John W. Carlin and Civic Leadership
Join the Conversation:
  • Home
  • About John
  • Blog
  • Leading and Learning Moments
  • Leader Corner
  • Resources
    • Feedback

The U.S. Postal Service is Essential to Democracy

8/29/2020

1 Comment

 
Republican members of our Congressional delegation are basically silent on the President’s straightforward attempt at destroying the Postal Service for what he sees as a key to his re-election. The President’s motives are very clear. He believes that making it more difficult to vote by mail, confusing people, and creating mistrust may result in fewer turning out to the polls and many ballots not arriving in time to be counted. All tactics that Trump thinks could increase his chances of winning. 

Trump also wants to privatize the United States Postal System even though the impact on many citizens will be higher costs and loss of services all in the name of serving the bottom line for private investors. 

For us living across Kansas with so much rural area and the necessity of quality service that will deliver mail to remote areas, without the U.S. Postal Service, where would we be? Kansans are poised for another large increase in mail-in voting participation this fall, but it's not just election results at stake. Just think of all the critical and time sensitive shipping services that either by budget cuts or the private sector push for profit would be so dramatically impacted. Essential medical prescriptions, business transactions that require timeliness, bills that need to arrive and be paid on time, and of course Social Security and other retirement benefits, all create real life impacts when mail delivery is delayed.  

Is destroying the Postal Service a direction we want to take? I do not think so and wonder why our Republican Congressional delegation is so silent given all the rural areas they represent. But it's not just silence that is damaging; a current candidate for U.S. Senate—​doing Trump's work for him—​recently referred to it as a "so-called crisis." Their inaction and misinformation is also a clear message that Republicans are not concerned about our right to vote and to have all of our ballots counted in the middle of this brutal pandemic. 

This strikes right at the heart of our system of government and the integrity of our all-important elections. Faith in our elections and the peaceful transition of power are bedrock principles that parties and candidates throughout our history used to support, not undermine. Those Republicans should ask themselves exactly what kind of country we want to be and what freedom really means to them. What credibility do we have in promoting the idea of self-government abroad when our elections are now the ones that need to be monitored by independent sources in order to ensure integrity? Without the right to vote and fair elections, this is no longer the republic we thought we lived in and that we were gifted by our founders.

The U.S. Postal Service is not a product of either Republican or Democratic ingenuity but of Benjamin Franklin, a founding father and our first Postmaster General. He recognized at the very beginning of our democracy the need for citizens to have a way to communicate and have mail delivered in a timely fashion. Franklin believed that having such a system was critical to keeping the citizens informed and making our new government work, which is why it's rooted in the Constitution itself. To paraphrase Franklin's famous words, they left us a republic, if we can keep it...
                                                                     
Instead of concerns about the Postal Service, our delegation is not just silent but instead are raising concerns about issues that are not at the top for most Kansans. Take a recent television ad for Congressman Marshall that includes Senator Moran with both focused on Sanctuary Cities (Kansas does not have one) and immigration as an excellent example of their gaslighting. Both are using these issues as punching bags for self-serving political purposes that results in very negative side effects. In particular, the agriculture sector in western Kansas very much needs immigrants to do much of the work, and the focus on vilifying others does not exactly lay out the welcome mat to immigrants nor new business. 

Our elected Representatives’ silence is allowing the damage to the Postal System to continue when we know how critical this service is to our democracy. Their inaction is hard to fathom.
Picture
1 Comment

19th Amendment Centennial and Where We Stand Today

8/15/2020

1 Comment

 
On August 18th, 1920 the 19th Amendment to the United States Constitution received final approval when Tennessee became the state to achieve the ⅔ vote necessary to amend. Kansas ratified the 19th Amendment a year earlier on June 16th, 1919. To put this achievement in some perspective, shortly after the Civil War, Black men's right to vote was recognized with the passage of the 15th amendment to the Constitution. Over forty years would pass before a woman's right to vote would be recognized.

This significant advancement was not accomplished by men leading the change. Men were not making the case to their colleagues that the time had come for women to have the right to vote. Much to the contrary, women persisted in leading the way. In 1869 the National Woman's Suffrage Association was formed and led by Susan B. Anthony. This movement was built off of previous women-led efforts around abolition and temperance movements.

Women have always been key in leading change and that is even more important for our future.

From a point of view of state pride, Kansas in many ways has led the nation on women’s equality. Kansas was the first state in the nation to hold a referendum on women’s suffrage in 1867 and recognized women's right to vote in local elections in 1887. That same year, the town of Argonia, Kansas elected the first female mayor in U.S. history. And, in 1912, Kansas recognized a woman's right to vote in national elections, eight years before the 19th amendment passed.

Understanding our past holds lessons for our future. My focus in this blog is on what should be done to make the most of the underutilized talents of the women in our workforce. This is not just about equal pay, but promoting women into positions that make best use of their talents and leadership skills for the benefit of everyone. Especially, at this time in our nation where there is a critical need for making positive change.

The growing fact is that many young women are outperforming young men at a significant pace by doing better in their classes, by simply learning more, and by being better prepared to really make a difference through leading change. I want to make it clear that we have many very talented young men, it is just that they tend to be fewer in number. The key is getting the right person in the right position of leadership and more often than not a woman.

So how does that progress take place? There needs to be more awareness and acknowledgment that when employers fail to fully engage women in the workplace, there are consequences, including a potentially negative impact on the bottom line. Whether financial or due to unachieved policy outcomes and practices with public institutions, the consequences can be quite significant. Given the huge challenges that are coming out of the pandemic, ensuring women are allowed to fulfill their potential is even more important.

In a strange way, the pandemic and all the needs it exposed for major change in our society may accelerate interest, motivation, and pressure for major change. We just might be more aware of the reality of our shortcomings, that we are no longer number one or close in many key areas, and going forward with the past ways will just not get it done. That will put more pressure on getting change agents—​often women—​in a key position to lead us on climate change, improving education, and addressing the many local issues needed for economic growth in the future.

The fact that more women are stepping up to run for public office also gives me hope. The new, very talented women in Congress from 2018, and likely more coming from 2020 elections including a candidate for Vice President of the United States, is very positive. Younger generations also inspire me to believe that the message of equality is taking hold, and their continued engagement is precisely the thing that can bring about the lasting changes we need.

So here’s to the women’s leadership and engagement that brought us the 19th Amendment. It is my hope that future celebrations of progress for women include not just pay equity but rightful promotions. When that happens, we will not only celebrate but also reap the economic and policy rewards.
To learn more about the history of the 19th Amendment and the key leaders and documents that made it a reality, I’d highly suggest following along with the National Archives this month, as they share suffrage stories and publish inspirational and educational materials on their website. I look forward to reading and sharing these great resources for learning about our country’s history.
1 Comment

Trump's Manufactured "Riots"

8/3/2020

0 Comments

 
Chaos started (Portland, Oregon) when President Trump said “the locals couldn’t handle it.” First, he called on states to “dominate protesters.” Then, he directed federal agencies to increase their presence to protect federal property including statues and monuments even though several years earlier he pardoned Ammon Bundy, whose armed militia took over federal buildings in Oregon. What motivated Trump’s action was not helping locals but his latest sinking poll numbers and just three months to recover.

Governor Kate Brown of Oregon shared that the locals had things under their control and unrest was calming down following the protests of George Floyd’s murder at the hands of police officers. Local officials were united with the Governor on dealing with it locally. Then Trump sends in the Feds and everything explodes. Compounding the problem, the officers Trump sent in were not trained for such activities and the pushback against the militarized federal deployment naturally followed. Keep in mind, the vast majority of the protesters are energized young people, moms and dads, and veterans exercising their Constitutional Rights on the concerns they have about the current directions of our country. 

Former Chief Justice Rehnquist was quoted saying, “Police power is reserved for the states.” I believe firmly that those who commit violence against others and engage in the destruction of property should be prosecuted under applicable criminal laws. That should not be a matter of serious debate, and local officials with state support can handle the protest situations without federal intervention. The President should be taking a leadership role instead on the coronavirus crisis, where national leadership would have and can still make a world of difference.

