What
can we learn locally from the national election?
Whatever your personal opinions, facts should have the last
word. Donald Trump is the President-Elect because enough people supported him
to pass the 270 Electoral College votes even if not the popular vote. What can
we expect from a businessman taking over the toughest job in the world?
To begin with, he wouldn’t be the first. Since 1900, there
are at least eight bona fide entrepreneurs who became presidents: Abraham
Lincoln, Warren Harding, Herbert Hoover, Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman,
Jimmy Carter, and the two Bushes. (Prior, Entrepreneur
2/15/16)
If we go back further, we can find many others who were
farmers and traders, in short, plantation (and slave) owners. Perhaps not a
qualifying measure for political success, but the engagement in commerce should
not be considered an impediment.
Second, our university system endorses the view that we can
train leaders (to organize their companies and communicate well), and that once
they climb high enough up the corporate ladder they can serve in political
offices. We can think of New York mayor Michael Bloomberg, our very own
governor John Hickenlooper, and the two Romneys as governors of Michigan and
Massachusetts.
Third, if we appreciate our political system as pragmatic
rather than ideological, it makes sense to appreciate the skill-set of
businesspeople when applied to the affairs of the state (or city). Governance,
in short, is about finding out what people want, compromising on the means to
accomplished these wants, and then proving one’s mettle with results.
To be sure, for all the greatness that business-leaders can
bring to politics, there are many critical assessments over their success.
David Davenport (Forbes 6/22/16)
explains that context matters, that measuring short-term success is different
from long-term policy consequences, and that after all ideology does inspire
the popular imagination.
We’ll have to wait and see whether President Trump will be
successful or not. Only time will tell what he can accomplish in an environment
where one’s whims don’t translate into law, and where the complexity of the
decision-making process is a bit more overwhelming than when running your own casino
or hotel.
It’s worth noting that when the economy is doing well,
credit can be given to the business community, so in those times business
leaders seem attractive as political leaders: if they can do it for their
companies, they can do it for the rest of the country.
Likewise, when the economy is not doing well, as we have
seen in the aftermath of the Great Recession and its steady but slow recovery,
we look for billionaires, from the Oracle of Omaha, Warren Buffet to Mark Cuban
to offer solutions to our ailing economy. This mindset surely helped propel
Trump to the presidency.
Whether the economy is booming or bust, salvation in the
hands of entrepreneurs is believed to be the only way to heaven on earth. Does
it work well in small cities, like Colorado Springs?
The first “strong mayor,” Steve Bach, was lauded as a
businessman who would approach the city’s dormant economy as a marketing guru,
bringing jobs from around the country and revving the economic engines of the
city.
After four years, Bach accomplished little on the economic
horizon; he’ll be best remembered for the acrimony he fomented between the
Mayor’s office and City Council. With this in mind, the wisdom of the day was
to elect John Suthers as an experienced lawyer/politician who will bring
harmony, if not economic progress.
Instead of economic stimulus, the current mayor’s personal
views about the legalization of marijuana—a Constitutional Amendment that
passed, no less—have overshadowed both our cherished democratic principle of
majority rule and a pragmatic approach to the economic benefits of legalizing
pot (as seen in booming Denver).
Regardless of how you feel about pot, isn’t it awkward that
the highest-ranking official of the city travels outside the state (Arizona) to
speak against the legalization of pot instead of traveling there and elsewhere
to bring businesses to the city?
Bach the commercial real-estate broker was unqualified to
manage a large city operation like ours; Suthers the politician seems too
beholden to an ideology to listen to the people and make the city less “lame,”
as some millennia call it.
Perhaps what we need is people who are not military
retirees who find politics a nice hobby, but entrepreneurs who run large
companies and have the experience of solving complex problems. The only two in
CS that come to mind are Philip Anschutz and Perry Sanders.
Between the two, Sanders seems to care more about the
well-being of the city and should therefore be recruited to become the next
mayor of his adopted home; he has a proven track-record!
Raphael
Sassower is professor of philosophy at UCCS. He can be reached at rsassower@gmail.com See previous
articles at sassower.blogspot.com
No comments:
Post a Comment