Several weeks ago tweets were sent out before President Biden arrived at Dover Air Force Base to honor the thirteen soldiers who were killed at the Afghan airport. The tweets said Biden had failed to show and CNN said they were sent by conservatives. Perhaps, but who knows. Could they have been sent by Russians posing as conservatives? Or, is there a 5th Column in the United States that either wittingly or unwittingly uses partisan vitriol amplified by digital manipulation? Maybe several 5th Columns.

Encyclopedia Britannica describes a 5th column, “as a clandestine group or faction of subversive agents who attempt to undermine a nation’s solidarity by any means at their disposal. A cardinal technique of the 5th column is the infiltration of sympathizers into the entire fabric of the nation under attack……….”

America has become radically schismatic. Our enemies are gleeful.  It is quite clear that foreign adversaries want our differences to grow in both number and severity. Gleefully they watch and react as political performances become increasingly kinetic. How did Portland, Oregon turn into a stage set for violent demonstrations?  I’ll tell you when, when exploitation was found to be politically useful. By the Americans?  Russians? North Koreans?  Or, well who knows. 

Each day, internationally and domestically, agents of divisiveness plow through the day’s news looking for hosts to attach toxic viruses. And when they are successful the toxicity becomes the news. The agents are doing their job quite effectively.

The most glaring example is reaction to Covid. Since when did the transmission of a virus, its consequences, and protective public health remedies become a political cause? Sometimes I wonder if discernment is roadkill in the 21st Century because we are too lazy or preoccupied or stupid to discern fact from fiction or common sense from fraud. Sure some public pronouncements were clearly wrong, wrong because the brains behind the voices didn’t know. Coronavirus means novel virus: “In medicine, “novel” usually refers to a virus or bacterial strain that was not previously identified.”

Some decades ago I became familiar with William Wilberforce, a leading reformer in Britain in the mid-19th Century. He was a Member of Parliament and best known for his fierce advocacy against slavery. He led its abolition. A companion mission was his effort to improve what he called “manners.”

I was reminded of Wilberforce while reading an essay by Lance Morrow. Morrow has won the National Magazine Award for Essay and Criticism and has the distinction of writing more “Man of the Year” articles for Time magazine than any other writer in the magazine’s history. 

Morrow’s recent essay in the Wall Street Journal began:  “Stupidity is one of life’s big mysteries, like evil, like love, an ineffable thing. You cannot exactly define it, but you know it when you see it, as Justice Potter Stewart said of pornography. It takes many forms. Stupidity is entitled to no moral standing whatever, and yet it sits in a place of honor at the tables of the mighty; it blows in their ears and whispers promises.” 

Morrow, who claims to be working on a Unified Field Theory of Stupidity, closed his essay with this assertion:  “The death of manners and privacy, I argue, are profoundly political facts that, combined with other facts, lead, eventually, to an entire civilization of stupidity. It’s a short ride from stupidity to madness. Soon people aren’t quite people anymore; they are cartoons and categories. And “identities.” The media grow feral. Genitals became weirdly public issues; the sexes subdivide into 100 genders. Ideologues extract sunbeams from cucumbers. They engage in what amounts to an oedipal rebellion against reality itself.”  

Morrow went exotic to make a point. Ideologues might be extracting “sunbeams from cucumbers”, but I doubt it. Would that ideologues spend their time on such frivolous pursuits. No, ideologues are organically disdainful, vainly insistent and intensely focused on attracting followers, not sunbeams. 

Historically America’s social health is in part due to a “can do” strain of pragmatism. Americans on balance want to make good things happen. After all, we all arrived here on a ship even if for many the term is metaphorical. We have inherited the let’s make America better gene and in exercising our right to select our leaders we look for candidates who in one way or another point toward a better future. 

So when academic intolerance cancels thinking and expression, send your children and money to colleges that honor thinking and expression. In a dynamic economy that is the only way to succeed. And when the spear carrying elements in the Trump world say fall into line or else, push back.

In a democracy, regardless of how messy politicians and politics, free speech is paired with the secret ballot. The next nationwide ballot counting will occur in November, 2022. Given the stakes for our country it can’t come soon enough.

But, back to 5th Columns. Campaigns and elections are fields of combat. And the field has been transformed. We are now bits in computer clouds accessed algorithmically. Hackers and saboteurs are often one. They will work to destroy threads of unity and the candidates that seek to appeal to our better nature. Push back!

