When Adults Leave the Room!

Good managers lead. Bad managers push. Good managers set achievable goals. Bad managers shoot the moon with no plan. Good managers create a culture of achievement, respect, and trust. Bad managers create a culture of fear, unpredictability, and forced loyalty. Good managers hire people smarter than themselves and use that brainpower to move mountains. Bad managers think they know more than anyone else does and micromanage. You seldom see the lack of managerial skill, ill behavior, and lack of cohesiveness that our national government exhibited the week before Christmas, 2018.

The government shut down, based mostly on temper tantrums. The President announced troop withdrawal from Syria and Afghanistan by Tweet, after little or no discussion with the Departments of Defense, State, and our allies, especially the Kurds. The resignation of the Secretary of Defense sent shock waves across the world because he was "the last adult in the room." Markets plunged on the news. Our adversaries publicly rejoiced while allies panicked.  

Since, at least, the first day of the primary season leading up to the 2016 election, people knew that Donald Trump was a very different candidate. He had never managed a government entity, was reported to dislike security briefings and didn’t read much. His was a transactional world. His was a relationship world. His was about the art of the deal. He lived in a zero-sum world. The people elected him in spite of his limitations or because of them.

The real world is nuanced. Personal relationships are important but not as important as the factors that determine the relationship between nation-states: safety, security, trade, and protection from known enemies. And yes, sometimes national values need protection. Because a President has a good relationship with the president of another country doesn’t mean that the two nations have a good relationship.  

Most world leaders tolerated the uncertainty emanating from the White House because they knew that there were a few people, adults, who could keep it from making bad decisions. General Kelly, his Chief-of-Staff was one of the adults. He is leaving. Rex Tillerson, Secretary of State was another. He is gone. General Mattis is gone. By outward appearances, only the sycophants remain to manage the country.

Soon after his victory in the 2016 election, the President-Elect told his aides to think of each presidential day as an episode in a television show in which he vanquishes rivals.[i] A retrospective of the last two years comes into clearer focus when considered as a daily battle, a daily need to win, a daily need to put people down, the daily need to create news about one’s self, or to bolster a fringe element of society.

Some might say that we need not worry about the lack of adults in the room since their influence has been negligible anyway. General Kelly came to the White House with the expectation that he could bring order and rationality to the place. He couldn’t. General Mattis was not consulted on many military decisions. Rex Tillerson wasn’t consulted all that much about foreign policy and failed to reorganize the State Department. So why worry?

The 2018 mid-term election gave us a hint that the American public can only take so much of one person’s daily messaging and diatribes. Whoever heard of a president scolding the Attorney General in public, in a tweet? Whoever heard of major allies finding out about our war plans in a tweet? Which president tried to use the AG’s office for a personal lawyer instead of the nation’s justice department? Which president has threatened to fire the head of the Federal Reserve Bank, an independent agency over which a president has little authority and no influence?

We should worry, in my opinion. Forget about serious policy differences between parties and party leadership. That is why we have political parties. We should worry about the fact that our elected leader is not an effective leader; rather than unite, he divides; rather than compromise, he grandstands; rather than treat people with respect, he debases; rather than honor the office, he focuses on himself. Many people are glad that he is what he is. They wanted someone who would shake up the system, “drain the swamp.” Fine and good, but that should be a process of well thought out strategies, planned steps, wide communications, and consensus building. We should worry that no more adults will step forward to fill the void.

---

[i] Haberman, Thrush, Baker – “Inside Trump’s Hour-by-Hour Battle for Self-Preservation” – NYT December 9, 2017 

Gentler & Kinder

The nation stood still, flags at half-mast. Banks closed, markets shut down, government offices stood empty. George H.W. Bush, forty-first President of the United States had died. President Trump declared Wednesday, December 5, 2018, a National Day of Mourning. For a few days, we became, what “41” had hoped for us; we were a gentler and kinder nation.