What we have here is all politics. Trump is trying to duplicate President Nixon’s 1968 strategy where he used similar tactics to totally disrupt the Democratic National Convention in Chicago. The national press coverage that followed totally overwhelmed any positive message that could come from the convention and made “law and order” a successful campaign theme through the November election. 

Now Trump is taking actions ostensibly intended to advance the interests of law and order, but one patently designed for the purpose of creating division, heightening levels of fear and anger, and advancing his reelection prospects. Trump has repeatedly, over time suggested that Democrat-led and sanctuary cities are filled with crime. Now, he is threatening to send more “troops” of militarized federal officers from Border Patrol and other agencies into these areas to use force against American citizens. 

The Battle of Portland and Trump’s military-style force against citizens exercising their Constitutional rights to seek greater equality brings to light larger questions for our nation. Who is creating the real source of carnage within our country? Who should be the object of greatest scorn and attention? Who presents the greatest threat to Americans, to our institutions and our values? I think it is fair to ask who has inflicted the most pain on other Americans and who is most responsible for damage to the economy of this country. Is it a Chicago gang member whose violent acts are disruptive to neighborhoods and cause great pain (even death) to other individuals and families? Is it the elected leaders who refuse to increase the minimum wage while actively dismantling the social safety net? The gang member’s conduct certainly deserves condemnation and should be punished. But his or her impact, however, is numerically and geographically constrained. 

In contrast, by distracting the American people with unneeded use of Federal Law Enforcement Officers, by dismissing the reality and severity of the coronavirus and encouraging activity that would spread the virus, Trump has eviscerated the lives and livelihoods of millions of Americans. His chaotic and cavalier response to the coronavirus pandemic as well as the intentional rejection of scientific opinion on how most effectively to address it has contributed to the deaths of tens of thousands of Americans and to illness and unemployment for millions. 

For a superb in depth analysis with historical context, read the piece “Trump’s Wag-the-Dog War” by Thomas Friedman, Opinion Columnist for the New York Times. Friedman said, “This notion of Trump commanding a “surge” of federal law enforcement troops into Democratically-governed cities is appalling in the extreme.” ​

Without a doubt, these actions serve to create further division in our country, at a time when we desperately need to heal and work to find better, more peaceful, and more just ways forward for our communities and nation.
Picture
A scene from Portland, Oregon [Photo: Reuters]
0 Comments

Some VP Thoughts for Joe Biden

7/29/2020

0 Comments

 
Joe Biden, sometime very soon, as the Democratic Presidential Nominee, you are going to have to make a decision on your running mate. So whether you will see this blog or not, here is what I think about your options. My views are based on years of experience in politics as a citizen (I voted for Truman in ‘48 at Smolan Grade School) and in elective office as well as my concern for my grandchildren and their future given the impossible challenges we face as a nation.

Of the potential running mates that are mentioned most frequently, Stacy Abrams is a real talent that has emerged on the National scene in a big way and very quickly. She would clearly bring a passion for change that would help excite the younger generation and has demonstrated her capacity to lead change with communication and organizational skills so necessary to succeed. I think she needs more national seasoning but certainly could help your administration in a number of different ways.

Kamala Harris gets lots of attention and understandably so. From starting in a local elected office, she quickly moved to being State Attorney General, and now represents California in the United States Senate. As a woman of color with national standing, it is no surprise she is on your list of potential running mates. She has the potential problems that come with being a former prosecutor. But, overall, her strong and effective voice in the Senate and her ability to take the Trump administration and its officials to task in committee hearings and elsewhere has certainly earned her serious consideration for the Vice Presidency or for other roles down the road.

Not surprisingly, Senator Elizabeth Warren gets a lot of attention. She is very bright, passionate, and has a balanced set of experiences that make her a logical option. She has not only her Senate experience but as well being a part of the Obama Administration leading the then newly established agency to protect the consumers interests. She clearly will be an important ally, especially from a policy perspective. The question is in what position. I would definitely make the best use of her talents for sure if you can get the Republican Governor of Massachusetts to appoint a quality Democrat to her seat.

There are other prospects getting attention and rightfully so. Governors like Gretchen Whitmer from Michigan and Michelle Lujan Grisham of New Mexico are showing real leadership under fire, but I think their potential opportunity will come down the road. Susan Rice was in the Obama Administration but has never run for office and her focus has been at a high-level advising rather than executive leadership positions. This leaves us with Congresswoman Val Demings from Florida and Senator Tammy Duckworth from Illinois, unless, Joe, you have a big surprise for us.

Earlier, I thought Congresswoman Val Demings from Florida would be the best. Her job on the Impeachment team to represent the House was outstanding and gave her substantive national exposure. She is certainly smart and a great communicator. What also caught my attention was her experience as a Police Chief in Orlando Florida, a state that will be key with the Electoral College. Her piece in the Washington Post giving the Minneapolis police hell had more punch coming from her and reinforced her support for change. She was certainly not born with a silver spoon in her mouth and will be able to identify with millions of Americans regardless of color.
​
But I did some more checking and learned a couple things from my contacts in Florida. I was reminded that with so many Congressional districts in Florida, her statewide political clout is likely limited and 25 years on the police force could have some risks that have not surfaced yet. However, she is clearly another talent to keep an eye on.

Of the names circulated the most at this point, that leaves Senator Tammy Duckworth from Illinois as, I believe, the best choice. Early on, I didn’t even think of her as much of an option, but then she started getting more attention so I went online and got acquainted. Born in Thailand, her father was a retired Marine who was working for the United Nations Refugee Program. Her public service leadership experience at both the state and national administrative level followed by two successful terms in Congress and now in the United States Senate, certainly gives her solid and broad credentials. FYI, for more depth Google “16 Things You Might Not Know About Tammy Duckworth.” You will, I think, be amazed.

As a woman of color, who has sacrificed much for her love of this country, Senator Duckworth would be a significant asset for winning in November. But she also has what might be most important. In talking to several of my political friends, the question that came up most was who is most ready to step in from day one to be your successor? That day will come, and the huge problems we have will only be addressed by strong leadership over a significant period of time, thus making your choice for Vice President even more important. Senator Tammy Duckworth would be the valuable partner you will need, Joe, as well as the strongest leadership credentials to help return this country to the policies and actions that restore our nation’s reputation at home and overseas.

Mr. Vice President, you certainly have your pick of some outstanding potential VP’s, along with a host of exciting talent to build your administration around. But first, it’s incumbent on all of us to do everything in our power to make sure there is no second term for the Trump administration. As you’ve rightly pointed out on the campaign trail, our country can recover from one term of this, but after two, the damage would be irreparable. The stakes are simply too high to get this one wrong.
Picture
0 Comments

The Kansas GOP’s Assault on Health Care

7/20/2020

2 Comments

 
My last blog asked whether Republicans would ever stand up to President Trump, speak truth to power, and help set us on a cooperative path to address critical needs in our country. In that blog, I identified Kansas Republican leaders from times past who kept the common good in the forefront of their political decision-making and who, I believe, would not have hesitated to speak out in opposition to the dishonesty, the flights from reality, the manifest errors, and the cynical divisiveness that have characterized actions of this President and his administration.

I may not always have agreed with the policies of those past Republican leaders, but I never doubted that they were motivated by a determination to act in the best interests of our state and country. Today, however, that doesn’t seem to be the case. With a few exceptions, the current crop of elected Kansas Republicans has chosen far right wing ideology and loyalty to Trumpism over the very real needs and interests of Kansas citizens. This choice is starkly reflected in their approach to health care and health insurance, especially given the presence of a pandemic that has caused suffering and devastating casualties across our country and the world.

The most publicized of their actions has been the obstinate resistance to Medicaid expansion among Republican legislative leadership—​particularly in the Kansas Senate. This resistance has to-date cost Kansas taxpayers and businesses approximately $4 billion in forgone federal funding; has deprived tens of thousands of hard-working but low-income Kansans of the opportunity to obtain health insurance coverage; and has done untold, long-term damage to the survivability of rural hospitals in the state. 

