HOW TO OVERCOME POLITICAL TRIBALISM

It is never out of bounds to ask the question, what is the role of government in American society? With political and social institutions no longer functioning properly, the question now becomes an imperative.

The time honored conservative-liberal divide on the role of government is fondly remembered by the last generation of more moderate elected officials. Conservatives traditionally wanted a government with a smaller footprint that gave market forces and individual liberties as much free rein as possible. Liberals, on the other hand, viewed government as the vehicle to regulate markets and individual excesses to guarantee more equality in society.  When the American experiment was working properly, the pendulum of our two party system moved back and forth between these dual principles, usually with a degree of bipartisan compromise and no clear winner.

The ideological battles of the past few decades have dramatically changed the classical conservative/liberal conflict into something very different. Size and intervention of government have taken a back seat to tribalism, a term best defined as the tendency to connect one’s identity to one’s politics.

These hardened ethnic and ideological identities attached to our two political parties obscure the traditional views toward government. For example, a Republican Trump supporter may insist on less government involvement on issues like health insurance, public health protections, the minimum wage and gun control while seeking more governmental regulation of immigrants, women’s reproductive rights, LBGTQA+ rights, access to voting and public school curriculum. 

The culture wars, religion and race now matter more than the size of government in setting positions within our tribal politics. The tribes do not just disagree on policy and politics — they see the other as alien, immoral, a threat.  Profound polarization (members of Congress refuse to speak to members of the other party) has made it impossible to pass legislation important to the country.  Not even a global pandemic of epic proportions has subdued the mean spirited nature of our sectarian political system.

The question now becomes, what is the role of government when democratic institutions are unable to achieve their stated purpose of deliberating over policy choices and passing legislation for the betterment of its citizens? The logical answer is to take a pause from unproductive law making and work tirelessly to overcome the impenetrable conflict that stands in the way. 

There is no evidence that sectarian tribalism will disappear on its own. Democrats are deluding themselves if they think that reversing the directives of the Trump administration or doing away with the Senate filibuster will usher in a new political age to match the FDR “New Deal” or the LBJ “Great Society.” The next election could easily erase all of their efforts.

A short essay that appeared in the recent print addition of Foreign Affairs focuses on ways in which America could defeat tribalism (How to Overcome Tribalism, Rueben E. Brigety II, Foreign Affairs, March/April 2021). Mr. Brigety, an academic and former U.S. Ambassador to the African Union has studied how other modern societies have lessened their destructive factional divides. He concludes that the central benchmark is “whether citizens of diverse backgrounds can use reason and argument to transcend foundational identities and work together toward a common good.”

Political will and leadership are important.  Mr. Brigety points to South Africa and Northern Ireland to support his thesis. In the first example, Nelson Mandela and then President of the South African apartheid party, F.W. de Klerk, worked together toward the nonviolent goal of dismantling apartheid. In the second case, Sinn Fein leader, Gerry Adams and the Unionist, Davis Trimble bridged a century of violent differences to bring a negotiated peace to Northern Ireland. Similar victories against tribalism have been won in Africa by dedicated leadership.

Civic engagement must play an important role in defeating tribalism.  I have previously discussed a detailed report on how to repair democracy in America, published by the American Academy of Arts & Sciences, as an important baseline tool in overcoming tribalism. (Observer Reporter OP-ED page, December 23, 2020). Mr. Brigety points to another organization, the national Millions of Conversations civic campaign which seeks to foster open dialogue across party lines and social divisions. Other efforts in communities across the country sponsored by houses of worship, local community groups and local governments are needed to fight back against tribalism.

The Brigety essay identifies three specific policies that would have a profound effect on dismantling American tribalism.  First, “a full accounting of the country’s racial history coupled with focused attention on socioeconomic inequalities that affect communities of color could help move the United States’ political culture beyond…identity tied to race.” Second, “the most important constitutional reform for addressing the challenge of political tribalism is ending partisan gerrymandering.” Third, “President Biden must take the lead and convene a national summit on tribalism to examine the issue, explore its threat to U.S. governance and security and propose recommendations to address it.”

Ultimately, citizens must look up from their digital screens and find ways to interact with “others” from distinct backgrounds and perspectives.  The goal is not to eliminate differences or to end rational conflict, but to learn how to effectively govern despite them.  Mr. Brigety ends his essay with the stimulating thought: “A country that reveres its freedom and insists on its exceptionalism should also meet the standards of governance it sets for itself.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE REPUBLICAN POLITICS OF SURVIVAL

Many Democrats and Independents have become discouraged that Republicans are unwilling to engage the Biden administration on policy issues that are of immediate domestic concern and important to the American people. Political commentator Ezra Klein may be on to something when he points to a recent poll that asked voters whether the goal of reliable government is more about “enacting good public policy” or “ensuring the country’s survival as we know it”.  Only 25% of Republicans responded that it is about policy. Almost 50% said survival.

