The Importance of Service

At the state level there are two candidates I tend to watch closely. Both are Democrats, which is not the party of choice for me, but Wisconsin is a blue state. Senator Judy Robson has earned my vote as an incumbent twice. I disagree with her on several issues, but I disagree with the majority of her constituents on those same issues. I vote for her because she's responsive to her constituents, because she uses the language of service, and because she follows up her words with acts of service. Politics is not her career, but her calling - a calling she answered as a means of fixing real problems that she has observed with real solutions that are available but underutilized.

Representative Mike Sheridan is a whole different story. He is a politician; he pursues politics as a career, not as a calling. As a career politician, he's answerable to the supporters that ensure he has the funds to run, the support to campaign, and the means to get re-elected. Organizations and political parties do this not because they believe in candidates - they drop anyone who cannot play the game well enough for their purposes. They provide this kind of support because they know this support gives them access to the powers of elected officials. Which is not to say Mike Sheridan's supporters are bad people - before (and during) his position as Representative on the Wisconsin State Assembly, Mike Sheridan was president of the UAW in our area. There are a lot of good people in the UAW, and the UAW has done a lot of good things for our community, but the UAW is an organized, political organization with purposes and goals that do not always align with the best interests of the community Sheridan is elected to represent. This creates a conflict of interests that Sheridan has failed to acknowledge. If he has to choose between the best interests of the UAW or the best interests of the community, it is his responsibility as an elected representative to choose the best interests of the community. On the other hand, it is in the best interest of his political career to side with the UAW - and so he does. This is what differentiates a politician from a representative.

I call this point of differentiation the service mentality. As an elected representative, a candidate can serve their country just as a soldier or government employee does. Like soldiers or government employees, a candidate's capacity for service is dependent on the reasons and motivations the position is sought. A politician who seeks a seat on the Senate because he or she longs for the power and prestige doesn't perform the acts of service performed by a representative who seeks a seat on the Senate because he or she believes that doing so will improve the lives of his or her constituents.

A representative has three primary responsibilities in service of his or her constituents. First, the representative must know and understand what constituents need and want. Knowing and understanding are two different things; knowing is about hearing what people are saying and understanding is about interpreting the results they're looking for. If a representative hears people say they support a specific bill that's promised to do one thing, but the representative knows that the bill will accomplish something else, then the representative has the responsibility to advocate changes in the bill so that it can accomplish what people expect. If those changes do not occur, the representative has the responsibility to publicly object to the bill on these grounds, and refrain from giving the bill his or her support. Second, the representative must advocate policies that benefit his or her constituents. I'm not talking about pork here; that's the realm of the career politicians. I'm talking about legislation that facilitates the long-term success of the communities they represent. Third, the representative must advocate improvements that may be unpopular, but are needed. Representatives are elected to solve problems. Lobbyists and public relations firms are hired to advocate for policies that benefit special interests. The representative must face up to these individuals and organizations in order to actively solve problems. It's not fun, it's not popular, but the results are worthwhile. It are these results that improve lives; making the hard choices, taking the chances, and doing so not to be re-elected but to serve in the capacity the representative was elected to hold in the first place.

Throughout all of this is the assumption that the representative is effectively communicating with constituents, and this is where I believe many service-oriented representatives go wrong. Communication is not propaganda, it's not about tooting your own horn; communicating is about informing the public, so that voters can make informed decisions. Communication must go both ways in order to be effective. If a representative does not receive input from constituents, he or she cannot possibly know what they need or want. If a representative does not disseminate information to constituents, then voters cannot possibly know why the constituent is making the choices he or she makes. Poor communication is where many representatives lose the battle for re-election - they mistakenly believe that because they're in service of their constituents, their constituents know it. If you have such a representative, seek out the things they're doing right, and tell people about it. Word of mouth from people who know and care goes a long way.

The benefits of a service-oriented representative are numerous. Essentially, they provide us with better, more democratic government. When we elect service-oriented candidates, we have true representatives doing their best to look out for our communities. That doesn't mean they don't make mistakes, but that does mean they strive to do their best for their constituents at every opportunity. Service-oriented representatives are not without their downsides, however. Politics in this country are driven by give-and-take alliances - this is the nature of pork. If you don't play their game, it's more difficult to get support for legislation you propose or support. Thus, while the proposed legislation is better for constituents, it's not as likely to be adopted. A truly service-oriented candidate is likely to be side-lined by his or her fellow "representatives" once in office, making such a candidate less effective, though more genuine.

Politics-as-usual is driven by career politicians. These are candidates who play the game and play it well. They seek power, prestige, and the myriad benefits contemporary American politics offers to those elected. They may be elected by voters, but their loyalties lie with those who give them the funds for their campaigns and their fellow politicians who support their efforts to buy off voters with pork spending. These are the candidates that dominate our national political environment. Americans are not satisfied with the results of their choices, but they continue to make the same choices over and over again. As long as these politicians hold the reins, the few service-oriented representatives that get elected will continue to be side-lined.

By Stephanie Crist
Published: June 25, 2009 8:36 PM
0 Votes