Steven I. Platt, The Daily Record Newswire
Bob Woodward’s newest book, entitled “The Price of Politics,” highlights the destructive role that politics, as characterized by Woodward, played in the ultimately unsuccessful attempt by President Barack Obama to reach a substantive agreement on a budget deficit reduction plan with the Republican leadership in Congress as well as the Democratic leadership.
That fact and the reasons for it documented by Woodward illustrate and explain why the public approval rating of Congress is consistently less than 20 percent in every recent poll regardless of which political party holds the majority.
All of the political intrigue and theater described in the book produced only an agreement to defer the decision until after the November election, but before Jan. 2, 2013.
So, what the actors in this tragi-comedy agreed to do was to hang the United States of America’s economic health and fiscal integrity over a rhetorical “cliff” by providing for an across-the-board “sequestration” of funds effective Jan. 2, 2013, unless a legislative solution is passed by then, presumably in a lame duck session of Congress after the election.
No sane person who has been briefed on the details of what the sequestration would involve believes for a minute that it will be allowed to occur.
The fact that it would jeopardize our national security, shatter our social safety net, etc., as has been reported in some of our normally less-than-hysterical media outlets, is testimony to the lack of responsibility on the part of the lead actors and actresses who produced, directed and acted in this political comedy of errors.
The fact that this docudrama can have a tragic and unhappy ending if the script is not changed simply adds to its theater of the absurd effect.
Toxic nature of politics
The fact that there is even a question about whether a legislative compromise can be enacted that will prevent the country from going over this politician-made cliff is testimony, if not proof, of the current toxic nature of politics in this country and the inability of the political class to implement policies that transcend their personal, political and ideological agendas for the benefit of the people who elected them.
That political fact, i.e., “The Way Washington Works.” is not funny and stopped being entertaining quite some time ago.
Obama does not escape critical scrutiny by Woodward and the responsibility for this sad state of affairs either.
Woodward assesses some of the difficulty in “communicating” to the president’s lack of affinity for political schmoozing, which is best illustrated by Speaker of the House John Boehner’s explanation of his differences with the president, as the natural barriers between Boehner, who negotiates while smoking cigarettes and drinking merlot, and Obama, who is sipping iced tea while wearing his patch to keep from smoking.
Whether this has anything to do with the breakdown in the political process is at best speculative. But it does explain why both parties are running ads that suggest that the interim agreement to set up the fiscal cliff was the idea of the other while failing to mention that they agreed to it.
Last time I checked, an agreement required at least two parties. It also reinforces the wisdom of one of my mentors who was a successful manager of politicians and political conflict, who said on more than one occasion, “the danger with any politician is that he or she will start believing his or her own handlers, press releases and speeches.”
What is the best method to change “The Way Washington Works?”
Michael Ignatieff, a former professor at Harvard and contributing writer for The New York Times, who is now a member of Canada’s Parliament and Deputy Leader of Canada’s Liberal Party, writes directly on point when he points out that the attribute that underpins “good judgment” in politicians “is a sense of reality, which is to be distinguished from what is considered good judgment in intellectual life.”
Specifics matter
Among intellectuals, judgment is about generalizing and interpreting particular facts as instances of some big idea. In contrast, in politics, specifics matter more than generalities. Theory can often get in the way of a politician’s understanding of what the true reality is.
Ignatieff illustrates his opinion further by referencing historical figures such as Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill and the writing about them by the philosopher Isaiah Berlin.
Berlin explains that, “what is called wisdom in statesmen is understanding rather than knowledge — some kind of acquaintance with relevant facts of such a kind that enable those who have it to tell what fits with what; what can be done in given circumstances and what cannot; what means will work in what situations and how far, without necessarily being able to explain how they know this or even what they know.”
This means, very simply put, that politicians can’t confuse the world as it is with the world as they wish it to be.
As Ignatieff emphasizes, “There is no science of decision making — the vital judgments a politician makes every day are about people; whom to trust, whom to believe and whom to avoid.” Having good judgment in these matters and having a sound sense of reality therefore requires trusting some very unscientific instincts and intuitions about people, as well as a sense of timing of when to leap and when to remain still.
Bismarck famously remarked, “Political judgment is the ability to hear before anyone else the distant hoof beats of the horse of history.”
‘Fail again, fail better’
Likewise, Samuel Beckett’s statement “Fail again, fail better” captured an even clearer perspective on the inner confidence, personal comfort and security necessary to success in the political arena.
Churchill and Charles De Gaulle kept faith with their political judgment even when elite opinion strongly believed them to be wrong. Their willingness to wait for historical validation looks like greatness now.
Finally, and most importantly, doesn’t having good judgment in politics depend on being a critical judge of oneself, which in turn means recognizing his or her own personal limitations from which prudence arises and upon which sound judgment relies?
That means confronting the world without preconception every day and learning mostly from our mistakes what works and what doesn’t work while at the same time recognizing that even lengthy experience can fail us in life, love and politics.
Which one of the candidates understands himself well enough to exercise sound judgment and be an effective leader? The answer to that question is the answer to who can best change “The Way Washington Works.”
—————
Steven I. Platt, a retired associate judge on the Prince George’s County Circuit Court, writes a monthly column for The Daily Record. He can be reached at info@apursuitofjustice.com.
