Month: September 2018

 

 

January 20, 2017 while the nation watched the inauguration of President Trump, I recall one of the talking heads, filling up some air time during the parade, launching into a diatribe about what President Trump needed to do to keep from losing the House and/or Senate majorities during the 2018 midterms. The prognostications have been going on, non-stop, since that day.

So what? The so what of it all is that every day we see national issues, security issues, economic issues, crisis issues that are all tainted, delayed and debated in light of what it will “mean for the midterms”. The debate is too often not about what is best, or in some cases, what is absolutely necessary for the nation, but rather how it will impact the November, 2018 election results. Sad but true.

The unfortunate nature of politicians is that the next election is their top priority and everything else, no matter how important to the nation, is a distant second. US Representatives and Senators are arguably the most self-serving group of people in this nation and they are unlikely to change of their own accord.  To protect the nation from our politicians we need to change the environment and hopefully it might change their behavior.

Electing 435 US Representatives to the House every two years is outdated and unnecessary. Their collective campaigns cost hundreds of millions of dollars. It is an unfortunate fact of life that a huge amount of the Representatives’ term in office is spent raising money and campaigning for reelection. Raising money has its own huge drawback in that politicians become beholden to the big donors and lobbyists, perhaps at the peril of the nation.

The advantages of a four-year term for Representatives are so obvious and make so much sense, that it should become a priority to get it changed. One would think the Representatives themselves would be wholeheartedly in favor of a four-year term.

And while that amendment to the Constitution is working, why not take on the issue of term limits. There is something about the Potomac water; the more of it a politician drinks the more incoherent and power-hungry they become. Four terms, 16 years, for Representatives and three terms, 18 years, for Senators seems about right. There is an old saying that applies to organizations, “change or die”.  Change and new blood for Congress can only be a positive thing because the current system, and the politicians running it. are not serving the nation well.

And while we are at it, the Supreme Court could do with a little update. It seems so untoward that millions of Americans and half the politicians sit around hoping some eighty-year old Justice of the Supreme Court will become too infirmed to continue serving or even die in order for a sitting President to “stack the court.”

Because the Supreme Court has become so politicized, there is extreme pressure for some justices to remain on the bench no matter their age, health, personal desire or capacity to do the job required of them. “Appointed for life” is just not the best answer.

The average age of the three oldest justices, Thomas, Ginsburg and Breyer. is 78 years and they have served on the Supreme Court an average of over 25 years. Are they absolutely in their prime? One could argue not. We can do better than that? One would think so.

The Supreme Court is too important to become a political football. It is not difficult to fix this and thereby turn the court over periodically by limiting the term of office to twenty years.  Given that the average age of the current 8-judge court, at the time they were appointed, was about 52 years, retirement at about age 72 seems very reasonable.

Here is a simple solution.  Change the Constitution and set in motion a system wherein the longest serving Justices (Thomas 27 years, Ginsburg 25 and Breyer 24) will mandatorily be retired in 2019, 2021 and 2023 respectively. It follows then that Chief Justice Roberts would reach the 20-year retirement mark in 2025, Alito in 2027, Sotomayor 2029, Kagan 2030 and Gorsuch 2037.

With Presidential elections in 2020, 2024 etc., Presidents will routinely get a shot at picking new Justices.

Why do this? The founding fathers were perhaps the greatest gathering of minds at any time in world history. But they did not have a crystal ball and could not get it all right. That is why there are 27 amendments to the Constitution. It is not difficult to build a case for a couple more.  It all comes down to value added to the organization.

Lieutenant General, US Army retired, Marvin L. Covault is the author of Vision to Execution, a book for leaders.

 

 

 

 

The most heard answer to the question, “why is the nation so divided” is, “it’s President Trump’s fault, he is dividing us.” The mainstream media has picked up on this answer and it gets repeated over and over, day after day.  If President Trump is to blame, then by extension, those who support him are also partly to blame. The “divide” is real.  The “divide” is potentially very dangerous.  Is the simple answer, “it’s all Trump’s fault” good enough?  I don’t believe so. Let’s take another shot a defining why the “divide” exists  before we jump on that bandwagon.

“Trump is a racist.”  We hear it every day.  Being called a racist is a very ugly thing. Members of the KKK are racist; people who proclaim to be White Supremacists are racist. Now we are led to believe President Trump is a racist because Maxine Waters says so, therefore it must be true and all the mass media have picked up on it?  But, what do Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have to say about Trump and his association with African Americans? Google up, Trump receives honor from Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and you will find headlines like this;  “Jesse Jackson praises and thanks Donald Trump for a lifetime of service to African Americans.”  Hmmm, interesting.

“Trump is Islamophobic.”  He must be because he is defeating ISIS.  He must be because he does not want to allow immigrants from nations who are state sponsors of terrorism; from states that openly seek the destruction of America; from nations where those wanting to immigrate cannot be vetted because there is insufficient data to check their backgrounds.  Hmmm, also interesting.