The Republican leadership's obstruction comes despite the fact that Medicaid Expansion is favored by a wide majority of Kansans—​and even by a majority of both houses of the Kansas Legislature. Interestingly, in a statewide election earlier this month, the Oklahoma electorate approved Medicaid Expansion in that state—​leaving Kansas as one of the few outliers still refusing to participate in the program.

Although the Medicaid expansion issue has received the most attention, an effort by Attorney General Derek Schmidt to have the entire Affordable Care Act (ACA) thrown out would have broader and even more devastating consequences for Kansans. General Schmidt has joined with a number of other Republican attorneys general in filing a lawsuit seeking to have the ACA declared unconstitutional. The case is now before the United States Supreme Court.

I think we all realize that undermining and ultimately eliminating the ACA, because it was an achievement of the Obama Administration, has been a continuing objective of Trump. Who can forget the fictional Trump campaign promise to offer a simpler, less expensive, and universally available health insurance program?  Such a pipe dream, of course, was never real and has never materialized. Instead, the ACA has been the target of unrelenting attack by the Trump administration and his minions, including Attorney General Schmidt. Trump and the Attorney General have chosen ideology (or perhaps simple jealousy) over the financial, emotional and physical health of literally millions of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Kansans.

What are the specific consequences to Kansans if Attorney General Schmidt and his colleagues prevail? First, of course, their efforts would deprive more than 100,000 Kansans of health insurance coverage that they have been or would be able to obtain under the ACA—​but that is only the beginning.  

Additionally, Attorney General Schmidt’s efforts would eliminate the possibility of Medicaid expansion. Tens of thousands of hard working, but low income, Kansans would be deprived of the opportunity to acquire health insurance through Medicaid. They and our state’s hospitals and businesses would continue to suffer without the possibility of legislative relief. 

And there is much more. If the Attorney General prevails, protections for those having pre-existing health conditions would be taken away. The ACA prohibition against placing lifetime or annual limits on the dollar value of coverage for essential health care benefits would be eliminated. There would no longer be a requirement that health plans extend coverage to dependent children up to the age of 26. Beyond that, a host of other health care benefits for individuals ranging from transparency requirements to limitations on eligibility waiting periods would also be lost.

I do not know what decision the Supreme Court may reach. I do know, however, that Attorney General Schmidt and others who recklessly seek repeal of the ACA have elevated loyalty to Trump and his agenda above the very real needs and interests of individual Kansans and Americans. They have departed from any path that elevates the common good above political ideology. In doing that, I believe they dishonor the tradition of their Kansas Republican predecessors and all those sensible representatives who prioritize listening and doing right by Kansans, rather than scoring political points. They should be called to account.

​The people of Kansas deserve leaders who will represent their interests and work for them, rather than for themselves or their own partisan gain. This November's election will be yet another opportunity to bring this closer to a reality for the Kansans who need it most.
Picture
Kansas Attorney General, Derek Schmidt [Photo by: John Hanna/AP]
2 Comments

Political Fundraising: Tales from the Inbox

7/11/2020

0 Comments

 
Picture
Although it’s a necessary part of the process, it seems candidate staff tend to have no respect for those of us receiving fundraising solicitations and, FYI, the really crazy messages all come from out-of-state. I guess the writers assume we are naive, forgetful, and mostly suckers for whatever they write and ask. They just have to ask, which is essential, and, yes, often the request does work.

Ninety-eight to 99% of emails I receive are fundraising messages, many from candidates I have no idea who they are. I clean out my email inbox several times every day. This has meant deleting one fundraising request after another, giving little or no thought and I know at least once a day I delete a message that I should have read and in some cases should have responded. 

Typically, seven days a week, I will get more than a dozen or two requests a day from the Biden campaign. But, I can give Joe Biden a break. His direct fundraising letters, even those from his staff, usually have thoughtful appeals tied to real issues generally of concern. My problem with Biden’s campaign is that they ask me so often that I now just delete and move on. 

In general, most campaign requests start asking for only $5. They share how desperate the candidate is and that the campaign will be all over if they do not raise $5,403 by midnight and your $5 will make the difference. The candidate is running for the United States Senate, and you tell me my $5 towards raising just $5K, could lead to victory? Do they think I am stupid? Yes, probably so, because the fundraising system works.

But the craziest thing I see in online political fundraising is the strategy to hit you from both extremes on the same day. For example, in a morning email the focus can be on a devastating new poll where the candidate they want you to support is crashing and can only be saved by a rush of new money. In the afternoon, that same poll for the same race shows the same candidate charging ahead and only with your dollars can the candidate hold the lead.

One of the best examples of that is the McGrath-McConnell race in Kentucky. On June 10th at 7:59am, I received this email headline: “Amy McGrath Wins” followed by “We just got the best news from Kentucky- brand new poll 41% to 41%. Amy is dominating him (McConnell).”
Picture
​Then, that same day, at 10:06am, I received this message: “Amy McGrath lost. Almost no one—​seriously no one—​is donating to hit our June goal. 36 hours left. If 12,254 people donate right now, we’ll hit tomorrow's ad budget goal and Mitch McConnell will lose.” Crazy as it seems, they do raise big money.
Picture
I want to make this clear, I am not discouraging folks from giving to candidates they want to support. I just wish that more candidates would use straight-forward requests and a little more honest substance on why one should make a contribution.
0 Comments

Will Republicans Ever Stand Up to Trump?

6/28/2020

0 Comments

 
I’ve had this thought for some time after earlier screw-ups, wondering how, not just our own Kansas Republicans, but almost all elected Republicans stick with the President regardless how obvious the mistakes. What purpose does that serve? I suppose the answer is an easier re-election. But, given all the problems we have (including the unfolding story about Russian bounties for killing for U.S. troops), wouldn’t it be a good time to speak up respectfully? 

IF THE NFL AND NASCAR CAN STAND UP TO PRESIDENT TRUMP WITH BILLIONS AT STAKE, WHY CAN’T YOU?

Over the past several weeks, we have seen people of all colors and backgrounds take to the streets, not just in this nation but around the world, demanding action to solve the obvious racial issues we have. Police departments all across the nation are under (and rightfully so) close inspection for major long overdue changes. Social justice for now is at the top of most political agendas. But where are the Republicans who are actually standing up to the President? This is a time for Republicans to join Democrats to pass real sensible legislation that has large public support and will signal just maybe we are on the road to recovery and sanity and, if necessary, over the President’s veto. 

Consider also COVID-19 in the early stages, when lessons from other countries should have been learned and turned into mitigation strategies for the United States. Why were the Republicans silent when it became clear that cutting the CDC budget was a huge mistake? Where were they when the cross-agency federal task force set up by President Obama to deal with such problems was abandoned? Democrats spoke up, but I’m sure the general public saw that as only politics. We needed Republicans to speak the truth, speak the truth to power, but they did not and here we are.

I think back to the Republicans who previously represented Kansas that I have known and in some cases worked with for the common good. This includes Senator Frank Carlson, Senator Nancy Kassebaum, Senator Jim Pearson, Senator Bob Dole, and Congresswoman Jan Myers. I can't imagine any of these Kansans not standing up to President Trump for the best interest of the country and even the future of the Republican Party.

It is not just our Kansas delegation but the Republican Party in general. We need a return to the days when we had two strong, competent political parties representing in general two different philosophies. Leaders from both parties were committed to work together in the end to get done what needed to be done for the best interests of the state and country. With the Republican Party now being so very far right and in so many ways anti-government, compromises are hard if not impossible to come by, and the result is needed action doesn’t take place. 

This stalemate explains why issues like social justice, climate change and infrastructure needs have never been dealt with and very likely will not be addressed unless major changes take place in how our political system works. That will only happen, it seems, when the people rise up and demand change, demand respect for the rule of law, and a return to the democracy our founders created for us. This positive change starts at the ballot box.