 

Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al writes on themes from his book, Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books. 

Recently I watched a very impressive Border Collie quickly herd what appeared to be a hundred or so sheep into a pen. A hundred sheep, one dog—compliant behavior dramatized. 

In the Congress the Border Collie is called a Whip. His/her job is to whip colleagues to support the Party position. Whip is perhaps an unfortunate choice of words; it suggests painful consequences for not following the Party line. Maybe the word Persuader would be superior but that would imply some give and take on legislative content. 

The $3.5 trillion package of so-called social infrastructure legislation was cooked up by Senator Bernie Sanders and bought by Joe Biden. And there has been almost no real research by the Congress on this development.

But, let us concede that there are important societal goals in the legislative package, as the package encircles virtually every domestic activity pursued by governments at all levels. Yet, when this package of exceedingly costly initiatives is being covered by the news media the coverage largely involves the vote counting drama. The drama includes arcane Senate rules dealing with budget reconciliation and the tension between the so-called progressive and centrist wings of the Democratic Party. 

The news often distills down to personalities. Reports often characterize this as a contest between Nancy Pelosi, the House Speaker, and Senators Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema whose support is necessary in the Senate. Pelosi is overseeing the whipping in the House, Senator Chuck Schumer in the Senate and the guessing game is how compliant the two centrist senators will be. 

The Congress, and I’m talking about what is arguably the most important institution in our democracy, is submerged beyond the reach of its snorkel. American adults appear to be largely disillusioned with U.S. federal government institutions; new polling by Gallup showing just 12 percent has confidence in Congress. 

Newsweek, that reported the poll in July of this year, noted: “Although few Americans expressed confidence in most U.S. institutions, the level for Congress was the lowest of all the institutions Gallup asked respondents about.” 

Perhaps it’s just me, but when Members of Congress appear to have forsaken their agency for a package of programs and tax increases amounting to a financial number that is inconceivable to all but supercomputers, the institution is on the edge of an abyss. 

We have all watched as legislators have yielded to Party control to enact some really inane stuff. The Texas abortion law is a recent example. You can be pro-life and find its version of vigilante enforcement to be too clever by half. So nobody expects anything like perfection or just good, but come on, when a nation’s elected representatives can be whipped like sheep responding to a Border Collie, we have trouble as the Music Man would say “right here in River City.”  In this case River City in on the shores of the Potomac River. 

I am left with one overriding question. Are there institutionalists who value the integrity of Congress, who are willing to put their leadership to the test? Returning Congress to a position of strength and respect is, in a democracy, of ultimate importance.

Order is needed; there is a need for legislative sanity—in the Congress this is called Regular Order. Wikipedia sums it up: “Regular order within the context of the United States Congress refers to the semi-strict or strict application of committee and subcommittee processes, including public hearing opportunities and the holding of multiple votes. Said processes are designed to promote consensus-based forms of decision-making, particularly in terms of fostering accommodations for minority viewpoints. In the context of the broader history of the U.S. Congress, regular order is closely associated with bipartisanship.” As the parliamentarian is said to say, “let there be order.” 

Post-9/11

My mind captures the moment, just not the exact date. I think it was two nights after 9/11/01. The place was a Presbyterian church in midtown Manhattan. It is my guess that most of the people at the memorial service for the victims of the bombing of lower-Manhattan were living in New York. Many corridors of transportation remained closed.

My wife and I went to the service with a neighbor who was Jewish. Many faiths were coming together and that is what it was about. We needed to come together. We needed to recall shared humanity and a universality of faith. Faith, not division.

Friends, having found out we were in Manhattan on 9/11, often ask what we remember. For me the day began under a cerulean blue sky and ended in pungent smoke and haze. Evil is like that.

But I recall standing in line to give blood, the humanity of the City and especially the two days after the day when Christians, Jews and Muslims stood together and sang God Bless America. 

And now, take a walk in the neighborhoods of New York’s Boroughs and as you pass the fire stations look for the plaque—the plaque that recognizes the firefighters from that station who died that day to save others. There is just something about the spirit of humans acting beyond their earthly humanity that is especially humbling. 

Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al writes on themes from his book, Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books. 

---

Inquiries and their processes are often bone dry. While in the abstract we might agree that detail is important, most of us aren’t that interested. And when it comes down to politics, as expressed through government action, we are most often tribal and regardless of the detail follow our tribe’s point-of view.

