In a few short weeks we will elect four school board members. This represents a majority of the entire board. The composition of the board could change dramatically as a result of the election. Keep in mind it is a mid-summer election that generally has very low turnout. As few as 800 votes could be cast in any one district. That means as few as four hundred and one voters will decide who serves on the board. Your vote will count.
School board elections usually get very little attention but I would argue that they might be the most important elected positions over the long term for any community. The health and welfare of a community can be linked directly to the quality of its education system. A strong school board leads to a strong superintendent, that leads to strong principals, that leads to strong teachers, that ultimately leads to strong schools.
With this election in mind I have a few questions (and a little commentary) I would like to ask each candidate. I hope you add to this list and ask your own questions. A school board should be made up of leaders who can help the superintendent develop the vision. In addition, they can help develop the local framework on which the system will be measured. Hopefully these questions can serve as a primer as you think about who you want to support and vote for in a few short weeks.
What is the purpose of the school board? I hope the answer sounds a lot like this: A school board is not another layer of management. A school board’s only employee is the Superintendent of Schools. The Board hires and manages the superintendent by setting the goals for the district (school system) and for the superintendent. It is the superintendent’s responsibility to create the strategies and initiatives necessary to accomplish those goals. The board governs, and the superintendent manages.
Our school system has shown some improvement over the last few years. That is commendable. However, at the end of the day, we are at or near the state average, in the 49th worst state in the country in the country ranked 23rd (among 35 industrialized nations) in overall education. That is nothing to rest on. Every year, LaGrange High, for example, sets a goal for its self — to be the next state champion, number one. Do they reach that goal every year? Of course not, but over time they have developed a program that consistently ranks among the best in the state. Do you think that would happen if their goal each year was to be slightly better than the state average? At the end of the day the team performs better because of a unified and aspirational goal. What is your goal for our system? Specifically, how can we do better? What will you do to significantly improve our performance? Why can’t we be number one?
Based on financial projections the school budget will see deficits for years to come. Declining property values, reduced state funding and increased spending mandates will further erode projected revenues. These reductions will far exceed any cuts to the administrative staff. I am sure every candidate will state they will cut these roles. Every politician cites waste and fraud as the places to cut. However, according to the projections that will not be enough, in fact it will not be close. Given this fact, what areas will you cut to balance the budget? What is off limits? What is needed but we can no longer afford?
At what point, if any, would you consider an increase in the tax millage rate to offset the budget shortfall?
Several of the candidates are proposing a reduction in school property taxes for senior citizens? Do you support this proposal? If so why? One could argue while this is a compassionate thing to do, it is bad policy. Education benefits the entire community. It seems unfair to pick and choose who pays for it. The consumer of education is sporadic (school aged children) but the benefit is a lifetime. Following that logic, would you exclude parents without children? I would argue that the best support government — in this case the school system — can give our senior citizens is a vibrant, growing, low crime community, all of which are direct benefits of a strong education system. The leveraged effect of this type of community would far offset a small reduction in the school tax.
What is the significance of .5 percent? That is one-half of one percent. That is the number of teachers that were terminated for low performance in the years 2010-11. That represents approximately six teachers out of the entire school system of 1,100+ teachers. That number is no fluke. It was .5 percent in the 2009-10 year and only .3 percent in the 2008-09 year. While we have many, outstanding teachers, every organization has employees, in this case teachers that under perform to the extent they must be let go. I would argue no high performing organization has forced turnover that low. Teaching is real time. A child never gets that year back. We must ensure that we put the best teachers possible in front of our students every day. What is your reaction to this number? What would you do as a school board member to remove under performers from the school system?
These are but a few of the difficult issues our school board will face. Each school board member will play a key role in how well we respond to these challenges. This role is much more than ex-teachers, long time members of the community and people with good intentions. It requires outstanding leadership and vision. We have some very capable board members. There are some capable candidates running against them. Now is the time to educate yourself to make an informed decision this July. Our community depends on it.
Published June 21, 2012 LaGrange Daily News
Read more: LaGrange News
Friday, June 22, 2012
Thursday, May 03, 2012
Is Harry Reid the Real Problem?
I have found the perfect job. This job carries great prestige. It pays well.
It offers amazing retirement benefits.
It affords an enormous staff to do you beckon call. It allows you to be evaluated once, every six
years. And most importantly, if you
don’t like a certain key aspect of your job, you simply don’t have to do
it. Who wouldn’t want a job like
that?
I am talking about the Majority Leader in the
United States Senate as fulfilled by Harry Reid.
In full disclosure, during my day job, I am a
process consultant. When I encounter
problems at work my first instinct is to see if there is a process problem. The key is to drill down past the symptoms
and find the root cause. If something is
not working, then the question often boils down to two alternatives: Is the
process valid and are people following the process? Is the process broken and
does it need to be changed?
There is no doubt our political process is not
working. The President and Congress
cannot reach a consensus on virtually anything to solve the pressing issues
facing our republic. The question is:
are they following the process or does the process need to be changed? Some say the government is just too big to
manage. Others say we are just too
partisan. I say that neither of those
are the root cause.
Yes the size of the government is daunting. It is complex and bureaucratic. That has been the case of every government
since the beginning of time. Besides,
what choice do we have? To say it is
unmanageable is to admit defeat. The
size of the government is not the root cause of our problem. It is just a
symptom.