​Register and vote like our future depends on it, because it most certainly does.
Picture
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell maintains a Republican shield, protecting the President's lawlessness and preventing needed legislative progress.
0 Comments

Thanking the Governors (Most of Them)

5/20/2020

0 Comments

 
With the exception of a few who are content with carrying out whatever the President wants from them—​and setting aside my own possible bias—​I’ve been especially impressed with the Governors and their role with today’s Coronavirus crisis. Leading on the front line, dealing with unbelievable challenges, and making decisions daily that are seldom easily understood by their constituents, Governors have been the ones with the courage to lead. All of this comes at a time when the Federal Government just cannot get its act together on any consistent basis. National media outlets are turning to the Governors to get honest information on what is really taking place. Governors from both parties, including our own Governor Kelly, are clearly stepping up and in many cases filling the leadership void coming from Washington.  

From my experience, I know about how challenging an issue like this pandemic can be. Issuing Executive Orders based on the best science available, while knowing your economy and state budget are going to hell, makes for long days. Then there is the pressure from the public to keep everyone safe and healthy but also get people back to work and students back to school. Nothing is easy here. And the lack of federal guidance and support has left the states to largely fend for themselves on necessary supplies and infrastructure—​and foot the bill for it. We can only hope Congress will get its act together and pass some budget relief for the states, otherwise, it will be yet another failure in the response from Washington, D.C., and this one will be largely due to problems they failed to solve during the initial relief stages.

Many Governors are demonstrating real leadership at a time when it is so desperately needed. Their strategy is not rocket science. They surround themselves with very good, qualified advisors. They listen to these experts and then make the tough decisions. These Governors respect science and take seriously that they are leading for all the citizens of their state, therefore leaving politics to a very definite back seat. And, as important as anything, they understand the value of communication that is accurate, understandable by the general public, and does not require walking the statement back shortly after its release.

I have always thought that those who have served as a Governor should be the most important pool from which to draw for potential candidates for President. I say that because in contrast to U.S. Senators, Governors have actually led large, complex organizations. They have experience making tough decisions that directly impact citizens as well as putting together leadership teams that are successful. And because Governors are closer to the people, they have experience dealing with the many challenges that come with being a decision-maker for the public’s interests.

When President Obama was starting out as U.S. Senator from Illinois, I recall telling him when he was in Topeka for a Washington Day Address that my unsolicited advice was to go back to Illinois and run for Governor and then he would be in a really strong position to run for President. Obviously, he didn’t take my advice and was a very good President, but could he have been even better with more Executive experience? On the flip side, given a high percentage of Illinois Governors have ended up in prison, rejecting my suggestion certainly had some merit.

The bottom line is that Governors represent not just the leadership needed now in this health and economic crisis, but they are the pipeline for future leaders of our country. Both political parties have talented Governors who would be excellent national leaders. Maybe the current debacle with a totally inexperienced leader at the national level will be a lesson we do not forget.
Governor Laura Kelly
Here in Kansas, Governor Laura Kelly has listened to the science and taken responsible action to keep Kansans safe during this difficult time. [Photo by: John Hanna/AP]
0 Comments

Democrats Lucky to Have Speaker Pelosi

5/9/2020

0 Comments

 
​Speaker Nancy Pelosi has led through difficult times, balancing political realities with what is best for the country. She has certainly come across often as the adult in the room of Congressional leaders and the Administration. Despite representing a very liberal district, she has operated from a very pragmatic point of view. She has charted an aggressive course of action while working to keep her caucus in the majority, knowing if they lose the majority everything accomplished would be destroyed.    

There are those that lump both Houses as making up the do nothing Congress. The facts clearly document that she and her caucus have actually been very responsive to the needs of the American people. Through her leadership and the hard work of her committee chairs and the Caucus, over 400 bills, many key ones, like safeguarding our elections and with huge public support, have passed the House and been sent to the Senate. From there, Republican Majority Leader McConnell makes sure the House legislation goes nowhere and that very few originating bills come out of the Senate for the House to work.

Her first major challenge was dealing with President Trump and the decision of Impeachment. Early on, she clearly wanted the Fall 2020 election to determine if the issues surrounding the President merited impeachment. I believe Speaker Pelosi thought delaying was both best for the United States as well as her Democratic Caucus. But when the Ukraine scandal more clearly brought to light impeachable offenses and the public tide shifted towards holding hearings, she quickly assigned her Judiciary and Intelligence committees to hold hearings. She managed the process effectively and amazingly kept her troops together (albeit, there was one defector), to pass the impeachment of the President and send the indictment to the United States Senate.

Her role in the government’s response to the Coronavirus again showed her leadership skills and capacity both to challenge and to work with this Administration. Speaker Pelosi worked one-on-one with Treasury Secretary Mnuchin to develop packages that address the nation’s needs as well as secure the support of the Administration and the votes needed in the Senate. While not perfect, these relief efforts have been made significantly better through the help of Speaker Pelosi and other Congressional Democrats.
Picture
The first day of the 116th Congress, Nancy Pelosi was once again elected Speaker of the House on January 3rd, 2019.
What makes her accomplishments even more interesting is that, after the 2018 Congressional elections and winning the majority, many members of the Democratic Caucus worked hard to deny Pelosi the Speakership. Yet, she not only won, but today is almost without exception solidly backed by the entire caucus. This is not an easy thing to accomplish. But the amount of respect she has garnered among her colleagues over the years and her experienced leadership have clearly made her the right person for the job, at the right time.

Given the challenges of dealing with a President like Trump and a Majority Leader like McConnell, Speaker Pelosi has done amazing things. History will place her in the short list of Speakers who have really stood out with common sense, political savvy, and success. She has impacted Washington action in a positive way for the best interests of our country.

I am currently reading the new book “Pelosi,” by Molly Ball. I haven’t finished it yet, but I’ve already learned about so many fascinating, character-building experiences she’s had in her decades of public service. She has always been a smart, tough leader. And she's paved the way for so many other outstanding female leaders, who will help guide us into the future. I’m looking forward to learning more about her brilliant career as I finish reading this insightful new book.
Picture
This photo was taken at the Reopening and Rededication of the Rotunda at the National Archives on September 17th, 2003. Pictured here are Congressional leaders, Rep. Steny Hoyer, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Sen. Tom Daschle, and Speaker Dennis Hastert along with former Chief Justice William Rehnquist, who delivered remarks and myself, Archivist of the United States.
0 Comments

Lessons from Coronavirus: Respect for Science Saves Lives

4/22/2020

0 Comments

 
One lesson I learned very early in public life is that when the government fails to deliver during any kind of crisis, whether that be a snow storm or something of the nature we have now nationally, people are more likely than ever to not forgive the person(s) in charge come election time. Whether that will hold true with the current crisis remains to be seen. I know from experience that even the folks who follow the small government philosophy expect the government to do whatever it takes in a crisis to get things back to normal. And the best way to get back to "normal" in today's circumstances would be to follow the advice and guidance from health care professionals and public health experts. Unfortunately, with folks openly defying and protesting stay-at-home orders, politics has been injected into a situation that should revolve solely around science and the responsible actions that are needed in order to keep people safe. Continuing with the Lessons from Coronavirus I started last week, it is my hope that one thing this crisis can teach us is the value of science in our governance and day-to-day decisions. 

Without a doubt, there are now and will be more citizens who will die as a result of federal failures and some Governors who have refused to issue orders for the public to follow standard protocols in minimizing the spread of the Coronavirus or will move to reopen their states without the adequate testing procedures in place to ensure public safety. The key question now is: When the real health experts tell us what we need to do to get back to normal and stay there, will the President and all Governors really lead? Or will some elected leaders simply ignore them and fumble around giving lip service at best and putting the blame elsewhere?
 
One clear example of accountability is observing how leaders provide the public with reliable, factual, and science-based information. There have and will be more deaths from the virus, the direct result of citizens getting their news and health updates from Rush Limbaugh and Fox News. Fox News has finally come around to accept some real science but only after large death numbers have piled up. Such behavior borders on criminal action. And now, they are pushing to “open up the economy” immediately, viewing all those who will be infected in the future as an “acceptable loss.” 

Unfortunately, if folks simply refuse to understand or believe the real danger posed by COVID-19, that does not exempt them from getting sick or infecting others. In fact, reckless behavior in this volatile time will have dire consequences. Time will reveal the whole story. And, when the results come in, it will be impossible to ignore the real impact and loss of life from a virus that does not stop to ask someone if they believe in its existence before infecting an individual and taking its toll. So, more than ever, Americans need to hear the truth and operate from one set of facts in order to guide responsible action and decisions.

