and crossing a red line would in fact stop Syria from using those weapons?  What does it mean that Syria used chemical weapons in spite of the “red line?”
4. Because the events in Syria, including chemical weapons, were predictable wouldn’t it have been a good use of visioning and strategic planning to ask Congress to have a “red line” debate and vote before making the red line declaration?  Then, would the “red line” be so easy for Syria to ignore?  Wouldn’t a little preplanning in terms of “what if” have been a great thing to do with our allies too.
5. A broader question now might be whether the President has stepped back to look at the Middle East as a whole to see what other red lines might exist.  Are there finished strategic plans that can be called upon and implemented when needed?  Has the consulting and communication with Congress and our allies been done ahead of time so action can be taken when certain things happen?  
6. It seems that the military is prepared to implement a number of options, if needed.  Why is leadership in the White House and in Congress so unprepared to make a decision and to act?
7. The big question overall is why does it seem like we’re so unprepared?  What if our leaders had the skills of visioning, strategic planning, leadership and team building, would we be better prepared?

PART OF THE ANSWER TO ALL OF THE ABOVE QUESTIONS

Sadly, instead of focusing on answers to the questions above, most of our elected public officials are more interested in planning political strategies and winning political battles around issues that are only partisan because they want them to be.  

As voters, it’s time for us to use the Voting Alert Beacon principles to elect leaders who will work for us as individuals, and the collective we call America.  In terms of our national interests and defense, it would also be great if our leaders knew what the words “Be Prepared” meant, and could take the required actions at the required times.

. . .  remember that America’s best days aren’t behind her.   America’s best days are ahead of her.  They always have been and always will be.

Dave

Copyright © 2013 by David William Wygant. All rights reserved.