On Sunday August 15th Afghanistan fell; President Biden ordered the removal of the structure and troops that had held off the insurgency. He had long ago decided Americans should leave Afghanistan and his predecessor had made a deal with the Taliban to do just that. He anticipated, perhaps, some sort of bi-partisan ownership of the withdrawal. But, he was seven months into his Presidency and had reversed much of what his predecessor did by executive action and, of course, we don’t live in bi-partisan times.

Authors are now busily researching and beginning books about what the international magazine, The Economist, called “Biden’s Debacle.” Yet, while the interested will buy one or more books that will be disguised as history, at most a million or so books will be bought in the next year or so. We will have moved on.

So at the risk of getting it wrong, this is my skeletal summary.

President Biden wanted out regardless of what former President Trump had done. He had telegraphed that fact many times over the years. His aides knew; indeed they were hired, in part, because they shared his goal. In short, the intelligence process was short-circuited. When the circuits fail, the lights go out.  

America has too often in recent decades elected points-of-view. In each case a man, whose resume would not put them on a top candidates list of an executive search firm, is elected to shoulder the most complicated leadership challenge in the world. The result: Vietnam, 9/11, Afghanistan and Iraq. We often cite our assets, but “humint” is needed to win the day. Yes, we have the strongest military in the world, a magnetic set of governing principles and are near the top of most economic measurements. What we lack is “humint” in our politics and thus in the White House and crucial national security agencies. 

Humint is shorthand for human intelligence. What is now apparently a word is most frequently used in counter-intelligence. What, intelligence professionals ask, is the “story on the ground?” And what are the human sources of the information, their credibility, the timing of the intelligence and on and on.

If you want to read a compelling book on the subject, I would recommend “The Spymaster of Baghdad” by Margaret Coker. It is not bone dry. Ms. Coker dug deep and writes a harrowing story about how humint turned the war against ISIS for the Iraqi government. 

Retreating to a political scandal in the summer of 1972, the Watergate Hearings began the eventual end of the Richard Nixon presidency. One senator, Howard Baker, a Republican from Tennessee, kept asking of each witness “What did the president know, and when did he know it?”                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        

George W. Bush’s strong views on the need to get rid of Saddam Hussein led to war in Iraq to rid the world of its weapons of mass destruction. But when Americans went to Iraq to find the weapons, they didn’t find any.

President Biden, when asked about the his decision on when and how to leave Afghanistan, said the best intelligence suggested the U.S. would have at least a month or more to extract troops and allied Afghans before the Taliban controlled the country. Was this opinion held up to a rigorous debate or did it lean to confirmation bias? Did the President hear what his aides thought he wanted to hear or did he reject their advice because of a hardened and long held point-of-view?

As I write, we struggle to get out. We struggle to repair our historic alliances. And we will find it difficult to reverse an image of international indifference to both alliances and facts on the ground. 

Interestingly two Members of Congress, both war veterans and from opposite parties, just took a trip to Kabul to see for themselves what was going on. The Washington Post headline framed the partisan reaction by the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi: “Pelosi assails two lawmakers who made unauthorized trip to Kabul.” She didn’t approve. She wanted to make sure that whatever information the electorate might receive was filtered through the same agencies that misinformed the President. 

Moments of failure are to be expected. We are human. No nation or set of national leaders are without failures. But, when in the months that preceded 9/11 intelligence on the ground didn’t overcome our inability to conceive an attack on the homeland, a very large and quite kinetic domino fell. It is going to take strong and able leadership to reverse this perilous and often self-inflicted cascade. We lost more than citizens and buildings on 9/11.

I do not generally end a column with a parenthetical thought, but I cannot fail to cite the constitutional guarantee of free speech that protects one of our most important institutions—the news media. When the media becomes enraptured by an ideology or a political leader or party, it becomes the unwitting agent of bad decisions. It is the media’s job to add an important and objective layer to what is happening “on the ground.”

Personal Note on Process

Before becoming Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission.  I had served as the principal advisor on telecommunications and information policy to the White House. This fact was both a blessing and a curse.

The blessing and the curse had an identical source—I had strongly held views. And, as a practical matter, my key aides either shared my views or were at least not uncomfortable with them.

But, I headed a Commission. Each of the four other Commissioners had also been appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. They were there to assert themselves and quickly learned that dissenting from my direction brought a lot more attention to them.