The appreciation we’ve seen for health care professionals gives me hope that perhaps more people will respect their sacrifices by heeding their expert advice—​during this crisis and into the future. Given all the time we have been staying at home, there is plenty of time to think. In this case, I want to look for a silver lining, something potentially positive to come out of this horrific tragedy we are living through. Writing this blog got me thinking about what could be really positive spin offs to come from what we are experiencing. As I wrote last week, it’s critical for us to learn from this crisis in order for us all to emerge stronger.

​Could one result be the public having MORE RESPECT FOR SCIENCE in governance decisions? And, if so, does that extend to other policy areas, many of which have parallels to what we’re seeing with Coronavirus? For instance, what about a majority of the public accepting the realities like climate change and voting in November for candidates who understand and are willing to invest in policy changes needed for our own good?  

Naturally, coming to this conclusion without a global pandemic would have been the ideal, but I will take second best, given our choices at the moment.
Picture
0 Comments

Lessons from Coronavirus: Federal Failures

4/14/2020

1 Comment

 
When we experience a challenge or crisis—​like we’re seeing with the COVID-19 pandemic—​it reveals what we’re made of. This comes with a recognition that previous actions and decisions have consequences, and they ultimately lead us to the norms, systems, and structures we currently have in place. Unfortunately, we cannot change the past events that have led us to this disastrous point with the Coronavirus crisis, but we can most definitely learn from these events in ways that better prepare us for the future. There are many aspects to cover and many things to learn, and I plan to continue exploring other lessons throughout the crisis and further down the road on my blog. But I want to start with the area that is perhaps the most glaring vulnerability that has been exposed by this crisis: the failure of federal leadership to respond to and address the immediate public health risk that all Americans now face.

​Here are some of the governance lessons that stand out to me from the federal level:

First, it’s clear that, with something as big and complex as the current crisis, there is not and can not be just one Federal level agency with the budget or capacity to fully deliver. Over four years ago, President Obama recognized this and put in place a coordinating mechanism that could reach across agency lines to better assure that the response to a major crisis would have the best chance of success. President Trump abolished the Obama-created White House National Security Council Directorate for Global Health Security and Biodefense, consistent with his philosophy of small government being best. In my opinion, that was a short-sighted decision and the current crisis is clear evidence there are challenges where every resource of the Federal government needs to be brought together in a coordinated way to be the most effective. 

Second, if a small government approach is the path a President takes, it becomes even more important to have better coordinating and operating systems in place. In any crisis affecting multiple states, there will always be some resources and involvement from the Federal government. For example, the Department of Defense resources for working with state and local governments to deal with the health crisis should always be an option. And, in terms of engagement with the private sector, it should be done in a coordinated, mission-oriented fashion, rather than the “everyone for themselves” approach we’re currently seeing. The private sector has expertise and a huge capacity for innovation and production, but this needs to be leveraged more effectively—​which requires strong leadership making specific directives and implementing smart, strategic policies.

With this pandemic, we were simply not prepared. The Federal government was not ready to deal with the challenge and certainly had no coordinated system worked out with state and local government. The fact that our government and infrastructure at the national level and in many states was so woefully under-prepared to deal with this pandemic is linked to successful right-wing moves at all levels of government and across many areas, like health care, the social safety net, and more. They have been able to cut necessary programs at every opportunity, without thinking about the real results including loss of lives. 

The other clear lesson in this crisis is that choices made in selecting leadership across all levels of government can and does make a huge difference in the capacity of government to respond with clear, accurate information and decisive action. In making appointments, President Trump emphasized family, business, and political connections much more than whether the person had the capacity to deliver. And, perhaps worst of all, those folks are now in positions where they can effectively shut out or, worse yet, actively ignore or deny the advice of the scientists and experts we do have within our government.

And, when it comes to leadership at the very top—​from the President himself—it pains me to see just how far we've fallen from President Truman's "the buck stops here," to President Trump's "I don't take responsibility at all" stance. Deflecting any blame and trying to rewrite the history of his administration's response is a sign of weakness, not strength, in a time of crisis. And it's certainly not the way to actually solve problems or gain trust and credibility with the American people.

Hopefully, out of this crisis, we learn something. Government should be at the size and quality to serve the legitimate needs of the public. Whether that be Federal dominated or heavily led by the states, the response to a crisis like Coronavirus must be well-planned in advance, with the correct systems in place, and the leadership needed to carry out the mission.

I’ll have more “Lessons from Coronavirus” in the coming weeks, including some positive notes on the leadership we’re seeing across our state and country, so I hope you’ll continue to follow along. And keep in mind as we go through these difficult days and weeks: There is always more we can learn. These challenging times will require all the dialogue and lessons we can possibly generate in order to help us all emerge from this crisis stronger. It’s something we can all contribute to and participate in; whether it’s changes to large, complex systems or in our everyday activities, we can always improve, and creativity will be key. Good ideas and leadership can come from anyone, anywhere, at any time. Remember: Challenges simply reveal what we’re made of.
Picture
Wearing his campaign hat, President Trump visited CDC Headquarters on March 6th. It was the day he promised that, "everyone who needs a test gets a test...they have the tests and the tests are beautiful." With a group of experts standing behind him, he utilized his press conference to talk at length about his own intelligence and how much he understands about science and public health. As several states were reporting their first cases, including Kansas the day after this visit, he also utilized the opportunity to spread misinformation about the virus being "under control" and mischaracterizing the timeline for possible vaccines and treatments. He then took to attacking the media and smearing Governors of the opposing party, calling Gov. Jay Inslee, "a snake" and telling Vice President Pence not to be complimentary of him. And, of course, when asked about taking in Americans from the Grand Princess cruise ship, he explained that he'd rather not because, "I like the numbers being where they are." All of this happened at a time when Americans desperately needed correct, clear communication about the spread of COVID-19 and the enormous challenges facing all of us.
1 Comment

Republicans Perfectly Comfortable with Trump's Wrongdoing

2/1/2020

2 Comments

 
The United States Senate—​with all but two Republican Senators—​has cleared President Trump of any impeachable actions. What does that mean for our immediate future? What will Trump do beyond what he has already done? Certainly, Trump will do whatever it takes to win re-election, but it would not surprise me if he makes plans to stay in office beyond a second term.

At this point, just what would President Trump have to do to lose the support of Republicans in Congress? This week almost all Republicans are making it clear they are with him regardless of what additional evidence emerges. Even the President’s defense lawyers for the hearings admit to his wrongdoing in many cases. But they insist his actions do not reach the level for “Impeachment (Indictment) for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors” (Article II Section 4 of the United States Constitution).

I think back to all the earlier Republican Senators from Kansas that I’ve had a chance to work with or at least get to know. I cannot imagine any of them supporting what is going on now. Kassebaum, Pearson, and Carlson for sure, and I have to believe Senator Dole privately is shaking his head in disbelief. Their values and principles would have stood up to any future primary threat like what now seems to be keeping many of our current Senators towing the party line.

President Clinton lied about sex with a White House intern, and most Republican Senators had no hesitation supporting throwing him out of office. The Democrats in the end backed Clinton, but the trial was a real trial with witnesses and records very available. The rules for the trial were adopted on a vote of 100 to 0. That is in total contrast to the circus run by Majority Leader McConnell. Their vote to essentially skip the actual trial phase and deny the American people access to all the information and relevant witnesses is equivalent to full participation in the cover-up. Now, with multiple branches of government participating in this cover-up, we have reached a dangerous new low for our country.

If Trump, now having survived an impeachment trial, wins a second term, returning to our system of democracy and the rule of law will very likely not happen. Capitalism will dominate. The very rich will solidify their hold on Washington D.C., and our good memories of the past will be just that.  

Trump and his campaign operatives will certainly feel comfortable doing whatever they want to win re-election. Certainly in play will be courting foreign countries to help rig the election in return for some kind of promise of financial support. In time, not cheating may become the pathway to almost always losing. 