“Trump hates women.”  His qualification for that statement seems to be that he  had an alleged extramarital affair 15 years ago..  Hmmm, no one in his huge business has said that?

“Trump hates Latinos.”  That must be true because he wants to seal the border to keep out illegal immigrants who are terrorists, criminals, drug traffickers, sex slave traders, and others who just want to disappear from view and live off US government assistance.  Or possibly it is because he is opposed to cities and states that willfully defy federal law and openly give sanctuary to Latin criminals.  OK, so that all makes good sense?

By engaging multiple media sources and in private conversations, it is difficult to get through a day without hearing a comment about how divided the nation has become. Maybe, just maybe, the issue deserves a more thorough look from what I pointed out in the opening paragraphs.  .

Begin by thinking about two parallel lines drawn about one-half inch apart.  The top line we will call the Republican line and the bottom one the Democrat line. While recognizing there are Independents and unaffiliates, the majority of Americans feel attached to the two major parties. So, I will use just the two to explain the divide.

There has always been a divide between what the Republicans and Democrats stand for; their platforms, vision of the future, etc.

Let’s say that in the fall of 2016, the divide between the two parallel lines was one half inch. The Republicans were asking for a stronger military, a fully engaged foreign policy (North Korea, China, Russia, Iran, the Middle East, the European Union, NATO),  trade deals that are more advantageous to the US and will reduce $500 + billion annual trade  deficits, defeat ISIS, cut taxes, reduce regulations, reduce the size of the federal government, immigration reform and border security to include building a wall and finally, do away with Obamacare.

The democrats were less specific about their vision for America, but their rhetoric led us to believe they advocated for open borders, military readiness status quo, maintain current trade deals plus a new one in Asia, maintain the level of military action against ISIS, essentially no change in foreign policy, raise taxes on the rich, increased government regulations, advocate against big business, and retain the tax-and-spend programs to stimulate the economy.

Now fast forward 24 months to the fall of 2018.  What we see on the Republican parallel line is a nearly identical list from 2016.  However, instead of being 2016 campaign promises, they are now completed or being worked as major policy initiatives.  With the exception of eliminating Obamacare, promises made, promises kept.

While the Democrats have been unable to move forward with their proposed campaign agenda, they have moved their vision further to the left. Many mid-term Democratic candidates, are actively advocating for the US to become a socialist state in spite of the fact that socialism has never been successful anywhere in the world.  And those who are not openly using the “socialism” tag, are advocating to nationalize big corporations, provide free college tuition, single-payer government-run health care, and the elimination of ICE, a major US law enforcement element charged with security for the nation’s citizens.

Based on the comparison of what the two political parties stood for in 2016 and where they are today, I have concluded that the divide should be widened from ½ inch to ¾ inch apart. But, while party comparisons are highlighted in the news every day, they still do not get at the crux of the “nation divided” issue.

Go back and look at the two parallel lines. For all practical purposes, the Republicans on the top line are happy. Yes, there are those who wish President Trump would stop tweeting and wish he was a little more articulate, but from a policy standpoint they are ecstatic. He made campaign promises and, for the most part he is working all of them; most, successfully. President Trump is not a politician in the truest sense of the word, he is a pragmatist who sees a problem and says, “this needs to be fixed, here is what we are going to do.” The tens of millions of Americans on the top line are happy.  The Republican line remains stationary, it has not moved upward to increase the divide.

A large percentage of Democrats literally HATE President Trump. They are very vocal and openly demonstrative about it. This hate talk is not just taking place around the family dinner table, it is daily headline news by the majority of mainstream media.

“Hate” is an ugly word and an ugly concept.  Widespread hatred is becoming a culture.  Culture is a powerful and pervasive force that, if negative, can paralyze an organization (the US) causing it to be unable to move forward.  For more on “hate”, see my blog; A LOOMING CRISIS IN AMERICA.

Bottom line, the United States is under the grip of a culture of hate.  It has spread rapidly and is growing. The normal separation between the two party’s’ ideologies is not what is “dividing the nation.” The “divide” is, in fact, the additional separation caused by the culture of hate.  The culture of hate has moved the Democrats’ parallel line down at least another ½ inch. The divide is getting so wide, it has negated civil discourse across the nation.

The irony is that in the media and personal conversations about the divide, the blame is placed on President Trump for “dividing this nation.”  Quite the opposite.

I’m not asking Democrats to support the Republicans; I am asking that Democrats support America. Democrats have a powerful and pervasive force on their side; the culture of hate.  If not abated, it can destroy this great country.

Lieutenant General, US Army retired, Marvin L. Covault is the author of, VISION TO EXECUTION, a book for leaders.