In short, there was not a single important decision made by the Commission that was not fully and often publicly vetted. The legislated structure did not assure optimal decisions, but it did assure active thinking, advocacy and eventual reconciliation of views.

Profoundly, Abraham Lincoln understood the importance of engaging different points of view. This was the text of Doris Kearns Goodwin’s book, “Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln.” Lincoln was faced with the disintegration of America and the need to rid it of slavery. He knew success required a well informed and forceful center of gravity. He brought important political rivals into his cabinet.

But and here is the saddest fact of all. We know this. Lincoln, our most celebrated President and the subject of untold books taught us. So here we are in the 21st Century congratulating ourselves on all the progress we have made when in reality much of our political leadership has regressed. And, in our democracy, that is a bipartisan fact.

Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al writes on themes from his book, Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books. 

As we get older we experience death in an entirely different way. I can recall the deaths of my grandparents and certainly my parents. I can recall the wrenching loss of a young friend while in my late teens, but those were different. Statistically, I was far from death’s claim. Death was close but faraway—personal yet impersonal.

More recently impending deaths, in particular, have arrived in a whole new context. I have friends across a wide age spectrum; predictably the older ones are more vulnerable. The pandemic warnings have been like a two note instrument; age and infirmities have you on a down elevator. One thing is certain, the pandemic has caused all of us to think more about death and maybe, the possibility of a timeless existence. 

In the post-pandemic period, suicides are up and suicidal living has also trended. One assumes that each story is different even though the statisticians dutifully measure and report. But, what do the statisticians know about death?

Perhaps the younger, those statistically few who seem self-destructive simply accept the likelihood of an infinite slumber—a non-existence—and conclude it will be more enjoyable than their present state of despair. They choose termination while others suffer through the long goodbye, clinging to a painful life perpetuated by chemistry. 

Why do we fight death? If it is merely infinite slumber, why do we endure the sufferings of drugs and severe anxieties to hold on for a few more seconds of infinity? Doubt, perhaps.

Merle Haggard the country lyricist/poet asked that question in his song “How Long”: 

“……………….You live and learn just to die and forget it all. / But as I take these shallow breaths, / And this strong, old heart slows in my chest, / I look back on life with no regrets. / I’m just ready. // How long, Lord, must I lay here / While this old body slowly dies?……………………” 

Okay, I understand, Merle introduced a transcendent being but in a sense that is all too human. We can’t be sure what comes next so ultimate questions crowd in.

In recent years we don’t talk about “death,” we call it “passing.” It must sound better, but then it begs the question passing to what? The question will not go away. We don’t know, we can’t know, so question we must.

You will note that I reach for questions not answers—while I can note ironies, I cannot provide eternal verities. And questions like these are in a personal context, inevitably. Even if I disagree, and I do, that truth is relative, the final truth will come from a deeper place. We can wade in the shallows not confronting eternal questions, or go deep, but only the last breath, our last breath, will be determinative.

Having been at bedsides, so to speak, of those whose lives are slipping away in a blur of pain and pills I know one thing for sure. If ultimate questions need to be asked and answered, do it earlier. If death is now passing, passing to what? 

One last thought. If God made us distinctive—gave us a mind—how can using it on the ultimate questions be anything but God-affirming?

Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al writes on themes from his book, Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books. 

“Never let a good crisis go to waste” was a pithy point in Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. Much later Rahm Emanuel, then Chief-of- Staff to President Barack Obama, in the context of the “Great Recession” reprised Alinsky and said, “Never allow a good crisis go to waste. It’s an opportunity to do the things you once thought were impossible.” 

To varying degrees most politicians have used this formula. President George W. Bush with support from the Congress began two wars. The attacks on 9/11/01 produced a crisis and a gusher of emotion. And more recently the pandemic has been a convenient excuse to catapult the difference between revenue and expenditures at the Federal level. We have accumulated $24 Trillion in debt.

I like to think a more conservative point-of-view resists an emotion-filled explosion of new commitments and expenditures, but maybe it’s just a difference in allocation. But, and this is my central concern, we have created almost an infinite list of dependencies. Circumstances move us, commitments are made, they join decades of earlier commitments and rarely are the commitments sorted out and rationalized. After all, commitments lead to dependencies, voting blocks and rivers of political cash.

What is it about dependency we don’t know? A bunch, I guess. What we do know is that people, institutions, industries, countries and much else integrate assistance into their patterns of life or business models. It is estimated that we still have approximately $20B a year in fossil fuel subsidies as alternate energy subsidies begin to soar.