If leaders accept this conduct from a President now for whatever reason, I raise these questions: Just how do we get this genie back in the bottle? How do we go from ignoring the law and the Constitution to respecting and adhering to the Democracy and system of checks and balances set up by our founders? This is not just a setback that simply in the passage of time will be corrected. And this is particularly true if President Trump is re-elected, making November 3rd a do or die day for our future.
Picture
2 Comments

Just Weeks Before Iowa, Where Are We Now?

1/17/2020

1 Comment

 
Which candidate benefited the most from the last debate before the Iowa caucuses? That depends on who you ask. Each of the six candidates clearly think they won and the press varies in their observations with at least some positive remarks for all six. For me, no one hurt themselves or unlikely got a big boost, but if I had to pick one winner, I’d say Tom Steyer. Steyer had the advantage of being the one we’ve heard less from on the debate stage, although his television ads are becoming all-too-familiar. However, he did have some powerful responses to several key questions and looked right into the camera talking directly to the American people. 

I thought the debate was the best so far with CNN and their panel did a really good job. I think they asked the right questions, in some cases targeted to specific candidates who clearly differ  in opinion on what is the right approach. CNN moderators also focused in on problem areas for specific candidates like Vice President Biden with his son on Ukraine and Mayor Pete and the black vote.   

For right now, I do not see any candidate who is really on a roll. One might say Biden with his name recognition advantage. But, given that several candidates are bunched at the top of the polls and the history of surprises in both Iowa and New Hampshire, who knows? Senator Sanders has come up in the polls and could win both Iowa and New Hampshire. In the Iowa caucuses, voters for candidates who don't make the 15% threshold on the first round can go home or stay and participate in the second round and shift to one of the remaining candidates. That makes being the second choice for candidates remaining quite important. This also makes the back-and-forth between Senators Sanders and Warren an interesting feud to keep an eye on, given that they need to draw some contrast while also keeping one another's supporters willing to cross over if the situation calls for it. Meanwhile, this divide may open the door for other candidates to compete for the rest of the votes that are currently up-for-grabs.

Two new issues make predicting winners more difficult. First, the new schedule put together by the Democratic National Party moves up many state primaries and caucuses to have a real Super Tuesday on March 3rd, just one week after the South Carolina Primary. Second, Billionaire Mayor Michael Bloomberg will then be on many of those ballots.

For Super Tuesday, Biden and Sanders will still be in the running, Mayor Pete and Warren probably, as well as Steyer and Bloomberg who have the money to continue. One additional wildcard is Senator Bennett from Colorado who is flying below the radar. He is very well qualified but hampered by his late start. He has put everything into New Hampshire and that primary does have a history of impacting the vote in remaining states. 

Before you dismiss the chances of Bloomberg and even Steyer having any real opportunity, remember that by Super Tuesday the other candidates will likely have very little money. Having momentum out of the first four contests is more important than saving dollars for March 3rd. Biden could be the exception with his name recognition. Bloomberg and Steyer are certainly the wild cards with television ads all across the country. I say that because they are both on television here in Kansas with high quality ads, certainly a new experience for us.

So where does that leave us? The only thing I know for sure is that our granddaughter is still very much with Mayor Pete.
Picture
1 Comment

Best and Worst from the 2010s

1/4/2020

2 Comments

 
Looking back over the last ten years and my eighth decade of life, I am sharing what stands out for me both in good ways and bad:

On the good side:

  1. I had the pleasure of finishing ten years as Archivist of the United States and played a role in making sure we all understand that it is not just for history that we have records, but to protect citizens’ entitlements (Veterans, for example). And maybe, most importantly given the times we are in, conveying the importance of records as essential in holding the government accountable.
  2. My engagement with the Staley School of Leadership Studies at Kansas State University for the entire decade has grown my confidence in the potential of our younger population, giving me hope for the future.
  3. Governor Kelly defeating Secretary of State Kris Kobach in the 2018 election.
  4. Kansas City Royals won the World Series for the first time since 1985, K-State won Big 12 championships in both football and basketball. Yes, KU won the other nine in basketball, but offsetting that, K-State was 10-0 competing against KU in football. 
  5. Kansas State University closed the decade by making really good decisions and hires that will, I believe, have significant positive impact for the coming decade. 


On the bad side: 

  1. Having to endure eight Brownback years (and all the mistakes that will haunt Kansans for many years) really makes a much more difficult path to the future for both the Governor and Legislators.
  2. The election of Donald Trump as President in 2016. A man with little or no respect for the law, little or no understanding of how our government functions, and little or no appreciation of the huge challenges (e.g., climate change) we face that, if not addressed, will do damage of unbelievable portions.
  3. Having Moscow Mitch (Republican Senator from Kentucky) in a position to stop almost every important piece of legislation through the entire decade, even those that had overwhelming public support. In addition, his handling of the courts and judges has set several damaging precedents for the future.
  4. Almost 100% of Scientists with a climate background have issued serious warnings throughout the decade and there has been little or no action in response.
  5. The national failure to make any progress on immigration reform, funding of infrastructure needs, dealing with gun violence, addressing climate change, as well as the increasing National debt. This represents the utmost failure of our leadership in Washington D.C.

Here’s to a new year and decade with the hope that progress can and will be made.
Rotunda National Archives
The rotunda of the National Archives, home to the "Charters of Freedom." These documents, including our Constitution, have safeguarded democracy in our country since its founding. But, as we know from Dr. Benjamin Franklin, our nation is only a republic, "if we can keep it."
2 Comments

The "Trump Effect" in 2020 and Beyond

12/14/2019

1 Comment

 
Removing or defeating President Trump is only a start of what needs to be done to bring this country back to one of sound leadership, more balanced policies, having respect for the law, and return to being respected around the world. The odds of being successful are very slim unless there is strong leadership, a return to some degree of bipartisanship (or at least respect and mutual understanding on core issues related to our system of government), and it will also take a supportive public that understands this will all take much time. 

Exacerbating our predicament is that Trump supporters are not going away after the 2020 election, even if their leader is no longer President. Trump’s base is the Tea Party on steroids, and Trump potentially could remain their leader. The Tea Party, the earlier far-right caucus, for the most part emerged on their own and without the use of a public figure (other than being anti-President Obama) who had ready access to nationwide news coverage.  

I am certain that I am not the only one thinking this way. I am convinced that many current Republican office holders are not just concerned about 2020, but they are planning beyond this upcoming election and are factoring in Trump’s base going forward. The Republican Senators who are not up for re-election in 2020 seem as frightened as those who are, and I understand why. For Democrats to attack moderate Republicans who toe the line with the President could prove costly for the country. Why? If doing what is right for the country causes moderates to lose a Republican primary in places where electing a Democrat in the general election is highly unlikely, we may find ourselves in an even worse situation in the United States Senate.  

In her recent book, Governor/Ambassador Nikki Haley (former moderate for sure), whether intended or not, basically documented this reality. She wants a future in public service, understandably so, and I suspect she knows that the current Trump voter base is going to continue to play a role in Republican primaries. In her book, it is very clear she has some very strong differences with the President, but she also makes it clear she defends him on impeachment and supports him on many issues—​issues that I suspect she would have evaluated differently before the time of Trump. She's even started to walk back some of the very positions that gave her some appeal as a moderate voice among her Republican colleagues. And the political calculations she's clearly making should serve as a warning that, even after 2020, much work will remain in order to truly remove "the Trump effect" from our politics. 

This is not a cheery message for sure. But I believe that anytime someone, or in this case a country, deals with huge challenges, having a realistic and honest look at reality is where one must start. Young people give me hope. And let us all remember, this is not the first time America has had its back to the wall.
Picture
1 Comment

Impeachment Process and Where We Stand At This Point

12/8/2019

0 Comments

 
I am old enough that this is my third experience in a process that, fortunately, just doesn’t happen that often. There was Nixon and Watergate, Clinton and Monica, and now President Trump and his disregard for the rule of law. With now three years in office, he has taken crossing the line to a whole new level.

This blog is not to recount the details of the hearings that I am hopeful you heard or saw some part of, but to share my view on the politics and the process of it for both parties and incumbents on both sides.