The news of the President’s death was not a surprise. Failing health was visible for a couple of years. Seven months before, Barbara Bush, his partner for 73 years passed away. The events that followed showed the extent of the planning that had gone into this week of mourning. President Trump’s immediate proclamation, while he was at the G20 meeting in South America, was soothing and eloquent. Air Force One was sent to Houston to transport the body and the family back to Washington. The Military’s preparation for the reception of the casket, for transportation to the Capital, for standing guard, and for other events was precise.

No one would be surprised if public memories faded in the twenty-five years since he had been in office, but they evidently did not. Lying-in-State in the rotunda of our magnificent Capital, scores of thousands of people stood in line for hours, in freezing weather, to spend a few minutes viewing the casket. It lay on the same catafalque used for the viewing of Abraham Lincoln, and only 32 others in the history of the nation.

The memorial service at the National Cathedral in D.C. was a combination of reverent Episcopal liturgy and civic ritual. Attended by 2,000 or so invited guess, it was very much a public ceremony for the country. The “private” service at St. Mark’s in Houston was a more personal funeral for his family, and his friends. From Houston, the President went by train to his library on the campus of Texas A&M for burial. The seventy-mile route was lined by thousands upon thousands of people wanting a last glimpse, wanting to say goodbye, wanting their children to savor the experience, wanting the family to know how much they respected “41.”

The theme of the week, peeking through all of the military ceremony and liturgies, was palpable: family, honor, and service. He served his country well and history books tell the story. He was a man who prized family, who embedded in them a sense of duty, for to whom much is given… He taught constantly, he gathered the growing clan at every chance and he let them know they were loved.

George H.W.Bush was one of the country’s most prepared servants: decorated war hero, Member of Congress, Envoy to China, Director of the CIA, Ambassador to the U.N. and Vice President. He is thought to be the most effective and important one-term President in our history. He presided over the downfall of the Soviet Union, the reunification of Germany, freed Kuwait from occupation, and much more. Political accomplishments, however, no matter how high or how important, pale in comparison to how he will be remembered in the end: he was a “good man.”

There is no higher achievement.

The Reds and the Blues

Look at any red and blue map of the U.S. It will show which political party dominates in each county across the country. It will also show the extent of the political and cultural divide of the nation. The mid-term election results are clear. A large number of Republican districts flipped in favor of the Democrats who will control the House. The Senate Republicans picked up seats, continuing their majority. The map won't tell the whole story, but it is a start.

If we allocated congressional seats based on territory instead of population, the Democrats would not stand a chance, even in California. But, we don’t. It is normal for the President’s party to lose big in the mid-term elections. It happens to the best of them. What is so striking, however, is the continued divide between the heartland and the two coasts, between the rural areas and the metropoles, between the highly educated and the less highly educated sections of the country, between the highly skilled work sites and those losing jobs in low skilled areas.

The new Congress will seat over 100 women, 25 will be under 40 years old, and two will be under 30 years old. The Congress will be the most diverse in history, with the first Native American women, about 27% people of color, and Muslims. The average age of House members will be 10 years younger than the last Congress.[i]   Change is on the way.

Large metropolitan areas and the ex-urbs’ issues differ from those of the heartland. The center of the country and rural areas in general still does not think that they have their fair share of the American dream. The question remains about how well the coastal Democrats can relate to and do something for those in the middle of the country and rural areas. On January 3, 2019, the slog will begin anew, but to what end.

A recent national survey confirmed the depth of the divide:  most Democrats think the Republicans are racists and sexists and most Republicans think Democrats are ignorant.[ii] That does not bode well for attempts to bring the nation together to work for the common good.

Mid-America, bombarded with the identity politics of the coasts, which it dislikes, and change that is too rapid to absorb is straining local institutions: schools, churches, and civic groups cannot keep up, so they dig in to preserve what once was. They could use some jobs. Amazon, however, chose to put their two new “headquarters” facilities in coastal metropolitan areas: Crystal City, Virginia, across from DC, and in Long Island City in Queens, New York. Those two facilities expect to hire 25,000 employees each. To be fair, its unlikely Amazon could find 50,000 high tech employees in one spot in the heartland. This continues a trend. Seventy-two percent of all new jobs created since the great recession has been in dense urban areas.[iii] In smaller cities, employment opportunity has decreased.