We also know that dependency, drawing on a seemingly bottomless bank account, deceives or corrupts both the giver and the receiver. Landlord and tenant aid in the amount of $46.5 billion was provided during the pandemic’s darkest days and supported with bipartisan conviction. Yet only $3 billion has been distributed to eligible households.  Entanglement in intergovernmental bureaucracies is certainly not unusual. 

The most immediate outcome of this dysfunction led President Biden, under pressure from his Left, to extend a Federal eviction moratorium even though a Supreme Court majority said that such an extension must be done by Congress. And this at a time when job’s growth is robust and story after story reports employers having trouble filling positions. By the way, it is reported that 40% of rental properties are “Mom and Pop” businesses.

Dependencies also happen far from home. We are now watching the Afghan government that integrated our soft and hard aid seemingly on the verge of collapse. President Biden, hell-bent to depart, apparently fails to understand that reversing dependence takes skill and time. Ryan Crocker, an estimable career diplomat characterized Biden’s rush to the exit: “He owns it, I think it is already an indelible stain on his presidency.” So let me see, Bush decided to engage in nation building—the first mistake—and now Biden is rapidly pulling what limited support we have been providing in recent years.

21st Century government must not act as if the 20th Century did not happen. Most of the unfunded or underfunded obligations that threaten our future began during the last century. As did our international commitments and alliances. We cannot treat the future as if the past did not occur. 

As we add obligations to the Federal budget because circumstances seem to demand it, we must do so in context. What have we learned? What can we cease in order to meet a compelling new demand? Americans are rightly proud of the many fully funded successes of decentralized governments, businesses and a wide variety of not-for-profit initiatives. But, when it comes to our national government it increasingly creates dependencies and shows almost no aptitude for the end game.

Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al writes on themes from his book, Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books. 

Back in the day I thought professional wrestlers fought to win but then my Dad burst my bubble. While I don’t recall his exact words, “Son, they follow a script” will suffice.

I was taken back to that faint recollection by an article sub-titled, “America’s favorite form of theater overlaps with conspiracy theories and politics.”

The article in The Economist exploring politics and Conspiracy Theater, noted: “The two worlds also share an omerta-like code. Wrestler’s commitment to “kayfabe”, the imperative never to break character in case it ruptures the suspension of disbelief, occasionally borders on ludicrous.”

Kayfabe sent me to the dictionary, while the article recalled my Dad’s revelation. Wrestling is theater—very successful theater. Take a look at “Raw and Smackdown” on the World Wrestling network.  Revenue was $265.6 million in the second quarter of 2021.

But, I have always had a hard time understanding the audience. Do they think the match is real or have they decided to become minor actors in the drama—paying actors? Can they totally suspend disbelief?

And so it is in politics. Donald Trump went from a largely scripted reality show (so-called) to the White House. MAGA was his script, the other side was villains and he led the chorus of applause and scorn.

Trump worked hard to stay on script. Unfortunately for him even the best impresarios have trouble controlling Washington much less foreign capitals. The former President was doing a pretty good job controlling the script and then Covid intervened. It became the daily life and death story. He had villains in China and the self-cocooning elites, but the medical realities at home went way off script.

Covid 19 doesn’t play fair. It defies the White House press conference routine. It entangles those with scientific credentials who struggle with consistency. And it races headlong into strongly held views about freedom. It probably brought down Trump and is now working its destructive power on President Joe Biden; as the President says “get vaccinated but stay masked.” 

And, the pandemic became too convenient for people who research, write and report. Its import overwhelmed all else—budget stories, foreign policy and, more recently, a 21st “New Deal” filled with conceits. But, if we look across a broad range of public policy issues and their rhetorical devotees, we discover more actors than thinkers. Actors, who regardless of facts, refuse to break character—they understand kayfabe. 

People with public responsibility need to be curious. Jettison the scripts. History will judge authenticity. A theatrical edge can help but only if the story has a good ending.

I was on the set of Cheers, the popular 1980s TV show, some years ago and spent a few minutes with Ted Danson. Danson was the bartender/impresario, Sam Malone. Danson, a master of comedic one liners said “you guys in Washington are just like us—we’re all actors.”

The joke unfortunately, was more than a joke. We all want to tell our story or expound on our theories or enjoy the limelight. Yet, when the mission is the public trust, the elected and appointed should step back and those they serve, the voter, should hold them accountable for more than an agile tongue. A suspension of disbelief is corrosive.