I am happy that the Democrats are accepting their constitutional responsibility to follow the process and see where it leads, rather than playing safe politics and holding off for another election where the same tactics of foreign interference can easily be used again. For now, the House Democrats appear to be moving towards a vote before Christmas passing Articles of Impeachment to the Senate. In the Senate, where the official trial would take place, the Republicans, for now, have the votes to acquit. This does not mean the whole procedure was a wasted effort. The public has benefited from the hearings and should be much more informed if the final decision is up to them come November 2020. 

I am very proud of the House Leadership and how they have handled the Impeachment process in a very responsible way. House Speaker Pelosi has clearly risen to the occasion, balancing political concerns with constitutional responsibilities. Representative Adam Schiff from California has been superb, with a focus on laying out the facts not just for Congress but for the American people. They rightly chose to accept their constitutional responsibility rather than ducking and playing it safe politically. 

I would hope that anyone following the hearings understands that what the President did (solicit help from a foreign country to dig up dirt on a political opponent) is wrong. In my opinion, there are several Republicans that would join the Democrats in convicting the President if it weren't for the politics of needing the President’s base to get re-elected. 

But for all this effort with so many folks in big trouble, some in jail, some headed there, and for some just becoming damaged goods, the real political backfire might be that Trump picked the wrong horse to try to damage. With his support numbers staying steady so far, right now, I would put Joe Biden at the front of Presidential candidates, although with little more than a 50-50 chance of becoming the nominee. The big unknown at this point is the entrance of Michael Bloomberg into the race and what impact that would bring.

But the side benefit for all this has to be seeing the professionalism and courage that the career civil service leaders in the state department, foreign service, CIA, and the ambassadors showed in standing up to the administration's pressure to not testify. Several who did testify are naturalized citizens, who came here as immigrants and have given their lives to the service of this country. Why would they do this? More than anything else, I believe it is their support for our Constitution and our historic respect for the rule of law. What message will we send to the world about where we stand on those issues today?
Picture
0 Comments

The Surge in Youth Voting Must Continue

11/17/2019

0 Comments

 
The good news is that college voter participation is growing significantly. In a recent New York Times article, they shared that college voter “turnout in the 2018 midterms—​40.3 percent of 10 million students tracked by Tufts University’s Institute for Democracy & Higher Education—​was more than double the rate in the 2014 midterms, easily exceeding an already robust increase in national turnout.”

The bad news is that many Republican lawmakers all across the country are doing everything possible to not just stop this trend but to turn it around and not with a persuasive argument but through voter suppression. Intentionally making voting more difficult should not be a surprise, as we have long experienced issues like limited voting places in key areas to create long lines and wait time that can discourage voters. These strategies are all designed to help elect Republicans who struggle to appeal to a broad cross section of the electorate. Apparently, for at least some Republican lawmakers, making it more difficult for some voters to practice their right, just makes common sense if it will help them get re-elected or pass special interest legislation that Republicans support.

In general, today’s state action driven by Republicans to reduce student voting focuses on reducing and in some cases eliminating early voting sites, adding various voter ID requirements and restrictions, making use of student ID cards as difficult as possible, and on election day, not having any voting opportunities on campus. Some would say that this behavior is just politics and everyone does it. Aside from this being untrue, it is certainly not the American way to limit voter participation after all the years of work to get the vote for women and eliminate many restrictions designed to limit certain folks from voting.

We’ve been through voter challenges in Kansas with the reign of Secretary of State Kris Kobach and his agenda of voter suppression. Hid under the guise of detecting election fraud, he did everything he could to limit certain populations from voting, voters that he concluded would vote the wrong way. This in particular included students. At the height of his voter ID law, during the 2014 elections, I recall visiting with students here in Manhattan who did not have the required documents with them at college, such as a birth certificate, which was required in order to fully register and participate in Kansas elections. Many of these restrictions have since been paused or struck down in court, which has allowed for the full registration process to be completed online. And, after years of Kobach’s efforts, there was very little if any evidence of election fraud found. Almost all of his examples were new residents of Kansas that were not always aware of our different policies. Now he is running as a candidate for the United States Senate, and given his track record, I would expect him to, if elected, continue his cause and at the same time show no concern about Russian interference or the serious election infrastructure and security issues that need to be addressed in our national elections. 

Kobach’s replacement as Secretary of State, also a Republican I must add, appears so far to want to increase voter participation, which I commend. Riley County, Kansas has a very professional County Clerk, who happens to be a Republican, running elections who is outstanding in his efforts toward encouraging voting. There are good examples at the local level of folks taking access to the vote seriously, and working to promote it among people no matter their background or political stripes. And, with the courts striking down many of Kobach's restrictions, access to the vote has improved in Kansas, and so has youth participation. All of this is cause for optimism, and I sincerely hope these trends can continue.

Surely this should transcend partisanship; more people involved in our electoral process is a very good thing for our system of government, especially at a time when the values and ideals of democracy are being tested at home and around the world.

If we give a damn about the future and the challenges we face like climate change, we will work hard to stop voter suppression policies and open up more access to the vote, not less. We desperately need young people’s participation in elections to bring a more balanced look at what needs to be done and policies to improve society and the environment for the long term. Making it difficult for young people to vote is just crazy and short-sighted.
Picture
Pictured here is Anita Austin of the organization Loud Light, which is working to increase youth participation through voter registration and information efforts. Click the photo to visit their website to learn more or support their work. [Photo Credit: Kansas News Service]
0 Comments

Greta Thunberg and the Power of Your Ballot

11/9/2019

0 Comments

 
Seldom if not almost never does a sixteen year old student grab the attention of a significant part of the world. But in her recent call to action on climate change, Greta Thunberg from Sweden certainly did. Her video went viral and set off a great deal of positive response. Just as the Parkland students did on gun violence, we adults are reminded that this younger generation just might be the folks who force the changes necessary in so many areas of real concern.

I want to feel good about these steps, and am very complimentary of these young leaders for stepping up and trying to lead older generations to action. I wish them the very best. But I also know from years of experience that major movement on issues like guns and climate change requires more than gaining publicity and attention. Their actions and leadership must result in younger generations becoming more heavily involved in the political process.
Every opportunity I have with students, I push voter registration and actually voting. I don’t give lessons on how to register or how to vote, but I make the point that it is at the ballot box where these students can have the most power. I try to get them to understand that if young people want to have their agenda get the attention of candidates and elected officials, they need to start deciding the results of elections rather than leaving that up to older generations. I know from experience how quickly politicians will change if their election or reelection is at risk.

At the Staley School of Leadership Studies, we put a great deal of emphasis on civic engagement. We want our students to appreciate that in these times we need citizens who will step up and help their government by truly understanding issues and building support for positive change. Often at the local level, whether it be a school board or a city/county commission issue, if elected officials know there are citizens who understand and will support change, action becomes politically easier.

While many of our problems like climate change require action at the state, national, and international level, quality leadership at the local level is a good start. What is lacking at this point at the national level is the leadership for change by turning growing interest and collective knowledge into real action. We must have elected leaders committed to helping lead successfully on the issue of climate change. In practical terms this means much will ride on our Presidential election. However, it all starts with engagement and good leadership at the local level. We just held local elections here in Kansas, where there was an uptick in attention and turnout to local races. But this momentum must continue to grow for local elections and as we move into 2020.
Greta Thunberg
0 Comments

The Trump-Brownback Approach to Civil Service

10/12/2019

1 Comment

 
Career public servants have long been the backbone of state, local, and federal government. For eighteen years (eight as Governor and ten as Archivist of the United States), I had the pleasure of working with some of the brightest public servants one could find. They were dedicated to fulfilling the purpose of the agency’s existence and to the government in general. 

