A long time ago, the Sentinel called out a mayor for taking an action without city council approval (this was before Wrangell became a borough). The mayor had sent a letter to a federal agency, stating the city’s official position on an issue — but it was merely his personal opinion. There was no council discussion, no public notice.
It wasn’t that controversial a position, but the point was that the mayor, no matter how well meaning, should not speak for the city without first making sure the elected council is in agreement.
The mayor came into the newspaper office to defend his action — politely I should add.
When told that all he had needed to do was raise the question with the council before sending the letter, the mayor asked if he could borrow our phone. As they were local calls, we obliged. This is back when long distance out of Alaska could cost 50 cents a minute, or more.
While standing in the Sentinel office, he proceeded to call assembly members one by one. He described the issue to them and asked if they were OK with the position he had taken with the federal agency.
After he had three yes “votes” from council members to add to his position, the mayor announced he had four votes on the seven-member council and the motion carried. I think his words were something like, “I don’t give a s*** about the other three.” He was a good mayor and he was trying, in his own way, to correct a mistake, with a touch of irreverent humor.
I recalled that memory from my internal Google drive as I was thinking about today’s national politics and the growing attitude among hardliners that once you have a majority of the votes, the minority becomes irrelevant, easily dismissed.
A mean majority can turn arrogant. They see little need, if any, to compromise or to temper their agenda to acknowledge that majority rule should not equate to a dictatorship. Whether it is a budget decision or a policy call, they believe that their righteous views must prevail, and they don’t give a s*** about anyone who may think otherwise.
That attitude increases the divisive polarization in America. Winner take all may be fine for barroom bets, but it’s a lousy way to run a democracy.
Political parties are guilty of catering to their hardest-core constituencies rather than looking to serve everyone. They may believe they are in the right, but acting as if that is a permission slip to do whatever they want does not create lasting support among the public. Rather, it builds resentment, and that resentment adds to a divided society. It starts a fire that smolders and then grows out of control when the wind changes direction and the losers become the winners and want to get even.
Deciding on public policy while ignoring the opinions and rights of the minority is an inherently unstable way to govern. But that’s where we are headed in this country. Much of the public feels ignored. They get even by voting for the loudest candidates who cater to their anger.
Governing should not be about gloating just because you can count to 51%. It should not be about imposing your will on the minority.
To the political parties and candidates: Listen to what everyone thinks, not just the voters who agree with you.
Reader Comments(0)