When one drills down on this polling result, it is easier to explain the post-election actions of both Republican elected officials and supporters of the former president. Democrat initiatives to address the pandemic, pass comprehensive immigration reform, make it easier for qualified citizens to vote, provide a lifeline for disadvantaged children, improve the Affordable Care Act, pass rational gun control legislation and invest in human capital/ infrastructure do not ring the Republican’s bell. Instead, Democrat policy proposals are too often mislabeled as dangerous socialism, no matter the public need or the improvement to the lives of our citizens.

Elected Republicans are determined to stay in power, and Trump supporters want the nation to return to Donald Trump’s vision of “Make America Great.”  Under this survivalist view, there is little room to engage in formulating public policy. From the exiled Trump Cabal in Florida to our own David Ball in Washington County, many Republicans insist on circling the wagons with the limited objective of fighting off an imaginary “socialist onslaught” and “invasion” of immigrants. The primary goal appears to be returning a disgraced brand of Trump inspired white nationalism to the White House. 

This commentary will consider how Republicans could change their behavior without abandoning their principles. A shift from the negativity of political survival to a positive participation in the political process to achieve deliberated and lasting results.

Pandemic Relief.  Republicans continue to brand the pandemic as an excuse for Democratic governmental overreach when none was needed. Instead, party leaders and their followers should cut their losses and support the Biden administration’s eradication efforts. The party should insist on a bipartisan effort to develop a rapid response system to knock down virus outbreaks. This would prevent the need for further economic shutdowns or restrictions on individual liberties, both important Republican objectives.

Immigration Reform.  Last week, several Republican Senators visited the southern border to attack the processing of those seeking asylum.  In truth, the surge of those seeking asylum began on Trump’s watch.  Dire conditions in Central America drove the migrants north in the spring of the last three years.

Republicans should work to develop a bipartisan immigration bill that would please the business owners and border residents who support them. Moreover, Catholic Latino voters tend to be conservative and will reward Republican elected officials for being proactive on immigration.

Election and Voter Reform.  Republicans continue to lean on the “big lie” of a stolen national election to justify unprecedented efforts to change the rules of voting and representation. 253 bills in 43 states seek to tighten voting rules. Conversely, the Democrats through legislative action at the federal level are attempting to pass a bill that would tear down barriers to voting and would undo some of the changes being proposed in state legislatures.

Republicans in Congress should compromise on the federal proposals by adding honest efforts to make voting more secure while accepting provisions that increase access to the ballot box. Ironically, many of the federal mandates sought by Democrats, like expanded use of absentee ballots, are measures supported by older Republican voters.

Rational Gun Control. The night before the Senate Judiciary Committee was scheduled to hold a hearing to address “Common Sense Steps to Reduce Gun Violence,” another mass shooting occurred in Boulder Colorado. Less than a week earlier, a gunman killed eight people in the Atlanta Area. Firearms deaths reached a 50-year high in 2017, with 40,000 killed.

The recent efforts in Congress for rational gun control center on modest bills to expand and strengthen background checks.  Four in five Americans support these efforts. It is time for Republicans to turn away from the morally and financially bankrupt NRA to reach a compromise on gun control.  As remarked by President Biden last week “This is not and should not be a partisan issue—it is an American issue.”

Disadvantaged Children.  The Biden administration has proposed to establish a national pre-K and childcare program. Such an initiative would advance the educational prospects for many children and make it easier for both parents in low-income households to hold jobs.  It has also proposed universal health care for children to address the ugly secret that American children ages 1 to 19 are 57% more likely to die than children in other wealthy countries (January 8, 2018, Journal of Health Affairs). 

Republicans should view these Democrat efforts as long overdue social security for minors to reverse a lengthy history of child neglect.  Healthy, well-educated children are needed to replace the retired boomer generation in our new information age economy, a primary Republican goal.

Our nation needs two robust, forward-looking political parties committed to seeking rational compromise on public policy.  Honest debate produces better policy that will stand up over time.  We do not need Republicans dedicated to the survival of one man and his un-American ideology of hate, fear and self-promotion.

 

WHAT ARE THE REPUBLICAN COMMISIONERS UP TO?