The most cited symptom is that the politicians
are just too partisan. I think this too
is a red herring. Yes, it is fair to say
we are in a partisan environment. Part
of that is a good thing. We have
partisanship because the country is evenly divided on two competing political
philosophies. However, today’s
partisanship pales compared to partisanship in our past. In the past we had fist fights, duals to the
death and slander that would make your skin crawl. We have always had partisanship and the
government still worked. Partisanship is
just another symptom.
I think the root cause is the Senate’s inability
to pass a budget. The budget is the
lynch pin in the political process that focuses the resources of the federal
government. Without it, the bureaucracy
wanders aimlessly as it has for the last three years with devastating
consequences.
Harry Reid and the Senate he leads have not
passed a budget in three years! Since
taking over the House of Representatives the Republicans have passed a budget
every year. The missing step in the
process is for the Senate to pass a budget and then the two houses of Congress
to reconcile their differences. This is
hard work. It is called governing. It is part of the basic job
description.
Everyone knows that money equals power in
Washington. What is a budget? A budget is the roadmap for how to spend the
money (i.e. power). Our Founding Fathers
were brilliant when they devised the budgetary process. The reconciliation of
the people-centric budget (the House) and state-centric budget (at our founding
Senators were not elected, rather they were appointed by Governors) brought
together two different perspectives on how to spend the money (power). Once the Congress approved a budget it went
to the President for his approval or rejection. All three groups had input and
responsibility to get a budget passed and they did so for over two hundred
years.
While some things have changed (like the
election of Senators) the process still works.
The problem is Mr. Reid refuses to follow the process. The House has passed its budget. Now the Senate must do the same. The key to breaking gridlock is the work
involved in the reconciliation. Without Mr.
Reid’s budget there is nothing to reconcile so we have gridlock and the system
fails.
President Obama complains all the time about a
do nothing Congress. The problem is he is
the leader of the Democratic Party and could instruct Mr. Reid to pass a
budget. It would be hard work but it can
and must be done. After all, it is a
basic requirement for his (their) jobs.
If they don’t want to do their jobs, there are plenty of others who
would like to give it a try.
Published in the LaGrange Daily News (April 26, 2012)
Tuesday, January 03, 2012
We need a Renewal of Responsibility
Things are never as simple as they seem. One of the most disturbing trends in America is the shrinking middle class. There can be no doubt that the middle call has taken the brunt of the great recession. These trends are too disturbing to ignore.
• The bottom 50 percent of income earners in the United States now collectively own less than 1 percent of the nation’s wealth.
• The top 10% of Americans now earn around 50% of our national income.
• Many of those who are able to get jobs are finding that they are making less money than they used to. In fact, an increasingly large percentage of Americans are working at low wage retail and service jobs.
This trend has not gone unnoticed by our politicians. From Occupy Wall Street to President Obama, this issue has been elevated in the national debate. They have identified the source of the problem as the evil one-percent. They have adopted the tried and true tactic of identifying a scapegoat to pin the masses’ problems on. There is no doubt that the top one percent have fared better during the great recession. When have the rich not done better than everyone else in bad times? To divide our nation into the good and the evil will weaken our country and will make it hard to recover from when the economy turns around. You don’t make the weak strong by making the strong weak.
The root cause of the demise of the middle class cannot be laid entirely at the feet of the evil one percent. The American middle class exploded during the 1950’s through the 1980’s. There has long been a saying “the first generation starts a business. The second generation runs it. And the third generation ruins it."
A recent editorial by Froma Harrop got me thinking. Are we now the third generation? My grandparents (the first generation) survived the great Depression, won World War Two and built the economic power of the United States. My parents (the second generation) took over and established the United States as the sole super power in the world. Now to the third generation, my generation – today’s middle class:
We grew up in relative luxury, never experiencing a depression. We were born into a country that dominated the world economically and culturally. We had it good and it showed. Like the analogous third generation of a family business we were spoiled. Prosperity was a birthright rather than something to be earned. Harrop made these observations of today’s middle class: Gone are the “mortgage burning parties” of the earlier generations, instead they continued to buy bigger homes. Gone are the downtown retailers and the family businesses on the square as the middle class left them for cheaper detergent at the big box retailers on the outskirts of town. Gone is the respect of teachers and authority that provided an education that could lead to better opportunities. I would add, gone is the sense of personal responsibility when 36 percent of Americans say that they don't contribute anything to retirement savings and a staggering 43 percent of Americans have less than $10,000 saved up for retirement.
The President should be careful how he elevates a certain group as the source of all ills for the middle class. Once a group is demonized it is hard to rehabilitate them. While the policies that disproportionately benefited the one percent may be wrong-headed it is dangerous to call the people in this group evil.
Buried in the one percent are the likes of Bill Gates and Steve Jobs who created tremendous companies whose products benefited everyone including the poor, the middle class and the one-percenters. To demonize this group is lump the good in with the bad.
In 1916 by the Rev. William J. H. Boetcker, a Presbyterian clergyman penned 10 cannots that should serve as a guide to the President and today’s middle class.