We, those who don’t depend on politics for our ego satisfaction or paychecks, should refuse to play along. We pay for the ticket to watch, we should never become part of the script. 

Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al writes on themes from his book, Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books. 

Lydia Jacoby, the young breaststroker from Seward, Alaska was fortunate. She was underestimated—her potential was in her mind. She, indeed all Olympians, had worked beyond our comprehension but we didn’t try to own her—we didn’t know her. Ms. Jacoby won the gold. It can be exchanged for incomprehensible confidence and calm or fandom fury.

Simone Biles who was once a striver has become a god or what in sports is known as a GOAT (greatest of all time). Her gifts and striving had taken her to a media throne. Crowns are heavy and social media is ravenous. Biles’s step back was admirable.

Better, especially now, to retire on top. Be calmed by the gifts and sacrifice and accomplishments. 

__________________________

America’s Olympic dreams come in many different colors—both athletes and fans. That is America—out of many one. And, just as we encourage and fund the athletically gifted, it is crucial that educators attain the top of their game for all.

__________________________

Masked interviews should be discouraged. The International Olympic Committee (IOC) should understand that facial expressions are the epicenter of excitement. Damnably, some are masked in their interviews, others not. As the Games gain momentum turning heats into finals, the IOC too should up its game and stage, safely, a venue for unmasked interviews.

                                                                      ___________________________

Many nations are represented by a flag that expresses their oneness; the red, densely colored circle, for example, which is the flag of Japan, the host. Or the color bars, either horizontal or vertical that symbolize many nations. 

This is how one writer described the United States flag: “The stripes represent the original 13 Colonies and the stars represent the 50 states of the Union. The colors of the flag are symbolic as well; red symbolizes hardiness and valor, white symbolizes purity and innocence, and blue represents vigilance, perseverance and justice.” 

The flag is being attacked in some quarters as an expression of “wokeness”. 

This is how the singer Macy Gray described our flag: “Like the Confederate, it is tattered, dated, divisive, and incorrect,” she said, “it no longer represents democracy and freedom.”

Our flag is implicitly aspirational and tolerant; wokeness implicitly and explicitly intolerant. 

 __________________________

And while on the politics of sports, at least in my limited viewing politics did not tarnish interviews. Winners were gracious and didn’t use their stardom to attack others. Other performance artists should pay attention.

 ____________________________

Finally, one more suggestion to all international sports organizations. Japan invested billions in magnificent but largely vacant Olympic venues. Its commitment should be honored by international sports organizations who select performance venues for future events.

Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al writes on themes from his book, Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books. 

 

“Fools rush in where angels fear to tread” – Johnny Mercer

I wonder when the faceless will say, “enough”? When those who calculate in millions and billions and even understand trillions will say, “No more–no more, unless I get better terms.” 

One of my early lessons in business was to not depend too heavily on a handful of customers. The fewer customers, the more likelihood that they own you.

The United States, of course, has more than a few customers. It sells its debt—a debt approaching $30 Trillion to a lot of buyers. But, foreign ownership of US debt is approximately $7 Trillion, China holds about $1 Trillion. Overall China owes foreign purchasers about $300 billion.  

We have all been buyers. I can remember buying war stamps. Once you bought enough you got a war bond. There was never a suggestion that it wouldn’t be fully redeemed. My Mom was buying the stamps for me and I am certain that it never occurred to her that Dad, and the millions of soldiers he joined, would not win WWII.  It was the Swiss bankers who were making the risk calculations.

Today’s news is filled with financial numbers we can’t really understand. It is said that the White House and various Congressional leaders are negotiating over the size of a package of programs that will cost north of $5 Trillion dollars. They too don’t understand the consequences of continuing to add to our future obligations. But, stop here, reflect, and if you think they understand the global magnitude of the probable debt offerings, please let me know.

A legislative sequence has begun but legislators don’t like to spend their August in Washington—understandable. They work on a political calendar but when the real one combines high temperatures and humidity they want to go home—tense negotiations will continue. 

It is also written that in October the United States Government must receive from the Congress a new debt authorization. We (you and I) presumably will communicate with our legislators and let them know how much is enough. So let me see if I understand. People who don’t know how much debt is too much will need to communicate the answer to people who don’t really care. The leadership of the Congress will be too busy blaming each other for outrages past, present and future.