The population spread across the country divides us even more. Nine states account for 50% of the population.[iv] The 82 Senators, who represent the other 50% of the population, control what happens in the Senate. As a result, DC accomplishes little and respect for major institutions continues to dwindle.[v]

Cable-news doesn’t even try to hide its bias or its agenda of maintaining the divide. Sean Hannity, when discussing the late-vote counting in some states on his Fox News show implied that ballots still to be counted were “found” by corrupt officials trying to ensure a Democratic victory. When referring to the Senate races, he stated; “We won those races.”[vi] He is the “journalist” who spoke at Trump campaign rallies during the mid-terms. Hannity is not the only person creating the divide. Lawrence O’Donnell on MSNBC is as strong in his partisanship for the left as Hannity is for the right. Oddly, CNN appears to be the middle-of-the-road cable news channel.

The Democratic leadership already has a list of 85-100 investigations into the Trump administration. Those few that deal with corruption and malfeasance are legitimate. The party, however, is acting like a sore winner. They give every indication that they want to make Trump suffer rather than accomplishing positive things for the country. If they have any interest in winning the 2020 election they need to deliver practical programs to the people who need help. I doubt that an “I hate Trump” agenda will win the day.

It would be helpful if Congress concentrated on rebuilding the infrastructure of the country, which is falling apart more and more every day. Bridges need rebuilding, the grid is antiquated, the water and sewer systems are crumbling, the roads are giant potholes, and transportation systems inadequate. The nation’s healthcare and education systems need to catch up with the rest of the industrial world. We need a national strategy for AI. These types of programs put people to work, increase tax revenues, improve local economies and help us keep our competitive edge in the global economy.

The majority of people can get behind these types of programs. Action in these areas will show that those inside the beltway can achieve bipartisanship and can help the heartland. I suspect that the new, younger, and more diverse members of Congress will demand action from the old guard in leadership positions. Some have already protested outside leadership offices. The next two years should be interesting times.

---

[i] NPR -11/08/2018

[ii] Axios – Survey Monkey Online Poll 10/30-11/2/2018 – 11/12/2018

[iii] Clara Hendrickson, Mark Muro, William Galston – Countering the geography of discontent: Strategies for left behind places – Brookings Institute – November 2018

[iv] California, Texas, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York, Georgia, and Florida – US Census, 2000

[v] Confidence in Institutions – Annual Survey – Gallup – 2018

[vi] YouTube – Fox News – Hannity Show – 11/12/2018

The West Wing!

The West Wing is the center of world power. Its inhabitants demonstrate good or ill, compassion or indifference, truth or fiction, power or impotence, take the moral high ground, or demonstrate obstructionism.

When Nathan Wyeth[i] designed the Oval Office, an appendage of the West Wing of the White House, he used the oval Blue Room as a design concept. It is unique and meant to intimidate those who enter.

The room is a symbol of our country, its power, and its influence in the world. Some call it a sacred space. During most of my growing-up years and since, the room’s occupants have treated it that way, demanding honor and respect for the presidency.

I find myself going back to that place often.

The West Wing is where I find solace and think about what could be. I especially favor the episodes that show the Oval Office with grown-ups acting in grown-up ways[ii].

 I find, to the amusement of many of my friends, that one or two episodes each week quiet the nerves and provide a needed break from the fulminations that emanate from this sacred inner sanctum. The play is better than reality.

Presidents get the blame for what goes wrong during their tenure and they get credit for what goes well, whether the result is because of their policies or those of past administrations. Given that rule of thumb, President Trump gets credit for one of the lowest unemployment rates in decades, for the stock market at an all-time high, for putting two nominees on the Supreme Court, and for building a solid base of supporters. The mounting deficit will be a negative in a few months, the result of a massive tax cut. He maintains a base of supporters that is strong if not very large. He is reducing regulations in spite of science that says he should not. The country is divided on his priorities. My observation is that the Oval Office changed past Presidents. Simply walking into the room would seem to overwhelm them with the enormous responsibility they shouldered.