1. You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
2. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong
3. You cannot help the poor man by destroying the rich.
4. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
5. You cannot build character and courage by taking away man's initiative and independence.
6. You cannot help small men by tearing down big men.
7. You cannot lift the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer.
8. You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than your income.
9. You cannot establish security on borrowed money.
10. You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they will not do for themselves.
Many businesses have survived and thrived past the third generation. It is not easy and certainly not guaranteed. It takes a renewed sense of ownership. In other words, it will take a renewal of responsibility by all Americans working together to turn our fortunes around. Now that is a theme that would get my attention in this upcoming election.
• The bottom 50 percent of income earners in the United States now collectively own less than 1 percent of the nation’s wealth.
• The top 10% of Americans now earn around 50% of our national income.
• Many of those who are able to get jobs are finding that they are making less money than they used to. In fact, an increasingly large percentage of Americans are working at low wage retail and service jobs.
This trend has not gone unnoticed by our politicians. From Occupy Wall Street to President Obama, this issue has been elevated in the national debate. They have identified the source of the problem as the evil one-percent. They have adopted the tried and true tactic of identifying a scapegoat to pin the masses’ problems on. There is no doubt that the top one percent have fared better during the great recession. When have the rich not done better than everyone else in bad times? To divide our nation into the good and the evil will weaken our country and will make it hard to recover from when the economy turns around. You don’t make the weak strong by making the strong weak.
The root cause of the demise of the middle class cannot be laid entirely at the feet of the evil one percent. The American middle class exploded during the 1950’s through the 1980’s. There has long been a saying “the first generation starts a business. The second generation runs it. And the third generation ruins it."
A recent editorial by Froma Harrop got me thinking. Are we now the third generation? My grandparents (the first generation) survived the great Depression, won World War Two and built the economic power of the United States. My parents (the second generation) took over and established the United States as the sole super power in the world. Now to the third generation, my generation – today’s middle class:
We grew up in relative luxury, never experiencing a depression. We were born into a country that dominated the world economically and culturally. We had it good and it showed. Like the analogous third generation of a family business we were spoiled. Prosperity was a birthright rather than something to be earned. Harrop made these observations of today’s middle class: Gone are the “mortgage burning parties” of the earlier generations, instead they continued to buy bigger homes. Gone are the downtown retailers and the family businesses on the square as the middle class left them for cheaper detergent at the big box retailers on the outskirts of town. Gone is the respect of teachers and authority that provided an education that could lead to better opportunities. I would add, gone is the sense of personal responsibility when 36 percent of Americans say that they don't contribute anything to retirement savings and a staggering 43 percent of Americans have less than $10,000 saved up for retirement.
The President should be careful how he elevates a certain group as the source of all ills for the middle class. Once a group is demonized it is hard to rehabilitate them. While the policies that disproportionately benefited the one percent may be wrong-headed it is dangerous to call the people in this group evil.
Buried in the one percent are the likes of Bill Gates and Steve Jobs who created tremendous companies whose products benefited everyone including the poor, the middle class and the one-percenters. To demonize this group is lump the good in with the bad.
In 1916 by the Rev. William J. H. Boetcker, a Presbyterian clergyman penned 10 cannots that should serve as a guide to the President and today’s middle class.
1. You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.
2. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong
3. You cannot help the poor man by destroying the rich.
4. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred.
5. You cannot build character and courage by taking away man's initiative and independence.
6. You cannot help small men by tearing down big men.
7. You cannot lift the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer.
8. You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than your income.
9. You cannot establish security on borrowed money.
10. You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they will not do for themselves.
Many businesses have survived and thrived past the third generation. It is not easy and certainly not guaranteed. It takes a renewed sense of ownership. In other words, it will take a renewal of responsibility by all Americans working together to turn our fortunes around. Now that is a theme that would get my attention in this upcoming election.
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Bigotry of Low Expectations
I have thought about this editorial for a long time. It is a topic that weighs heavy on my heart and I have delayed writing it because I am afraid I will not do it justice. The nature of this subject requires a much more eloquent writer. With that said, I will ask for permission to speak freely. Look past my inability to give the topic justice and give thought to the subject I am trying to elevate.
In 1983, the seminal report on the nation’s failing education system stated that America suffered from the “soft bigotry of low expectations.” In other words we had given up on certain segments of our society’s ability to learn. That was true then for our nation and it is true today for our local community. That hurts. Before you react to that raw statement, consider these facts.
According to the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) and the CRCT testing, our community’s schools perform at or near the state average. At first blush, that would be acceptable. We are finally testing at the state average. The problem is that by virtually every standard, our state is at the bottom in educational performance.
I am not going to bore you with countless study after study that shows America’s educational performance is at the bottom of the industrialized nations and our state is at the bottom of America’s performance. That should disturb and challenge every one of us. Why are we content to perform at the state average of one of the worst performing states in the country? Why don’t we expect more from our schools and students? This complacency is well known to our education establishment.
Several years ago, I met with Dr. Ed Smith, our previous school superintendent. As we discussed the challenges he faced, he made a statement that was shocking in its honesty and consequences. He stated that due to No Child Left Behind (NCLB) testing requirements, the school system had to adapt the curriculum to ensure the highest probability to achieve success per the measures established by NCLB and the state. In doing so, he stated that the schools would have to go it alone. In other words, they could not count on the parents to be an integral part of a child’s education. They did not have time to involve the parents.
