Friendship and Politics

At the recent Utah State GOP convention I ran into an old friend. He was all dressed up in Hatch regalia and I jokingly told him he was supporting the wrong guy.  (By that time I was committed to Dan Liljenquist.)  He said he was a Hatch supporter because Senator Hatch and his Dad had been friends for years.  I responded that I could still be friends with someone, but not vote for them.  I explained I could not support Orrin Hatch because I believe life begins at conception and he does not.  We exchanged a few more pleasantries and then went our separate ways. (It was great to see him!)

But that conversation got me thinking.  Why is it that so many politicians think you should vote for them (or endorse them) just because you are their friend?  The aforementioned conversation with my friend is only one example.  Another case in point is Sarah Palin’s endorsement of Senator Hatch.  Her political philosophy is much more in line with Mr. Liljenquist.  So why is she backing Hatch?  One rumor—it is because Hatch was nice to her during the last presidential election cycle.

While friendship is important in life, it is a purely social/emotional activity. While politics is often emotional, there are definite skills and abilities that are required for the enormous variety of jobs elected officials must do. If we focus solely on friendship when deciding who we should vote for, we miss several important elements that should be part of that decision. What is their stand on relevant issues? When faced with a contentious issue, what decisions will they make? What are their values? Voting records? Experience? Talents? Skill sets?

Asking someone to vote for you because you are their friend is exactly like saying they should hire you because you are their friend.  Again, what about values, skills, and abilities? What if the job requires medical skills and you were trained as a teacher?  Or the job requires right-brain work and your talents are more left-brain? Are you not just setting yourself up for failure by simply asking for a job out of friendship? Or, on the flip side, is someone else setting you up for failure by giving you a job when you do not have the skills and experience required to do actually do the job?

Think about it.

I believe one of the biggest “root cause” reasons we are seeing so many governmental failures right now is the constant engagement of feelings when what is actually needed are skill sets, principles, and rational thinking.  For example, if you hired a financial planner and this person kept losing your money year after year, how long would they work for you before you fired them and found a new financial manager? My guess is that for some people, one year of financial losses would be enough and for others, maybe he’d maybe get fired after two or three years of losses (for instance: it took three straight years of losing seasons before Gary Crowton was asked politely to leave as BYU’s head football coach).  


And yet, Senator Hatch has supported overspending in Washington for decades—I repeat—decades.  It is on the record that he directly voted for over $7,900,000,000,000 (that's trillion or 1 million billions) in additional debt (closer to $9 trillion if you include voice votes).  Do even more math and that is $25,000+ per person (not per taxpayer, per person). And, since only a fraction of our citizens in this country pay taxes (or "tax units" which can mean a couple) it gets worse--much worse. In 2011 there were 87.7 million "tax units." Divide that into $7.9 trillion and that comes to $90,000 per taxpayer.  Do you make enough money that your financial planner could overspend your budget by $90,000?  I know I don't! And this is only one issue of many.  


Why are so many people still willing to “hire” Hatch?  Because they like him. Because he is their friend.

Am I being too severe?  Ruthless? A lot of people may think so.  I guess everyone has different political philosophies. (It is one thing that makes life so interesting.) But, for me, I just cannot vote for someone just because they are my friend (anymore than I could hire someone who was just my friend; harsh, I know). 


And I think I am in good company. Jim Collins, in his bestseller Good to Great (2001), discovered that greatness requires rigor and that there was a difference between rigorous and ruthless. He found that, "To be rigorous means consistently applying exacting standards at all times and at all levels, especially in upper management."  I think that, as voters, evaluating skill sets, values, and voting records means we are applying "exacting standards" to our elected officials.  In my view, this is not ruthless--it is rigorous.  

In the workplace and in government, kindness and friendship do matter as does being treated with dignity and respect.  However, equal in the “productivity and growth” equation are skill sets and accountability. Think of it as tough love for the workplace. To co-opt a familiar saying, government cannot live on friendship alone.  Friendship cannot balance budgets or analyze spending or design Constitutional laws (and the list could go on).  Without skill sets and accountability, failure will follow.

We as an electorate must start doing a better job of 1) electing people who have the right skills and talents and 2) holding our elected officials accountable for proper (or improper) exercise of those skills and talents. In other words, we must get better at "consistently applying exacting standards at all times and at all levels."

So, with all due respect to my friends who continue to support Senator Orrin Hatch because he is their friend, I must, as respectfully as I can, disagree.  Yes, he is a good man who has done a lot of good things for Utah and this country.  But the record shows Hatch has also made many, many bad decisions—decisions that are now hurting this country—terribly.  His voting record on key issues matters.  His skills sets (or lack thereof) matters.  His willingness (or unwillingness) to be held accountable for his actions matters. And despite all the good he has done, he needs to be held accountable for the expensive, life-altering mistakes he has made.

Thank goodness that this year Republicans in Utah have a choice.  We can go to the polls on June 26 and support someone who is good and kind and might someday be a personal friend.  But, he also has the values, experience, and the skills needed to begin reversing the damage career Washington politicians have been inflicting on this country for over thirty years.  That man is Dan Liljenquist. It's Time.