Politics is a bloody contact sport. Campaigns are brutal. Once elected to the office of the President of the United States, however, people expect the President, difficult as it may be, to become “presidential.” It is hard to define “presidential” but you know it when you see it. I have not seen in lately, especially in the Oval Office. Today, the sacred space is treated like a TV set. Actors and reality show-people parade in and out for sound-bite moments; the stage is set for Executive-Order signings and photo ops.

Did other presidents use the Oval Office as a stage? Yes, but …

I wish our President would watch a couple of episodes of West Wing each week. It could change his perception of the presidency and might even change how he behaves in those sacred spaces.

---

[i] www.capitol.gov

[ii] West Wing – 155 Episodes – 1999-2006 - NBC

Enemy of the People

“It is the press, above all, which wages a positively fanatical and slanderous struggle, tearing down everything which can be regarded as a support of national independence, cultural elevation, and the economic independence of the nation.”[i]

“The press is the enemy of the people.” Donald Trump lashed out at the press in the last few days, again, as the nation and the world grappled with the largest terrorist attack against the Jewish people in the history of the nation. In New York City, the Empire State Building went dim in honor of those killed in Pittsburg. In Paris, the Eiffel Tower went dim. Across the world, there were prayers for the families of the lost. In the U.S., there was politics as usual.

The day after another pipe bomb was delivered to CNN, the President tweeted that “There is great anger in our Country caused in part by inaccurate, and even fraudulent, reporting of the news. The Fake News Media, the true Enemy of the People, must stop the open & obvious hostility & report the news accurately & fairly. That will do much to put out the flame...”

We could be gracious and assume that the President and his minions do not understand the gravity of their discourse. We could believe that the President does not understand the history of the term. We could lay the actions of the administration to poor timing or lack of sensitivity. We could, but it is none of the above.

Enemy of the people goes back to the time of Nero. During the Reign of Terror in France, the government used “ennemi du peuple” to describe those who disagreed with it. The Third Reich called Jews the sworn enemy of the people. Mao called the press the enemy of the people. Stalin used the press to teach the populists to believe in his government, and those who did not agree wore the title of an enemy of the people.

There is, to be sure, a lot of fake news in newspapers with agendas. Human Events comes to mind, as well as the Weekly Standard, National Review, the Washington Times or the New York Post. Social media simply boils with agenda driven lies. However, the major newspapers who report the news accurately, in a democracy, cannot be called the enemy of the people. It is the role of the press, the Fourth Estate, to afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted.[ii] When they do their job well, they are not the enemy of the people.

To be sure, we are a few days from a significant mid-term election that will decide the tenor of the country for the next two to six years. It is legitimate to rile up the base and get out the vote. It is legitimate to work with all your energy to win the election. It is not OK to do whatever it takes to win.

In a period of national mourning, we depend on the President to be the Consoler in Chief. In a week when fifteen or more bombs were sent to leaders and prominent institutions across the country, we had no one to console us because our leader was on the campaign trail complaining about how the wind had blown his hair, or tweeting about the pitching changes in the World Series game. Any other President, of either party, would have called for at least three days of mourning and cessations of campaigning. They did it in past years. Ours, today, continues the campaign in earnest, building up hatred against those who disagree with him.

It should never be forgotten that the people of Germany elected Adolph Hitler to be their Chancellor. Once in power, he rallied the populist into a frenzy that allowed for the extermination of millions of the enemies of the state. The people of Russia allowed Lenin and Stalin to come to power and to eliminate millions of the enemies of the state.

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
     Because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
     Because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
     Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.[iii]

---

[i] Adolf Hitler – Mein Kampf - 1925

[ii] Finley Peter Dunne – Mr. Dooley in Peace and War - 1898

[iii] Martin Niemoller – First They Came - 1946

Judicial Temperament

At heart, I am a history teacher, irrespective of all else I have done since those early years. I am a political junkie too. I try to moderate my views but sometimes I stray. A few weeks ago, I spent most of a day watching the first Senate Judiciary Committee’s hearing on Judge Kavanaugh’s suitability for the Supreme Court. He already serves on the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. (Ironically, Merrick Garland, President Obama’s nominee to the Supreme Court, which the Senate Majority Leader derailed, is Chief Judge of that Circuit.) Most nominees to the Court are well vetted, but it still didn’t go well for Brett Kavanaugh.