Wow, that is a damning statement. The schools cannot count on the parents to be an integral part of the child’s education. How can that be? Was Dr. Smith crazy? Was he wrong? I don’t think so. Of course there are parents who are involved and their child can get a good education in Troup county. However, this is the exception rather than the norm.
On a systemic basis our schools turn out students who will perform poorly by objective, national and international standards. Far too many will be educated to the level of a fast-food clerk not to the standards needed to function in today’s global information or manufacturing society.
Why does this happen? Because, as a community, we don’t care. We have low expectations of our students and in turn the teachers and the school system. I know we are a blue-collar community, but that does not excuse our general lack of parental involvement in our schools. We make time for football, baseball, hunting, etc. What effort do we make to help children excel in our schools?
I know this is hard to face. But ask yourself this question? Why do so many transfers to our community choose to live elsewhere? Simple – education. They see a school system that churns out burger flippers rather than college graduates or technicians. They see other communities were education is at the core of the community’s identity. When given a choice, they choose to live elsewhere.
LaGrange (Troup) is America’s Greatest Little City. I love that bumper sticker. I love our sense of pride. I love the fact that Wednesdays are still slower than other days so presumably we can go to church that evening. I love the sense of community around our parks and recreation facilities that teach teamwork and sportsmanship to all children. I love our commitment to maintaining a vibrant downtown. These traits set us apart from other communities.
However, the same cannot be said of our community’s commitment to educating all of our children, not just the few whose parents take an active interest. We are average at best in a below average state. We do not live up to the bumper sticker in that regard. As a community, do we really aspire to be great in education? If not, we perpetuate the bigotry of low expectations our children and our community will suffer from it. If you have any comments or have a desire to make us great in education, contact me at jkirkhancock@yahoo.com. Maybe we can get something started.
In 1983, the seminal report on the nation’s failing education system stated that America suffered from the “soft bigotry of low expectations.” In other words we had given up on certain segments of our society’s ability to learn. That was true then for our nation and it is true today for our local community. That hurts. Before you react to that raw statement, consider these facts.
According to the Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) and the CRCT testing, our community’s schools perform at or near the state average. At first blush, that would be acceptable. We are finally testing at the state average. The problem is that by virtually every standard, our state is at the bottom in educational performance.
I am not going to bore you with countless study after study that shows America’s educational performance is at the bottom of the industrialized nations and our state is at the bottom of America’s performance. That should disturb and challenge every one of us. Why are we content to perform at the state average of one of the worst performing states in the country? Why don’t we expect more from our schools and students? This complacency is well known to our education establishment.
Several years ago, I met with Dr. Ed Smith, our previous school superintendent. As we discussed the challenges he faced, he made a statement that was shocking in its honesty and consequences. He stated that due to No Child Left Behind (NCLB) testing requirements, the school system had to adapt the curriculum to ensure the highest probability to achieve success per the measures established by NCLB and the state. In doing so, he stated that the schools would have to go it alone. In other words, they could not count on the parents to be an integral part of a child’s education. They did not have time to involve the parents.
Wow, that is a damning statement. The schools cannot count on the parents to be an integral part of the child’s education. How can that be? Was Dr. Smith crazy? Was he wrong? I don’t think so. Of course there are parents who are involved and their child can get a good education in Troup county. However, this is the exception rather than the norm.
On a systemic basis our schools turn out students who will perform poorly by objective, national and international standards. Far too many will be educated to the level of a fast-food clerk not to the standards needed to function in today’s global information or manufacturing society.
Why does this happen? Because, as a community, we don’t care. We have low expectations of our students and in turn the teachers and the school system. I know we are a blue-collar community, but that does not excuse our general lack of parental involvement in our schools. We make time for football, baseball, hunting, etc. What effort do we make to help children excel in our schools?
I know this is hard to face. But ask yourself this question? Why do so many transfers to our community choose to live elsewhere? Simple – education. They see a school system that churns out burger flippers rather than college graduates or technicians. They see other communities were education is at the core of the community’s identity. When given a choice, they choose to live elsewhere.
LaGrange (Troup) is America’s Greatest Little City. I love that bumper sticker. I love our sense of pride. I love the fact that Wednesdays are still slower than other days so presumably we can go to church that evening. I love the sense of community around our parks and recreation facilities that teach teamwork and sportsmanship to all children. I love our commitment to maintaining a vibrant downtown. These traits set us apart from other communities.
However, the same cannot be said of our community’s commitment to educating all of our children, not just the few whose parents take an active interest. We are average at best in a below average state. We do not live up to the bumper sticker in that regard. As a community, do we really aspire to be great in education? If not, we perpetuate the bigotry of low expectations our children and our community will suffer from it. If you have any comments or have a desire to make us great in education, contact me at jkirkhancock@yahoo.com. Maybe we can get something started.
Tuesday, August 09, 2011
Don't Shoot the Messenger
According to the polls (and the Democrats), it looks like many Americans think the Tea Party is to blame for the S&P downgrade. That would be like blaming Paul Revere for the Revolutionary War. All the Tea Party did was seize on the debt ceiling debate and educate the American people and Congress on the growing size of our government and debt.
