Re-Booting the American Dream

Re-Booting the American Dream A proposal for an updated political paradigm a “national congressmen” rudder for the “Ship of State”

by David Birnbaum Late Summer 2011 Manhattan

copyrighted / All Rights Reserved: David Birnbaum, NY

=============================================================

Re-Booting the American Dream A proposal for an updated political paradigm a “national congressmen” rudder for the “Ship of State”

by David Birnbaum

There are numerous challenges facing the United States. The challenges generally articulated are economic ones: Deficits, Unemployment, Growth, Trade Balances, Entitlements and related.

These are all, indeed, real issues.

Various solutions and remedies have been proposed. Some suggested remedies might even be the optimal approach.

However, there is an underlying structural problem which is the “joker in the deck.” This structural problem stymies any attempt at meaningful medium and long term dynamic/elegant/sophisticated planning, legislation and implementation.

And this structural problem undermines not just economic policy, but all policy: Foreign policy, social policy, education policy, environmental policy, energy policy – and on and on.

The Problem The structural problem includes the following inter-related dynamics♦ APPARATUS: The 2-party system, which is not incorporated or enshrined in the Constitution, but which evolved over time, has increasingly-evolved into a sub-optimal legislative/governing apparatus. ♦ POLAR-OPPOSITES: Both the Republicans and Democrats are disproportionately influenced by their polar-opposite wings.

Meaning, the left wing of the Democratic Party unduly influences Democratic Party candidates, nominations and policy; the right wing of the Republican Party unduly influences Republican Party candidates, nominations, and policy. ♦ WEAK CENTER: The two major parties – instead of finding “common ground,” governing from “the center,” and “to the center,” instead play inordinately to their respective vocal/extreme wings. ♦ SCORCHED-EARTH TACTICS: Recently, one of the major political parties adopted a policy of blocking ANY legislation from the other party – to deny them any credible achievement. ♦ CULTURE WARS – between the two parties burn-up precious time and Congressional talent in pursuit of objectives best left untouched totally by Congress. ♦ SHORT-TERM: Both parties seem to increasingly focus heavily short-term instead of short-medium-long term. ♦ NO PAIN: Both major parties often find themselves governing to sate the public’s appetite for minimalist-pain short-term fixes and catchy sound-bites.

♦ ERRATIC POLICY: American policy thus tends to zig and zag, depending on who is newly-elected. The newly-elected Democrat will first play to his left wing. Legislation will then veer-left. As the election nears, the elected official will tend to shift to “the center.”

The Republican will play the mirror image role. The country temporarily veers-right.

So, we zig–zag. And, worse, we zig–zag – with short term fixes – which, in any event, do not get concretely implanted. ♦ There is no steadiness. We are like a ship missing its keel and no voyage plan. We are like a company with two competing CEOs simultaneously – and no long-term business plan…only quickfixes. ♦ NO CORE PLAN: There is no core bipartisan Game Plan. ♦ MEDIA: The American media, reflecting its customer base, tends to give disproportionate weight to quick sound-bites, as opposed to carefully nuanced analysis. Thus the media and the electorate feed upon themselves – with sound bites carrying radically disproportionate weight and trumping sophisticated analysis. ♦ LOBBIES /Special Interests: Powerful lobbies disproportionately affect – and undermine – policy. Congress ends-up representing special interests and not the people. ♦ “EARMARKS” shoe-horned into legislation, undermine the very fiber of a serious democracy. ♦ The “REVOLVING DOOR”: Between government and industry/banking tends to short-circuit prudent and appropriate governance. Indeed, by the time someone ‘blows the whistle’ on malfeasance or recklessness, the latest commotion or disaster is already upon us.

♦ ELECTION CYCLE: Basically, we are in a 2-year election cycle even on the presidential level – as “midterm elections” pose high stakes to all-concerned. The national political horizon, at a maximum is two years. On average, it is thus the mid-way point – or one year.

