It’s official; change has arrived. We have new administrations at the state and federal level, and the status quo is going away. Obamacare is going to be repealed on the federal level and Right to Work is about to become law in Missouri. There are going to be a lot of changes, and for the most part a lot of those things were decided at the ballot box.
There are a lot of new people, and a lot of new policies, and that is reality. Regular readers are aware that denial of reality is not a thing that happens here. We can have feelings about the new leaders or policies but at this point those feelings are not going to change anything. Reality does not care about our opinions.
Some of you are dedicated to the idea of opposing or supporting particular human beings. You may not care for them or their behavior or their policies. On the other hand, you may love and respect a leader and all that they stand for. In either case, your love or hatred of a human being may cause you to oppose or support policies that you otherwise would not.
It is human nature to defend our decisions, whether it be in the form of “sour grapes” or “sweet lemon”, we tend to want to view the world through a certain lens and not let go of that viewpoint. And so those who voted for a person will see their actions in a positive light, and those who voted against that same person will see their actions in a negative light. I would like to respectfully suggest that this is counterproductive.
“Great minds discuss ideas;
Average minds discuss events;
Small minds discuss people”
-Eleanor Roosevelt
Instead of focusing on people, perhaps we should focus on ideas. Let me suggest that we take the blinders off and take a good hard look at the new reality and react to it, rather than hoping that reality will bend to our will.
The need to look at and react to actual reality is just as true for those who won as it is for those who lost. As we unwind programs we will undo the dysfunction they created but we will also confront the original problem they tried to fix with the current misguided solutions. The ACA is a good example. We can repeal Obamacare, but then we are faced with the problems that Obamacare was supposed to fix.
Republicans could rush through a replacement for the ACA along party lines but then they will have another doomed federal program, along with losing any philosophical argument they may have had. They know that is not a good solution, despite all of the divisive rhetoric.
The problem we have is that too many of us feel that we would be betraying our principles if we decided to cooperate with “the other side”. Too many of us fear we may lose friends if we agree with anyone on the other team; or if we are suspected of not supporting our team sufficiently. If, however, we focus on ideas rather than teams we can probably find common ground even if we are on different “teams”.
Even then, we are going to have to compromise. I am something of an ideological purist. I don’t like to compromise on things like fiscal responsibility or individual liberty. I would love to see a minimalist government and most power transferred back to states along with balanced budgets and dramatically decreased spending; but this is not going to happen. I know that there will have to be compromise.
We are facing a time when there will be a lot of negotiating going on, because deals have to be made, and we see people out staking out positions and triangulating to improve their position at the table so they can get a better deal. Everything would appear to be on the table, and it is far from clear what we are all going to end up with.
For clarity, I will be advocating for the same ideas as always. I want smaller government and less spending and debt and more liberty. I want every single American to be treated equally by our government. I will support or oppose legislation based on these core principles, and not whether or not the legislation is sponsored by my “team”. Now that the election is over I see no more need to talk about people; those decisions are made.
Many do not understand why some of us keep concentrating on seemingly minor issues like metal detectors at the state capitol. Last week I wrote about the need for consequences to be borne by those who make decisions, whether good or bad. When lawmakers pass laws, whether to enact the ACA or to change the laws regarding firearms, there are consequences to such legislation. People’s lives are affected. If you live in Ferguson Missouri you may be affected differently by gun legislation than someone who lives on a farm outside of Rolla.
Those who write laws must not be immune from those laws. If you are going to make the State Capitol a gun-free zone, then you should have to work in a gun-free zone without giving yourself an exemption. The consequence of legislating a gun free zone should be the loss of your own right to carry while in the Capitol; otherwise you are simply legislating consequences for other people. Likewise, whatever plan the federal government comes up with to replace the ACA should affect those in Congress directly.
Instead of everyone advocating for policies that favor their particular team, perhaps we could all advocate for equality. Instead of whining about our status as victims, perhaps we could stop demonizing one another. If we are going to move forward together, we need to stop punching each other.
We are all going to have to come to accept the reality that we are all equal, whether black or white, male or female, and nobody should have special status whether you are a cop or union member or legislator. We are also going to have to accept the reality that laws are just words on a document. At some point we just face a cultural/societal problem, whether addiction or divorce or abortion or poverty or abuse, and laws or lack of laws may not be at the root of the issue. Sometimes, people just have problems.
Repealing dysfunctional laws will uncover the root problems once again. We must resist the urge to simply replace the old laws with new ones. We need to find a better way, one that does not force people into more dysfunction.
Let me provide an example. In Missouri the new Republican administration is almost certainly going to pass a Right to Work law, which many will view as a blow to organized labor. Republicans would counter that RTW provides a counter to the problems with The Wagner Act. I have been thinking about this quite a bit, and if I were a union in Missouri right now I would change my approach.
I think unions should use capitalism to fight back. If I were a union, I would become a closed group; I would be exclusionary. I would exclude all but the very best workers and I would train all of my people until they were absolutely top-notch. All of the poor performers would be dropped, and workers would very much want to be part of the union, but it would not be easy to get in.
Maybe the workers would all work directly for the union, and only the companies that paid top dollar would have access to this pool of top talent. Other unions would compete with mine, of course, but the best unions would get the best work.
OK, it’s not going to happen, but it could. It’s a new day, filled with possibilities...and dangers. We are all going to have to deal with it. We should stick to our core principles but I recommend flexibility, and a willingness to compromise. And it wouldn’t hurt to think outside the box a little.
No comments:
Post a Comment