S&P knew the debt was growing too fast. That is why they wanted a $4-$6 trillion dollar reduction in spending. After bringing the country to the edge of default, all this President and Congress could muster was a trillion and a special committee. Thank God Paul Revere was more successful when he raised the alarm so many years ago.
President Obama originally wanted no cuts and a clean extension beyond the election. Congress has been unable to rein in spending. Do you really think we would have started the war on debt and spending had it not been for the Tea Party?
We did not defeat the British on the night of Paul Revere’s ride, but a few years later our nation won its independence. Let’s hope we can do it again.
Kirk Hancock
Whitesville Road, LaGrange
Letter to the editor - LDN
Monday, July 25, 2011
What the Republicans Can Still Learn from Reagan
The ideal Republican candidate for president would be divorced, a former governor of a liberal state, allow amnesty for millions of illegal aliens, a card carrying member of the Hollywood elite and heresy of all heresy, approve tax increases. Of course I am talking about the patron saint of the modern Republican Party, Ronald Reagan.
Reagan and the great saints of the church have become mere idols rather than authentic role models. How many people really understand why the early church elevated certain followers to sainthood? How many can tell you of the brilliance of St. Augustine or the compassion of St. Francis? To the extent most people know of them, they have been reduced to simple icons and have lost all depth and meaning of what really elevated them to sainthood.
I would argue we have done the same to the political genius that was Ronald Reagan. He is much more than an icon portrayed by so many in the Republican Party and the talk show network. He was a man of deeply held principles and yes, he was even a darn good politician. These two attributes are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they are critical and it is paramount that the modern Republican Party recognize this fact if it want to effectively govern and lead the nation.
A member of Congress who merely has convictions or principles is little more than a clanging gong. All the right convictions coupled with the inability to sway others is useless in the political process. The congressperson might be good for exciting sound bites or TV punditry but they are ill suited for political effectiveness. Now don’t get me wrong. Convictions are the bedrock of any good politician. Reagan had them and everyone who came into contact with him knew he had them.
Reagan had several core principles that shaped his political philosophy. These convictions were: belief in the individual rather than groups, a smaller and less intrusive federal government and an undeniable sense of optimism about America’s exceptionalism and its future. In addition he was a big tent Republican. He sought to include as many people as possible into his political world view. He evidenced this by his famous statement that ‘if somebody agrees with me 80% of the time, that doesn't make him my enemy.” Reagan would work with the modern day Republican In Name Only (RINO’s) and blue dog democrats. These are (or should be) the core principles that drive the Republican Party today.
However, convictions are not enough. Just like a monk isolated on a mountain top monastery, the best ideals without the ability to influence those around you are a waste. Saint Reagan was an effective politician not only because of his convictions but due to the fact he did not stay on the mountain top. He entered the fray of politics in California and Washington. He was the most effective Republican president in generations, if not all time. He was not held hostage by his convictions, rather he used them to drive the political process. He consistently moved the nation closer his core beliefs one step at a time. Sometimes he even took a step back to take two steps forward. That is the essence of politics.
Remember, Reagan is not a simple icon or a medallion to hang around your neck. He was the consummate politician. He was so successful that Bill Clinton, the patron saint of the modern Democratic Party was forced to declare “the era of big government is over”. Reagan won, clear and simple. He had won the hearts and minds of the American people.
He did it by sticking to his convictions AND compromising along the way. Today’s Republicans and many in the Tea Party have much to learn from this. The nation is split. The fact that the Republicans think the other half of the country is flat-out wrong does not matter. The genius of our government is it follows the collective will of the people not those with the most passion or loudest voices. As long as the nation is split the Republicans will be unable to significantly achieve their goals. This does not mean that they quit trying; it just means they will have to get big and small victories whenever and where ever they can.
The Republicans need to win the majority of the hearts and minds of the American people. They do this by adopting and implementing the principles and political philosophy of the real, not sanctified, Ronald Reagan.
LaGrange Daily News 7.21.11
Reagan and the great saints of the church have become mere idols rather than authentic role models. How many people really understand why the early church elevated certain followers to sainthood? How many can tell you of the brilliance of St. Augustine or the compassion of St. Francis? To the extent most people know of them, they have been reduced to simple icons and have lost all depth and meaning of what really elevated them to sainthood.
I would argue we have done the same to the political genius that was Ronald Reagan. He is much more than an icon portrayed by so many in the Republican Party and the talk show network. He was a man of deeply held principles and yes, he was even a darn good politician. These two attributes are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they are critical and it is paramount that the modern Republican Party recognize this fact if it want to effectively govern and lead the nation.
A member of Congress who merely has convictions or principles is little more than a clanging gong. All the right convictions coupled with the inability to sway others is useless in the political process. The congressperson might be good for exciting sound bites or TV punditry but they are ill suited for political effectiveness. Now don’t get me wrong. Convictions are the bedrock of any good politician. Reagan had them and everyone who came into contact with him knew he had them.
Reagan had several core principles that shaped his political philosophy. These convictions were: belief in the individual rather than groups, a smaller and less intrusive federal government and an undeniable sense of optimism about America’s exceptionalism and its future. In addition he was a big tent Republican. He sought to include as many people as possible into his political world view. He evidenced this by his famous statement that ‘if somebody agrees with me 80% of the time, that doesn't make him my enemy.” Reagan would work with the modern day Republican In Name Only (RINO’s) and blue dog democrats. These are (or should be) the core principles that drive the Republican Party today.