Thus, a great country – faced with extraordinary challenges over the next 5 – 50 years – has nevertheless de facto morphed to an average one year political horizon in both word and deed. This is almost as sophisticated planning as that of a 2nd grader. ♦ The NON-STOP CAMPAIGN: Voracious campaigning and campaign financing requirements turn the entire system into an ongoing fundraising/election campaign. ♦ STRATEGIC POLICIES UNDERMINED: Policy is consequently overwhelmingly very short term, radically disproportionately factoring-the immediate political needs of the next election. ♦ CAMPAIGN FINANCING: Respectfully, campaign financing – by lobbies, corporations and by wealthy individuals – sets up a “disconnect” between America’s interests – and the candidates’ votes. ♦ CO-OPTED: Currently, most congressman – irrespective of where they started-out idealism-wise – and irrespective of their innate dynamism – to at least some extent become co-opted by the dysfunctional dynamics which have engulfed the legislative system ♦ MIS-MATCH: The electorate and the candidates both vector towards short term “fixes,” whereas the greater public interest warrants long term strategy. As the mismatch continues, the entire electorate and congress bemoan the “lack of a coherent and vibrant long term strategy.” But long tem strategy requires “heavy lifting,” sacrifice, investment and “will.” And an apolitical core in the legislature.

♦ LONG-TERM INTERESTS?: There is no significant body necessarily truly representing, pressing-for and consistently votingfor the greater public long-term interest – in a concerted “centrist” and sophisticated fashion ongoing. ♦ TOXICITY: Currently there is far too much internal toxicity and trashing as part of the Congressional “discourse.” We need maximum vibrant open debate on the issues, and minimal (or zero) vitriol. ♦ STALEMATES & BICKERING: Metaphorically, is the government fiddling whilst Rome slowly burns to the ground? ♦ INTERNAL GAMES: including a surfeit of “convenient” mutual back-scratching ones inside Congress, must be truncated. ♦ HAZARDOUS CENTER: The political “center” has emerged as politically dangerous – and unsteady – political ground in America today – as the two major parties reward proponents assiduously catering to their respective vocal and intense wings. ♦ MIS-ALIGNMENT: The Congressional decision making process is simply not aligned with the strategic national interest.

Note: The above is not a complete list.

Macro What has become manifestly clear, is that the system – as it has evolved or mutated to this point over the decades - is currently not working – and, further, that it is not going to work.

The global competitive picture is not a pretty one. To put it euphemistically - We no longer have the ‘inside track’.

While we congratulate ourselves on having the world’s largest economy – and for being ‘the arsenal of democracy’ – we “lose ground daily.”

Demonizing the Chinese might be missing the point.

I might humbly suggest – We have “seen the enemy” – and “it is ‘us’”.

We sweep the domestic landscape for ‘fixes’ - and simply do not discern an elegant “quick-fix.”

The only consensus is that “we have a problem”…and, respectfully, as a nation we are NOT currently the proverbial ‘man with a plan’.

Moaning and groaning – and playing the victim – respectfully, is not going to help our children; We must be very smart and prudent in digging-our-way out of this, but ultimately we must be bold and decisive In capsule-form: We have “big problems” but a weak problem-solving apparatus’.

Metaphorically, we need a sleek 21st century fighter jet to deal with the myriad challenges; instead, we are employing a jammed18th century musket.

Considerations Now the litany of issues listed (in the section ‘The Problem’) above is somewhat overwhelming.

Attempting to set long term policy via Blue Ribbon commissions is, as well, short-circuited when the recommendations are (almost inevitably) most often simply never actually legislated into law as proposed. (Sometimes the recommendations are ignored; sometimes they are eviscerated, sometimes they are cherry-picked; sometimes they are enacted into law in radically diluted form.)

Attempting well-intentioned piece-meal fixes will simply not get us where we need to go. Respectfully, we need a core structural fix.