If my duly elected member of Congress called me, and he won’t, I would suggest a new script. Decide how much we are prepared to borrow (right now every person owes about $87,000 and the annual growth rate is about 7.3%) and then debate the shopping list.

Yes, I do understand that the necessary debt to fund the splurge in spending will depend on how much the Congress is prepared to raise taxes. When the new tax rates are set and the debt forecast is made I will be amazed if we are not measuring new debt in billion dollar increments. If the politicians didn’t consider debt somehow free money we wouldn’t owe so much.

Also we should tax our memories—remember inflation. Well it is with us again. Will enormous government outlays affect it? Inflation is merciless; its effects are particularly painful for persons who principally spend their money on essentials. And controlling inflation requires the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates, which of course drive up our cost of borrowing.

Now, returning to the real world, the one we partially understand. Covid 19 is still around, but now in a new costume. Predictably some are scared by the daily theories on its spread and prospective new hospitalizations. It is astonishing to me that theories still prevail in the minds of many. The data is in, vaccines work.

But when it comes to how much we spend, what will actually deliver a long term public benefit, and how much of that should be borrowed, all of us should understand—there are no vaccinations against excess; there is not even one in trials. Fools rush in. 

Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al writes on themes from his book, Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books. 

So which Politician do you trust? None is the correct answer. If you accept a lack of perfection in those with minor temptations, then understand that those who specialize in attention-getting are loaded with temptations. Indeed they become dependent on their fulfillment.

If that disappoints, get over it because tribal faith in politics is corrupting if practiced by enough people. Only skeptical voters can protect us. Falling in love with politicians is folly and in the end destructive. 

And, the consequences of love’s folly are worse. At the beginning of our nation, time was judicious. It took days, for example, to move between the homes of founders and Philadelphia, the seat of power during the revolutionary period.  Impulses were suppressed as time passed; thoughts had to be voiced or written and then weeks or months or years interceded. Debate, often a look at ageless history, informed those who had the right to make final decisions.

Time is now paired with impulse which is found in the shallow end of the pool. We live in an age where our Supreme Court is crucially important. It is the final arbiter. A nod to Chief Justice Roberts who is now frequently called an institutionalist. Protecting, enhancing the institution, is a patriotic calling.

But let me go back to politicians. I have spent some years amongst them and while never running for office myself, I was in the rooms where the stories and tactics unfolded. 

I was fortunate; most of the public figures I worked with at least began as idealists. And then they became politicians; all do. Performance talent and fortunate timing can accumulate true believers and then wealth chases the privileged—the privileged that occupy legislative chambers and the big white house.

At the true believer level there is no detachment. What the god of whatever office says is per force, true. And at the extreme, worth fighting for. 

Politicians like devotion and the larger the bloc the better, so they feed it, they manipulate the bedrock believers who then form an unrelenting chorus to further elevate the god. We are now being fed by extremes and while time was once judicious, it is now an important element in manipulation. Solidify the bloc. Stimulate it. Raise money from it. Exert power. And avoid at all cost, nuance.

Several miles from where I live there is Loves Folly Farm Road. I do not know its history but I can imagine a certain irony in naming the farm. Much that we fall in love with often fails to love us back. When judging the politician of the moment, left or right, stick to flirtation. Our Republic will be appreciative.

One Hundredth Anniversary of the Chinese Communist Party

This from The Economist on qualifying for membership in the Chinese Communist Party:

“Induction begins with an application letter that needs the endorsement of two party members. Next comes an interview with an official from the party branch. Then the branch considers whether to proceed. If it does, the applicant becomes a “party-entry activist”. This phase can last a couple of years, during which the applicant must submit thought reports every three months, join political study session, do volunteer work and meet mentors from the branch who write evaluations. Then there are background checks—a process that involves investigating the political reliability of family and friends and examining school records. An applicant in the West for a government job involving official secrets would require less rigorous vetting. 

If all goes well the applicant then has to swear an oath in front of the party flag, promising to guard party secrets, remain loyal and be “ready at all times to sacrifice my all for the party and the people. This means being willing to do as Mr Xi orders, without question. The party is his machine.”

To those who get angry over the inherent challenges of a democracy re-read the Chinese Communist Party requirements. No wonder they steal secrets from us. 

Al Sikes is the former Chair of the Federal Communications Commission under George H.W. Bush. Al writes on themes from his book, Culture Leads Leaders Follow published by Koehler Books.