However, convictions are not enough. Just like a monk isolated on a mountain top monastery, the best ideals without the ability to influence those around you are a waste. Saint Reagan was an effective politician not only because of his convictions but due to the fact he did not stay on the mountain top. He entered the fray of politics in California and Washington. He was the most effective Republican president in generations, if not all time. He was not held hostage by his convictions, rather he used them to drive the political process. He consistently moved the nation closer his core beliefs one step at a time. Sometimes he even took a step back to take two steps forward. That is the essence of politics.
Remember, Reagan is not a simple icon or a medallion to hang around your neck. He was the consummate politician. He was so successful that Bill Clinton, the patron saint of the modern Democratic Party was forced to declare “the era of big government is over”. Reagan won, clear and simple. He had won the hearts and minds of the American people.
He did it by sticking to his convictions AND compromising along the way. Today’s Republicans and many in the Tea Party have much to learn from this. The nation is split. The fact that the Republicans think the other half of the country is flat-out wrong does not matter. The genius of our government is it follows the collective will of the people not those with the most passion or loudest voices. As long as the nation is split the Republicans will be unable to significantly achieve their goals. This does not mean that they quit trying; it just means they will have to get big and small victories whenever and where ever they can.
The Republicans need to win the majority of the hearts and minds of the American people. They do this by adopting and implementing the principles and political philosophy of the real, not sanctified, Ronald Reagan.
LaGrange Daily News 7.21.11
What the Republicans Can Learn from Reagan
The ideal Republican candidate for president would be divorced, a former governor of a liberal state, allow amnesty for millions of illegal aliens, a card carrying member of the Hollywood elite and heresy of all heresy, approve tax increases. Of course I am talking about the patron saint of the modern Republican Party, Ronald Reagan.
Reagan and the great saints of the church have become mere idols rather than authentic role models. How many people really understand why the early church elevated certain followers to sainthood? How many can tell you of the brilliance of St. Augustine or the compassion of St. Francis? To the extent most people know of them, they have been reduced to simple icons and have lost all depth and meaning of what really elevated them to sainthood.
I would argue we have done the same to the political genius that was Ronald Reagan. He is much more than an icon portrayed by so many in the Republican Party and the talk show network. He was a man of deeply held principles and yes, he was even a darn good politician. These two attributes are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they are critical and it is paramount that the modern Republican Party recognize this fact if it want to effectively govern and lead the nation.
A member of Congress who merely has convictions or principles is little more than a clanging gong. All the right convictions coupled with the inability to sway others is useless in the political process. The congressperson might be good for exciting sound bites or TV punditry but they are ill suited for political effectiveness. Now don’t get me wrong. Convictions are the bedrock of any good politician. Reagan had them and everyone who came into contact with him knew he had them.
Reagan had several core principles that shaped his political philosophy. These convictions were: belief in the individual rather than groups, a smaller and less intrusive federal government and an undeniable sense of optimism about America’s exceptionalism and its future. In addition he was a big tent Republican. He sought to include as many people as possible into his political world view. He evidenced this by his famous statement that ‘if somebody agrees with me 80% of the time, that doesn't make him my enemy.” Reagan would work with the modern day Republican In Name Only (RINO’s) and blue dog democrats. These are (or should be) the core principles that drive the Republican Party today.
However, convictions are not enough. Just like a monk isolated on a mountain top monastery, the best ideals without the ability to influence those around you are a waste. Saint Reagan was an effective politician not only because of his convictions but due to the fact he did not stay on the mountain top. He entered the fray of politics in California and Washington. He was the most effective Republican president in generations, if not all time. He was not held hostage by his convictions, rather he used them to drive the political process. He consistently moved the nation closer his core beliefs one step at a time. Sometimes he even took a step back to take two steps forward. That is the essence of politics.
Remember, Reagan is not a simple icon or a medallion to hang around your neck. He was the consummate politician. He was so successful that Bill Clinton, the patron saint of the modern Democratic Party was forced to declare “the era of big government is over”. Reagan won, clear and simple. He had won the hearts and minds of the American people.
He did it by sticking to his convictions AND compromising along the way. Today’s Republicans and many in the Tea Party have much to learn from this. The nation is split. The fact that the Republicans think the other half of the country is flat-out wrong does not matter. The genius of our government is it follows the collective will of the people not those with the most passion or loudest voices. As long as the nation is split the Republicans will be unable to significantly achieve their goals. This does not mean that they quit trying; it just means they will have to get big and small victories whenever and where ever they can.
The Republicans need to win the majority of the hearts and minds of the American people. They do this by adopting and implementing the principles and political philosophy of the real, not sanctified, Ronald Reagan.
LaGrange Daily News 7.21.11
Reagan and the great saints of the church have become mere idols rather than authentic role models. How many people really understand why the early church elevated certain followers to sainthood? How many can tell you of the brilliance of St. Augustine or the compassion of St. Francis? To the extent most people know of them, they have been reduced to simple icons and have lost all depth and meaning of what really elevated them to sainthood.
I would argue we have done the same to the political genius that was Ronald Reagan. He is much more than an icon portrayed by so many in the Republican Party and the talk show network. He was a man of deeply held principles and yes, he was even a darn good politician. These two attributes are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they are critical and it is paramount that the modern Republican Party recognize this fact if it want to effectively govern and lead the nation.
