The political clock continues to tick towards high noon for Gov.
Gray Davis. But Davis is hardly the hero figure that Gary Cooper
was in the epic western movie High Noon.
The political clock continues to tick towards high noon for Gov. Gray Davis. But Davis is hardly the hero figure that Gary Cooper was in the epic western movie High Noon.
In this scenario, Davis is more like the bad guy and the town is out to get him. And according to most polls, this bad guy will lose. In the wings are a plethora of candidates ready to step up to the state’s highest political position. Your sample ballot lists 135 names: 42 Republicans, 50 Democrats, and 43 others all ready, willing, and well, it’s doubtful how “able” the majority of them are.
It amazes me to see how many people think they’re qualified to be governor. However, in a democratic republic like the United States, state citizens who meet the lawful criteria for governor have the right to turn their dream into reality. According to California’s filing rules, it only takes being of legal age, the payment of a $3,000 fee, no felony record, and 65 valid signatures to get on the ballot for the state’s highest office. Talk about American political opportunity!
Now opportunity is one thing, but duty, responsibility, and morality are another. Davis has proven to be irresponsible. He has not performed his duty. Why even the 50 Democrats on the ballot agree with those facts.
But there is an issue bigger than opportunity and easy ballot access that concerns me in this age of professional politics. That is, why are all these people running for governor? What are their real motives? And what has happened to the character qualities of duty, responsibility, and morality in politics?
I’m afraid that my pessimism (acquired from observing so many current public office holders) is that most candidates who run for office do so in order to boost their own inflated egos and/or personal agendas. And this covers the spectrum of politics, from governor down to our local politicians here in Gilroy – specifically those running for city council and mayor.
So often in politics, duty, responsibility, and morality are sacrificed on the altar of convenience with the knife of political power. Any thinking adult knows that every political position brings with it power, even if that power has different levels of degree. But power is power, and history confirms that the desire for power is something built into human nature.
As we’ve all heard, “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely” or from the mouth of a former President: “Politics gives guys so much power that they tend to behave badly around women. And I hope I never get into that.” So said William Jefferson Clinton, whose behavior as president over eight years certainly contradicted his stated wish.
So I raise the matter of “politician” verses “public servant.” Many years ago in this country the idea of “public servant” was pretty much synonymous with politician. I’m afraid that concept died years ago. An enlightening quote about politicians was made by none other than John F. Kennedy when he said, “Mothers may still want their favorite sons to grow up to be president, but they do not want them to become politicians in the process.”
Webster’s Dictionary includes two seemingly contradictory definitions for politician. One says: “One who seeks personal or partisan gain, often by scheming and maneuvering.” This definition certainly fits the behavior of Davis. The other says: “One who is skilled or experienced in the science or administration of government.” And it’s this definition that seems to have pretty much been lost, especially in California politics.
Of the various definitions of “servant,” Webster’s says this: “One who is publicly employed to perform services, as for a government.” And, I would add, those services should be motivated by the concept of duty, responsibility, and morality. George Washington, our first president said: “The consciousness of having discharged that duty which we owe to our country is superior to all other considerations.”
Yet, how many of today’s politicians bring the aspirations of duty, responsibility, and morality with them to office, and then practice them? I think too few. I’m afraid that the concept of servanthood in politics is for most politicians as archaic as the slide rule. And that’s really unfortunate because when those qualities in politics are lacking, we the people reap the results, either in local, state, or federal government mismanagement, waste and graft.
The solution? For those people in office who have proven themselves to be politicians and not public servants, a quote from an unknown writer is certainly applicable: “Politicians are like diapers. They should both be changed frequently and for the same reason.” Let’s elect those who will be public servants.