The President nominates candidates for the federal judiciary “by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.”[i] The Senate Committee on the Judiciary has responsibility for questioning nominees, considering information in the background checks conducted by the FBI and its own investigators and voting to either reject or forward the nominations to the full Senate for a vote. The quest to determine basic competence and integrity often becomes a deep dive into party politics.

The American Bar Association, the traditional arbiter of the competence of the nominees for the federal courts, considers several characteristics in its evaluation: compassion, decisiveness, open-mindedness, sensitivity, courtesy, patience, freedom from bias and commitment to equal justice. Throughout their deliberations, they consider judicial temperament.[ii]

 Professor Jeffrey Rosen, one of the most important scholars of the Supreme Court[iii] writes about judicial temperament this way: “The most important predictors of success on the Supreme Court are not academic brilliance, philosophical consistency, or methodological ambition.” Successful justices are open to compromise, set aside ideology, and get along well with their colleagues.

Judge Kavanaugh spent hours before the Senate Judiciary Committee answering questions and rebutting innuendo about his fitness. Frankly, he did a good job of defending himself. There was little question that his nomination would be sent to the full Senate for confirmation. Then the other shoe dropped.

During the two weeks following Kavanaugh’s initial testimony before the Judiciary Committee, a letter from Dr. Christine Blasey Ford accused Kavanaugh of sexual assault during their high school years. Later, two more allegations of sexual assault and drunkenness became public. Faced with mounting public outcry and political jousting, the Chair of the Judiciary Committee was forced to re-open the hearings.

Dr. Ford’s testimony brought visible angst to the Senate majority members. Her presentation was professional and wildly credible. The nation watched transfigured and found the professor’s stinging testimony compelling. She had made her mark on the country. Judge Kavanaugh would plead his case in the afternoon. Most agreed that he needed to be credible, as well, and do it in a way that showed judicial temperament at its best.

 He opened his rebuttal in a very unusual way. “The behavior of several of the Democratic members of this committee at my hearing a few weeks ago was an embarrassment,” and then suggested that the sexual assault allegations against him from three different women were part of a vast left-wing conspiracy going back to the Clinton era.[iv] Some wrote, “Kavanaugh was not simply angry; he was unhinged.”[v]

Judge Kavanaugh had suffered a shattering bruise to his reputation: top of his class in high school, in college, and in law school. He was a pillar of the community, serving the homeless, coaching his daughter’s basketball team, teaching at Harvard Law and serving actively at his church. He had a right to be angry, very angry. The accusations against him were embarrassing and career breaking. From the start, he went into attack mode. His opening statement in defense of his reputation and the charges against him was strong. His exchanges with members of the minority were impolite, to the point of requiring an apology. He did everything wrong. Judicial temperament was missing, and the nation saw it on full display.

Justice Gorsuch, a conservative Trump appointee, had had his difficulties with the minority during his confirmation hearings. His seat on the bench, however, was simply replacing conservative Justice Scalia with another conservative. Then Justice Kennedy, the swing vote on the court, resigned. This was now the stuff of historical proportions. Kavanaugh sitting at the bar would change the course of American jurisprudence for decades. In a divided nation, the appointment would not go down easy.

We witnessed one of the most historic days in the history of the Senate. Hoping for a rush to judgment and a quick floor vote, the Chair of the committee called the roll. It came down to one Senator who managed to work out an agreement with the minority side. He would vote to send the nomination to the floor only if he had an assurance that the majority party would agree to reopen the FBI background check to search for more evidence. It likely doesn’t matter what the FBI finds in its investigation. The Senate, so split in its view about the country, in its distrust of other members, in its penchant for a more conservative court, and in its fear of Donald Trump’s ability to persuade his base of voters in the fall election, that few will change their vote.

By the standards of judicial temperament, however, Judge Kavanaugh’s partisanship, lack of civility, and visible disdain for those who disagree with him failed the fundamental test for office. If confirmed to the highest court in the land, the institution will be changed forever. People will no longer see it as the blindfolded holder of the scales of justice but a highly politicized institution. It will change the country’s view of justice, impartial courts, the rule of law and its fundamental ethos.