Civil servants are the doers of the People's business. Governor Brownback then and President Trump now have both led to disregarding, making counterproductive changes, and politicizing the civil service system. Not only has this brought very negative results immediately, but even more serious damage is happening as time goes on. Here are several examples: 

Governor Brownback changed Kansas law so that if a civil service position was vacated for whatever reason, the replacement could be a direct political appointment. This law was used to reclassify many state employees away from career civil service positions with employment rights, to essentially politically-appointed positions who could be fired at any time for any reason. Combined with this action is the fact that during the Brownback years, Kansas had the highest exit rate of millennials leaving the state with one exception. Now Governor Kelly is dealing with a workforce where many of the Brownback hires are not the type of public servants needed. Attracting new and bright talent to work in that environment will take time and not be easy. In the meantime, government efficiency and effectiveness has and will continue to suffer.

Under the Brownback Administration, the Kansas Department of Agriculture (KDA) was moved from Topeka to Manhattan. Something K-State and Manhattan liked, but makes very little sense in terms of good government. KDA works closely with several other agencies on a regular basis in Topeka, making it now more difficult to coordinate and work together to better serve the public’s interests. The likely motivation for relocation was to shift from civil service jobs to political appointees. Moving over time can lead to significant turnover, allowing positions in the agency to be replaced by whomever the administration wants. This does not mean that everyone hired isn’t very qualified, but it opens the gate for strictly political hires to be made. 

Recently, President Trump, with 30 days notice, ordered the U.S. Department of Agriculture to move from the Washington D.C. area to Kansas City with many employees declining to relocate. There have been delays to this plan, I suspect because the administration has started to hit roadblocks in the process of making such a massive change so quickly. Now another agency, most of the Bureau of Land Management within the Interior Department, has been forced to move to Colorado. While the results of these moves will be similar to Kansas, I suspect in these federal cases the strategy is more a hasty move to cut government without regard to what is lost. Plus, it is the opportunity to employ some very likely lesser qualified personnel or sycophants who are willing to validate the President’s policy decisions on issues like climate change and others. Our government should employ real scientists, and it should treat them with the respect they deserve and give them the space to follow the science and the facts wherever they lead in order to serve our interests as a state and country. 

President Trump has been totally irresponsible in the way he has staffed up his administration. Vacancies and totally unqualified folks dominate the Trump administration. Turnover is the worst in my memory. Without a doubt this is the worst Presidential cabinet in history. They come and go so fast that keeping track of who is on the Cabinet is almost impossible. He has made some very good appointments, but they either get fired or worn out dealing with the chaos. The quality workforce has been hollowed out in many agencies, and this causes problems for the level of service and (in the case of the Department of State, Defense, and others) our national security. It will be a long path back to the return of a highly qualified federal civil service.

To anyone who says what’s the big deal: I guess whether government does it’s job well, serves the people with efficiency, and carries out their agency’s mission with purpose, makes no difference to you. I am confident that those who read my blog do not fit that mold. But I do suspect you need to be pushed a little to openly defend the value of a quality civil service system. Would anyone want private sector business to operate ineffectively? High turnover, incompetence, and much higher overhead, is not the direction for business success. Same is true with government.
Picture
Outside EPA Headquarters in Washington, D.C.
1 Comment

You Follow the Rules

9/21/2019

0 Comments

 
9/29/2019 Update:

It’s not often that I would do a re-share of a recent blog, but the story has come a long way since I posted this blog last week, and it warrants an update. The threat to the rule of law in our country has only gotten more serious and urgent. With the investigation well under way into the President’s misuse of power, the facts continue to point towards serious issues with the President’s conduct in withholding aid to Ukraine in order to pressure Ukrainian President Zelensky to dig up dirt on his political opponents. And, as if the notes of the phone call between the two Presidents were not damning enough, the extensive effort to cover up and unnecessarily classify information has brought these offenses simply beyond the pale. The cover-up effort itself raises questions about what other times this highly classified intelligence system has been misused in order to hide potential wrong-doing or restrict access to politically damaging information for the President.
 
The events come with grave implications for the credibility of our government, the integrity of our elections, and also for US foreign policy. And the defenders of the President have no legitimate defense. Their thin playbook only consists of attempts to discredit the whistleblower, which itself causes harm, deflecting to debunked claims against Joe Biden, or pushing Russian-created conspiracy theories that deny Russia’s efforts to meddle in the 2016 election. All-the-while, Ukraine continues to struggle against Russian aggression into their country. Ukrainian President Zelensky is now caught between a rock and a hard place. He must somehow appease President Trump’s ego in order to obtain needed military aid from the US, while not isolating his country from aid from European allies, all of whom have an interest in checking Russian aggression in the region. President Trump’s corrupt "favor" request to President Zelensky trivializes a very serious national security situation, and it runs counter to our country’s long-time foreign policy position to support Ukraine against Russia’s power-grabs.
 
To deny a country aid that the US Congress has granted to an ally is a huge misuse of power by the executive, and the fact that it further supports Russia’s foreign policy objectives is particularly troubling given what we already know about Russia's support for President Trump’s election and re-election. The American people deserve to know whether their President supports US interests or solely his own, or Russia's, interests. This gets back to my point in the original blog post: Outside influence on our democracy will continue unless our government—and Congress—successfully fights back.
 
The important thing now is that the inquiry continues, thoroughly but also with a level of speed and urgency. I believe the House has taken the right steps so far in order to surface the facts for the American people and make those facts known to Republican Senators, who have a lot of soul-searching to do in terms of just how far they’re willing to go to prop up President Trump. 
 
When we are faced with these challenges, action must be taken to preserve, protect, and defend our Constitution. I’m relieved to see this effort begin, and I join the rest of the country as we watch closely to see that those who have violated their oath are held accountable.
Picture
Original Post:

​Foreign government, adversaries in this case, interference in our elections is becoming an all too common experience as they plan to meddle again in the 2020 elections. Set aside for a moment whether or not you believe that President Trump colluded with the Russians to impact the 2016 presidential race. What we know and the President accepts is that interference did take place and he is certainly open to more help in 2020. What will be different in this coming election is that Russia may not be the only foreign government interfering. Outside influence on our democracy will continue unless our government successfully fights back.

Watergate and the Nixon Administration in the 70’s forced Congress to take action to address future law-breaking in political campaigns and elections. Out of that, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) was established with bipartisan support and for decades successfully dealt with questionable activity in politics and our election system. A six-member commission, equally politically split, hammered out decisions and effectively dealt with inappropriate actions. Now in recent years, starting before the Trump administration, the FEC has been totally partisan and completely incapable of dealing with the challenges.

There is some good news. Our often dysfunctional Congress is working in a bipartisan way to craft and put into use a reform plan to hopefully deal with much of this crisis. H.R.1 has passed the Democratic House with Republican support, and is on the Senate floor waiting for action. The bad news is Moscow Mitch, current Majority Leader, refuses to bring it up for a vote. This is hard to believe. The only logical reason (not a good one) would be the President has asked that the legislation be held, not wanting to meddle in Russia’s plan to help him again in the 2020 election.  

If Congress and the President fail to act, what needs to be understood is that over time, if not dealt with forcefully, this disrespect for the law can become routine, spreading across our country. India, one of the older democracies, is certainly an example of how this can happen. I know from experience in India that one must accept that paying bribes is just part of doing business there. And, given the situation in the United States with unlimited money in politics, we may not be far from this reality in our country today.

What can we do? One thing is to make sure our congressional delegation knows that election oversight is important and that the legitimacy of our democracy is at stake. Both Senators Roberts and Moran need to put pressure on McConnell to let the Senate vote on bipartisan H.R.1. The rule of law has to be much more than an often used slogan. Without such action, our democracy is seriously in danger.
Picture
0 Comments
<<Previous
Forward>>

    Author

    John W. Carlin​—​61st Speaker of the Kansas House, 40th Governor of Kansas, 8th Archivist of the United States, and student of leadership

    Categories

    All
    Agriculture
    Budgets And Taxation
    Capital Punishment
    China
    Civic Engagement
    Drinking Age
    Education
    Election 2016
    Election 2018
    Election 2020
    Election 2024
    Environment
    Health Care
    Higher Education
    Historical Perspective
    Infrastructure
    Judicial System
    Leadership
    LGBTQ Rights
    National Archives
    Research
    Teaching

    Facebook

    John W. Carlin

    Twitter

    Tweets by @johnwcarlin

    Subscribe

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    RSS Feed