Why? Because the system which more or less worked for 200+ years, has become dysfunctional.

And just when we need a very dynamic legislative system to deal with an increasingly competitive, resource-challenged, and debt-ridden global context, we objectively do not have one.

Analysis Status Quo

v.

Optimal

planning

short term

short-medium-long term

sacrifice

no pain

possible near-term pain; but long-term gain

sell-them-out

protect their patrimony

zig-zag election-driven

steady core Game Plan national interest – driven

attitude > future generations governance

Is there a possible “Structural FIX”?

Now, is there perhaps a line of attack to penetrate the problem – and open it up to potential solution, i.e. to potential structural solution to the myriad of structural problems?

My answer is YES. There indeed exists a “simple-concept” structural fix which would untangle this “Gordian knot”…and pave the way towards a better legislative platform Could this structural fix truly work?

It would certainly get us rolling in the right direction.

Now, would the “fix” require a Constitutional Amendment?

YES. Is there any “catch” to this seemingly straightforward and seemingly logical proposal?

No catch. The “hard part” is getting the concept approved. Article V of the US Constitution lays-out the possible paths.

If/when approved, we will enter a “positive cycle” upwards.

Right now, we are in a downward spiral.

Whether the current system is clinically “broken” or “not broken,” it is certainly not working.

The proposed structural fix: Concept: NATIONAL SEATS: The concept which I am proposing is to layeronto The US House of Representatives 25% more seats – call them “national seats” or “national interest seats.” Call them “centrist seats.”

Call them “apolitical seats.” Call them “USA” seats. Call them “Abovethe-Fray”’ seats.

Mechanism: NOMINATIONS COMMITTEE: A committee (the ‘Even Keel’ Committee composed of) of an even number of retired Democrat and Republican luminaries – Ex- Secretaries of State and Ex-Presidents preferred – would nominate national Representatives to fill this 20% “even keel” layer.

STRUCTURE: Candidates would be nominated for their credentials/savvy and perceived expertise and ‘will’ to objectively advance America’s short, medium and long term interests. No election or re-election.

CANDIDATE APPROVAL 60% approval of the Congress would be necessary for the nominees approval. The Even Keel Committee could/should send ‘packages’ of equal numbers of Democrats/Republicans to the Congress for approval. Independents could be sent for approval bundled in ‘separate packages’.

TERMS: Candidates would serve a 2-year term, renewable only by themselves - up to 4 times, meaning, a maximum of 10 years. They could not be re-elected. They could not run for any elective office in the United States, not even dog catcher.- for a fifteen year period after serving.

NET RESULT: The ‘bottom line’ result will be that 20% of the House will be independent, above-the-fray, un-beholden to anyone and able to vote the short-medium-long term national interest – fearlessly.

Ramifications: Among the consequences,  This group can readily vote their conviction. (Includes voting their conscience)  There would be a built-in “even keel” center – steadily advancing the “pure national interest.”  Instead of playing to their most vocal wings, elected officials would play more to the “even keel” center, as that is where legislation will tend to now gravitate.

- high credibility - important centrist swing-vote - power of persuasion to the wings of Congress  Ongoing policy would tend to be more steady….less zig-zag.  Planning and consequent legislation – would tend to be more finessed, more objective, more longterm.  The president will be emboldened to propose more dynamic legislation – if it strengthens the national interest.  Guided by more sophisticated, more objective and more longer term planning and legislation, the American ship of state would more likely tend to regain its balance – and vibrancy – to advance-forward steadily on multiple fronts.

The evolving consequence will be an empowered America.

A Constitutional Amendment seems to be a radical plan: Why is such seemingly drastic surgery needed?

First of all – The US Constitution is a “living document”; it was constructed with built-in flexibility in the form of the provision for Constitutional amendments. The Founding Fathers well-understood that times change….that different times require different solutions.