A member of Congress who merely has convictions or principles is little more than a clanging gong. All the right convictions coupled with the inability to sway others is useless in the political process. The congressperson might be good for exciting sound bites or TV punditry but they are ill suited for political effectiveness. Now don’t get me wrong. Convictions are the bedrock of any good politician. Reagan had them and everyone who came into contact with him knew he had them.
Reagan had several core principles that shaped his political philosophy. These convictions were: belief in the individual rather than groups, a smaller and less intrusive federal government and an undeniable sense of optimism about America’s exceptionalism and its future. In addition he was a big tent Republican. He sought to include as many people as possible into his political world view. He evidenced this by his famous statement that ‘if somebody agrees with me 80% of the time, that doesn't make him my enemy.” Reagan would work with the modern day Republican In Name Only (RINO’s) and blue dog democrats. These are (or should be) the core principles that drive the Republican Party today.
However, convictions are not enough. Just like a monk isolated on a mountain top monastery, the best ideals without the ability to influence those around you are a waste. Saint Reagan was an effective politician not only because of his convictions but due to the fact he did not stay on the mountain top. He entered the fray of politics in California and Washington. He was the most effective Republican president in generations, if not all time. He was not held hostage by his convictions, rather he used them to drive the political process. He consistently moved the nation closer his core beliefs one step at a time. Sometimes he even took a step back to take two steps forward. That is the essence of politics.
Remember, Reagan is not a simple icon or a medallion to hang around your neck. He was the consummate politician. He was so successful that Bill Clinton, the patron saint of the modern Democratic Party was forced to declare “the era of big government is over”. Reagan won, clear and simple. He had won the hearts and minds of the American people.
He did it by sticking to his convictions AND compromising along the way. Today’s Republicans and many in the Tea Party have much to learn from this. The nation is split. The fact that the Republicans think the other half of the country is flat-out wrong does not matter. The genius of our government is it follows the collective will of the people not those with the most passion or loudest voices. As long as the nation is split the Republicans will be unable to significantly achieve their goals. This does not mean that they quit trying; it just means they will have to get big and small victories whenever and where ever they can.
The Republicans need to win the majority of the hearts and minds of the American people. They do this by adopting and implementing the principles and political philosophy of the real, not sanctified, Ronald Reagan.
LaGrange Daily News 7.21.11
Friday, April 01, 2011
Lead or Get Out of the Way to Solve Debt Crisis
That ticking sound you hear is the national debt bomb. Just last week, Dallas Federal Reserve Bank President Richard Fisher stated that the United States is on a path to fiscal insolvency. He went on to say, “If we continue down the path on which the fiscal authorities are putting us, we will become insolvent; the question is when.” This is a chilling statement coming from the Federal Reserve.
With a national debt approaching $15 trillion and increasing $4 billion a day since 2007, there can be no doubt we are reaching a tipping point. Time is running out on our ability to stop the collapse of our financial solvency. We must take action now to address this unsustainable and growing debt.
On one level, every American knows we have a debt problem. While no one can comprehend a trillion dollars, you do not have to be an economist to know that we cannot continue to borrow one out of every three dollars we spend. Everyone knows this is unsustainable. However, the level of understanding of this problem is disturbing to say the least.
Recent polls demonstrate the American public’s general ignorance of our fiscal realities. A 2010 World Public Opinion survey found that Americans want to tackle deficits by cutting foreign aid from what they believe is the current level (27 percent of the budget) to a more prudent 13 percent. The real number is under 1 percent, much of which is military assistance to allies.
A Jan. 25 CNN poll revealed that even though 71 percent of voters want smaller government, vast majorities oppose cuts to Medicare (81 percent), Social Security (78 percent) and Medicaid (70 percent). Instead, they prefer to slash “waste,” the holy grail of politicians and of an uninformed electorate who believe said waste makes up 50 percent of spending, according to a 2009 Gallup poll. That is pure fantasy or wishful thinking.
Meaningful deficit reduction will take serious cuts to the entire federal budget. The problem is so severe that no portion of the budget can be off-limits. The American people need to face this reality. The issue is how do you educate 150 million taxpayers?
There are numerous advocacy groups trying desperately to educate the public as well as propose genuine solutions. One such group is Comeback America and is led by David Walker, the past comptroller of the United States. Check it out at www.tcaii.org. Mr. Walker has been preaching bipartisan fiscal responsibility for close to a decade. He states that the current fiscal debate is the equivalent of “arguing over the bar tab on the Titanic.” Walker predicts the United States will have a debt crisis “within the next two to three years” and implores Washington lawmakers to “wake up.” I believe he needs the voice of the president of the United States.
President Obama has been virtually silent on this issue. No, change that. He has not been silent; he routinely talks (and talks and talks) about the issue. The problem is that he is not doing anything to meaningfully affect the issue. Only the president can lead and educate the American people on this matter. Congress is a voice of 535 people. The president is the singular voice in the American political system to command the public’s attention.