Teachers will have to develop a new narrative when they teach Civics, when they teach about our being a nation of laws; when they teach about the basic values of our experiment. I hope that they won’t have to teach that democracy has run its course.

---

[i] Article II, Section 2 – Constitution of the United States

[ii] American Bar Association – 2016 – Committee that evaluates judicial appointments

[iii] Ellen McGirt – Fortune Magazine- September 28, 2018

[iv] Stephane Mengimer – Mother Jones – September 27, 2018

[v] Howard Ross – USA Today – September 28, 2018

Dignity

I like pomp! Throw in some circumstance and I am a happy fellow. I’m sure it’s a leftover from my early days as an altar boy, in a parish that pulled out all the stops almost every Sunday. It was part of the French-Canadian tradition carried to extremes: lots of candles, lace, and bejeweled vestments, and incense rising to the rooftop. Today, we would call it “high church.”

We saw pomp and circumstance the last weekend in August when America laid to rest one of its great warriors and statesman. We experienced quiet but uplifting ceremonies when he lay in the rotunda of his home-state capital. We experienced the military reception of the hero-senator when his casket arrived in D.C. We saw John McCain become only the 31^st person to lie in state in the rotunda of the nation’s capital, on the same catafalque that held Abraham Lincoln. The funeral service in the National Cathedral featured talks by two former presidents. Then, there was the burial at the Naval Academy. Dignity overshadowed the pomp.

We don’t have an overabundance of dignity in our political world anymore. John McCain, however, brought together people of different political parties to speak with each other. He brought together people of different religions to pray together. He brought together people with strongly divergent philosophies and convictions, and they walked together. There was dignity in the prayers, the songs and hymns, and the homilies. There was dignity in the stories and the humor. It was as if the nation needed a respite from the lack of civility in the last few years and the lack of dignity that is palpable.

President Obama quoted from Hemmingway, McCain’s favorites: “Today is only one day in all the days that will ever be. But what will happen in all the other days that ever come can depend on what you do today.”[i] No matter our disagreement or agreement with McCain’s policies, his methods, or his voting record, he made every day count. He pursued truth and spoke truth to power. His was a life which knew heroism, which knew service to country, which believed in the founding documents and which was determined to make every day count. The nation stopped for a few days and expressed its affection for a life well lived. And, it did it with dignity.

The talking heads gave their interpretation of the events. For some, it was a needed dose of how life once was. For others, it was too much for someone willing to compromise with, or even befriend someone from across the aisle. It was both really. Meghan McCain’s eulogy included “The America of John McCain has no need to be made great again because America was always great.[ii] More than one commentator noted that that was true for those in the cathedral. When the cameras panned the congregation it showed mostly older and mostly white well-to-do people. They looked like the stereotypical power elites of D.C., and they were. The jab was directed at the absent President Trump, who was not invited. Some noted that the gathering didn’t represent Trump’s strong base of supporters anyway. They are not part of the power elite class and resent the actions of that cast of citizens. The tweeting quickly followed.

My experience was, perhaps naively, that those elected to office, those to whom we gave the reins of power, those we entrusted to work for the good of the country, did it with fervor, did it with conviction, debated the issues well, took a vote, and then went out for a drink with each other. In the end, they were on the same team. The ideology was in support of the country, its constitution, and its traditions, not the party.

This rupture in our approach to governing slits the country, and we know from experience that “a house divided against itself, cannot stand.”[iii] Neither can a house lacking in dignity and civility.  

Maybe my propensity for pomp and circumstance drives my appreciation for the dignity John McCain brought back to America, even if only for one weekend. I suspect, however, that the visuals of that long weekend will remain with us for a long time and that we will demand more civility and dignity from our leaders, at all levels of government. We have seen what goodness and dignity look like. We need more of it.

---

[i] Earnest Hemingway – For Whom the Bell Tolls - 1940

[ii] Town and Country –September 1, 2018 – Lauren Hubbard

[iii] Abraham Lincoln – June 16, 1858 – Springfield, Illinois