A Constitutional amendment is needed because –  the system has lost its internal discipline. the national interest has become an orphan. on this score, we primarily get lip service from the government. we get “talk” but no serious gutsy action.  the problem has become ‘structural’; it is no longer a problem here or there  serious challenges/problems require serious approaches/solutions.  the malaise/gridlock/stalemate/morass is not going to get better on its own  we are going nowhere fast – with the current setup  we are not going to fix the problem – by playing yesterday’s game – by accepting ‘the givens’…. the status quo – by dealing at the same level of play we have been playing – by accepting the old assumption that the 200+ year system is untouchable “Jeffersonian genius.”

Now, Jefferson was, indeed, quite, quite astute, and, indeed, he built-in “a FIX” – the Constitutional Amendment process  at this point, we need – a Breakout Strategy – conceptual change; not incremental change – to shed our old skin and morph – and morph with all deliberate speed  “the cancer” is now knocking at almost every household door; it is no longer someone else’s problem; it is now the problem of each of our individual households  meanwhile, China advances-forward  we are a great people and a great country – and we must act like one – with alacrity & determination  we must play to win; not to tread water  we must stop blaming Goldman, Sachs for everything – and we must take responsibility for our destiny  we must face the stark reality that the current system has become dysfunctional; a new foundation must be erected over it

What would hold back such a structural fix?

Those same lobbyists – will fight-to-the-death – to protect their narrow interests.

The same vested and entrenched power interests – will dig-in.

Inertia.

Reluctance of both parties to yield any power prerogatives.

Fear of change.

Romanticizing the (recent) past.

Hyper-idealizing the status quo of governance.

The National Interest – mandates stability, foresight and decisive purposeful action.

The "checks and balances" concept – an overriding priority in 1776 – is now best served by a “national congressmen” block implanted into the very guts of the national legislature.

We can romanticize the status quo and wax poetic about the greatness and genius of the American political system – or we can face new realities, morph our system slightly – and rekindle the American political genius of the Founding Fathers.

The polarized 2-party system now primarily serves the interests of the two parties. Not of the nation. American greatness will not be reclaimed by incessant gridlock, bickering, filibusters and polarization.

A “strong center” with a “national congressmen” block, can potentially break the inertia, break the gridlock, and more pointedly, break the back of the all-sound-bite-talk/no-concrete-action status quo.

The existing political paradigm is not working. And will not magically fix itself.

An enhanced paradigm is needed to achieve a breakout.

The proposed new paradigm “structural fix” is lo-risk/hi-potential reward. Music to any strategic consultant.

The upside would be to enable our government to marshal America's inherent greatness.

The alternative – meaning, NO ACTION – would be to resign ourselves to “playing the victim” and resigning ourselves to creeping 2nd tier status. This was not, frankly, “how the west was won.”

Conclusions A fundamental structural fix is necessary.

A fundamental structural fix would advance America – whether somewhat or a lot – but there would be significant advance.

There will be fierce “vested interests” political resistance to the proposed fix.

The corpus of government has been knocked off-course; we need to get back in the game; We need to get off the mat. We need to “re-build”; We need to “reclaim our birthright.” We need to fight to provide a better country for our children.

If we can muster the national will to implement the “structural fix,” we will then have “a fighting chance.”

Pep Talk I seem to recall that this is the country which introduced LIBERTY to the world which beat the British Empire which liberated Europe from the Nazi monster which first placed a man on the moon which launched Sgt. Fury and Captain America ;) Let’s Roll

========================================================== David Birnbaum, a graduate of Harvard Business School ’74, is a conceptual theorist. He has a successful track-record of conceptualizing and then introducing “game-changer” new paradigms’ – in business, geo-political and intellectual-academic arenas. A long time ago he taught “The Science of Strategy” at the New School for Social Research in Manhattan. see www.BirnbaumNY.com for some context. contact: DBprivate@aol.com ==========================================================

If you are currently on Full Screen mode, First press ESC key