President Obama knows this is a problem. He appointed the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform (also called Bowles-Simpson Commission). This bipartisan group recommended meaningful reform to deaf ears. President Obama has decided it is too toxic and he will not lead on this issue. It would appear that heading into the 2012 election, he made the politically expeditious choice to let Congress, especially the Republicans, flail themselves on this issue. When they overreach due to the public’s ignorance of the issue, the president will seek a political advantage. This is not leadership – it is pure politics. Given the approaching fiscal Armageddon, this is political narcissism.
The president must address this issue. This is his chance to demonstrate true leadership and the bipartisanship he talks about all the time. The path forward is hard, but it can be done. If I could bend the president’s ear, this is what I would propose:
Build on the Bowles-Simpson Report. Set bold and meaning targets.
Educate the American people. Take every opportunity to deepen the public’s awareness of the magnitude of the problem.
Take the lead on reforming Social Security and Medicare. Only a Democrat can reform these key programs. It is political suicide for a Republican to touch them.
Join with key Republican hawks and the Tea Party to push for fiscal reform in the military. For a Democrat, proposing military cuts is political hari-kari. Only the Republicans can do this.
Set meaningful spending reductions for the discretionary budget and let Congress duke it out.
Follow all of this with more education. The key to this process is to ready the American people for meaningful change. They must support Congress and you in this very difficult effort.
This is the president’s opportunity to lead. Given the magnitude and urgency of the problem, it is time for the president to lead or get out the way. Our financial time bomb is ticking away.
Kirk Hancock is a member of LaGrange Writers Group.
Read more: La Grange News - Lead or get out of the way to solve debt crisis
With a national debt approaching $15 trillion and increasing $4 billion a day since 2007, there can be no doubt we are reaching a tipping point. Time is running out on our ability to stop the collapse of our financial solvency. We must take action now to address this unsustainable and growing debt.
On one level, every American knows we have a debt problem. While no one can comprehend a trillion dollars, you do not have to be an economist to know that we cannot continue to borrow one out of every three dollars we spend. Everyone knows this is unsustainable. However, the level of understanding of this problem is disturbing to say the least.
Recent polls demonstrate the American public’s general ignorance of our fiscal realities. A 2010 World Public Opinion survey found that Americans want to tackle deficits by cutting foreign aid from what they believe is the current level (27 percent of the budget) to a more prudent 13 percent. The real number is under 1 percent, much of which is military assistance to allies.
A Jan. 25 CNN poll revealed that even though 71 percent of voters want smaller government, vast majorities oppose cuts to Medicare (81 percent), Social Security (78 percent) and Medicaid (70 percent). Instead, they prefer to slash “waste,” the holy grail of politicians and of an uninformed electorate who believe said waste makes up 50 percent of spending, according to a 2009 Gallup poll. That is pure fantasy or wishful thinking.
Meaningful deficit reduction will take serious cuts to the entire federal budget. The problem is so severe that no portion of the budget can be off-limits. The American people need to face this reality. The issue is how do you educate 150 million taxpayers?
There are numerous advocacy groups trying desperately to educate the public as well as propose genuine solutions. One such group is Comeback America and is led by David Walker, the past comptroller of the United States. Check it out at www.tcaii.org. Mr. Walker has been preaching bipartisan fiscal responsibility for close to a decade. He states that the current fiscal debate is the equivalent of “arguing over the bar tab on the Titanic.” Walker predicts the United States will have a debt crisis “within the next two to three years” and implores Washington lawmakers to “wake up.” I believe he needs the voice of the president of the United States.
President Obama has been virtually silent on this issue. No, change that. He has not been silent; he routinely talks (and talks and talks) about the issue. The problem is that he is not doing anything to meaningfully affect the issue. Only the president can lead and educate the American people on this matter. Congress is a voice of 535 people. The president is the singular voice in the American political system to command the public’s attention.
President Obama knows this is a problem. He appointed the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform (also called Bowles-Simpson Commission). This bipartisan group recommended meaningful reform to deaf ears. President Obama has decided it is too toxic and he will not lead on this issue. It would appear that heading into the 2012 election, he made the politically expeditious choice to let Congress, especially the Republicans, flail themselves on this issue. When they overreach due to the public’s ignorance of the issue, the president will seek a political advantage. This is not leadership – it is pure politics. Given the approaching fiscal Armageddon, this is political narcissism.
The president must address this issue. This is his chance to demonstrate true leadership and the bipartisanship he talks about all the time. The path forward is hard, but it can be done. If I could bend the president’s ear, this is what I would propose:
Build on the Bowles-Simpson Report. Set bold and meaning targets.
Educate the American people. Take every opportunity to deepen the public’s awareness of the magnitude of the problem.
Take the lead on reforming Social Security and Medicare. Only a Democrat can reform these key programs. It is political suicide for a Republican to touch them.
Join with key Republican hawks and the Tea Party to push for fiscal reform in the military. For a Democrat, proposing military cuts is political hari-kari. Only the Republicans can do this.
Set meaningful spending reductions for the discretionary budget and let Congress duke it out.
Follow all of this with more education. The key to this process is to ready the American people for meaningful change. They must support Congress and you in this very difficult effort.
This is the president’s opportunity to lead. Given the magnitude and urgency of the problem, it is time for the president to lead or get out the way. Our financial time bomb is ticking away.
Kirk Hancock is a member of LaGrange Writers Group.
Read more: La Grange News - Lead or get out of the way to solve debt crisis
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)