Barring some unforeseeable change or revelation, I’m voting for experience in the borough election.
I’m voting for the two candidates who’ve been here at least 20 years, have served previously on the assembly and other governmental bodies and have learned a thing or two about the town and how best to govern it.
I have nothing against the other two candidates. They’re both fine people, I’m sure. In 15 or 20 years they may understand enough about the town, local politics and how to get things done here to serve us well. In the meantime, I’m voting for experience.
I’m not in love with either of my two chosen candidates. I’ve differed with each of them sharply in the past. They’ve made mistakes, in my opinion, but so did I when I served on the assembly. Neither of them shares all my views, so I’ll have to watch them if they get elected. I’ll be prepared to testify against their positions.
But I want them at the controls of power just like I want an old, gray-haired pilot flying my plane or a surgeon with at least a touch of gray carving on me. When crap hits the fan and difficult decisions must be made, I want a person in the driver’s seat who’s comfortable sitting there.
Longevity matters. That’s why indigenous tribes are led by Councils of Elders, not Parliaments of Newbies. It’s not fashionable to say it in a culture obsessed by youth and a belief that certain people possess preternatural gifts, but elders are wise most often because they are old.
They are wise because over the course of decades, either they themselves have made many mistakes or they have witnessed many mistakes and have remembered them. Human progress is not divine. It’s powered by a continuum of painful mistakes, each one forcing us to consider plans B, C, and D.
Local knowledge matters. There are few new ideas down at city hall. (I know, I proposed some and they failed miserably.) There are, however, many decent, old ideas that have been resisted or that failed due to shifting circumstances, including a level of personal politics that’s unfortunately inescapable in a small town.
But it’s knowing the history of those ideas, including why they failed or never fully fledged, that allows an experienced politician to pick them back up, dust them off, read the lay of the political landscape, and reshape them in a way that works. Edison tried thousands of filaments until one lit his bulb.
We are funny about electing politicians, perhaps because we’re not too long removed from believing in the Divine Right of Kings. Just five years ago, our nation elected as president a man with zero experience in governing. Why? If we owned a pizza parlor, would we hire as cook someone who’d never made pizza? If we owned a garage would we hire as mechanic a person who’d never worked on cars?
People who disagree with my endorsement likely have some personal issue with my candidates or have a grievance with something they’ve said or done in the past. Those concerns are legitimate or might be, depending on how much stock you put in a person’s ability and willingness to learn from their mistakes. Most of us don’t touch a hot stove twice.
Also, getting back to an earlier analogy, you decide on a surgeon based on factors other than which one is a swell guy. Politics, like medicine, is a serious business that determines the fate of others.
The two most experienced assembly candidates are also strong-willed and that’s a good thing. For too long, we’ve suffered under borough rule by mayors, or by managers or by whatever the hell the police chief wants. Under our form of government, the assembly is intended to lead, not to serve as an advisory group to anyone else.
An inexperienced assembly surrenders its power to others and suddenly the sailors are steering our ship of state instead of swabbing the decks. Without a clear chain of command, chaos ensues.
Certainly, the two most experienced candidates have enemies. But you needn’t watch politics closely to understand that making enemies is the price of getting things done. Politics is a form of peaceful war. There are no neutral players.
Leadership is not for kind-hearted church ladies or people seeking a new hobby. It’s difficult and messy work that’s only rarely gratifying. Leading well requires grit. It also demands large commitments of time and emotional energy. The experienced candidates, by their records, have proved themselves tough characters willing to make those necessary commitments.
That’s why they have my support.