Prior to the November 2019 election that saw Republicans take control of Washington County government, I warned of what the result would be if the Democratic majority were removed by voters (9/8/19 Observer Reporter OP-ED).  My fear was that replacing a well-functioning Board of Commissioners, that placed good government before partisan politics and ideological preferences, would not end well.

Unfortunately, my concerns have become a reality as evidenced by recent events. The Republicans are committed to frivolously spend taxpayer dollars and to stir up their Trump base of voters.

The latest revelations as reported in this newspaper are alarming. First, there were the March 4 disclosures concerning the new county solicitor, Jana Grimm Esq., and her law firm, Steptoe and Johnson. The Republican Commissioners increased the allotment for the solicitor’s legal services from an already extravagant $142,577.00 to $189,000.00, an escalation of 33%.

It is not shocking that Diana Irey Vaughan would choose a new solicitor once she was in a position to do so.  It is disturbing that the Republican Commissioners would create an outside “legal division” utilizing a boutique business law firm, like Steptoe and Johnson.  Such firms traditionally bill from $300.00 to $400.00 an hour, well above the going rate of qualified Washington County firms.

The claim that this move will save the county money is simply not accurate based on prior expenditures. If the Republicans intend to stand by this claim, they should be prepared to provide an accounting of hours worked and services provided at the end of the year.

Ironically, the well-regarded Washington law firm of Peacock and Keller is now located in the same building as the soon to be Republican Commissioner’s offices. (The plush, new, 10 million-dollar Crossroads Building accommodations). Peacock and Keller is more familiar with Washington County legal issues and has specialists in all types of municipal law.  However, our local firm, unlike Steptoe and Johnson, does not have over 300 lawyers on their masthead, of whom all may be called upon to contribute to the next election campaign.

The second revelation was not unexpected in the present environment of right wing ideological politics, as practiced by elected Pennsylvania Republicans.  Again, on March 4, the same day that QANON predicted Donald Trump would retake the White House, Washington County was declared a “Second Amendment Sanctuary County.”

According to the enthusiastic explanation given by Commissioner Irey Vaughn on the local newscasts, this resolution was intended to give physical shelter to gun owners when state and federal officials illegally come to confiscate their guns. The dog whistle message in the resolution is that “elected Democrats are closet communists intent on trampling Second Amendment rights.” The resolution is red meat for Trump voters and militia members.

Why pass a meaningless but divisive resolution?  Where are the pandemic resolutions honoring county first responders and medical personnel? How about a bipartisan ceremony to show respect for all of our residents who lost their lives to COVID-19 or those who have perished from gun violence. Perhaps a plaque for Commissioner Larry Maggi for driving many miles to participate in an early coronavirus vaccine trial that could have threatened his good health.  Apparently, keeping Trump supporters in the fold is more important than showing empathy and moral courage as an elected Republican commissioner.

My last topic is the most troubling of all. The Republican Commissioners have been assembling an audacious plan to revamp all of the county human service functions under one inflexible umbrella.

Presently in Washington County, there are several well-funded, well-run human service nonprofits. These organizations oversee functions such as drug and alcohol and the elderly/aging. Each of these nonprofits has flourished under the leadership of their independent management teams and boards of directors.

Each self-sustaining organization has important contacts with both Washington County and State officials in conducting their specialized services and in meeting regulatory requirements.  As an example, the independent/nonprofit County Drug and Alcohol Commission has become a national model in addressing opioid overdoses by bringing together all interested parties.

The existing structure is decentralized in a good way by giving focus and input to those participants who provide and receive the specific services outlined in each nonprofit’s mission statement.  The system not only works, it achieves a traditional Republican goal by lowering county expenditures and reducing payroll and overhead.

No one outside the Republican inner circle is quite sure of the provisions in the human services reorganization plan. There has been no attempt to involve the affected agencies. However, the fear is real.  A new monolithic human service department would swallow up the existing nonprofits like a giant amoeba.

Years of relationship building, funding sources and countless careers would be lost or altered.  There is little confidence that a transition could go smoothly, especially given the lack of transparency. Many of the participants, including knowledgeable Republicans, foresee chaos.

Washington county citizens who receive services from these drug & alcohol, aging and mental health organizations must demand that whatever grand plan is in play be exposed and explained.  This should include public hearings on each proposal affecting the delivery of human services.

The boring, predictable days when county government was taken for granted and trusted to provide the best solutions is past. We must remain vigilant and challenge everything that does not add up.

PANDEMIC POLICY IS MORE COMPLICATED THAN “FOLLOW THE SCIENCE”

When it comes to fighting COVID-19 and its mutant variants, the two national approaches that have played out over the past year are clear. First, there was the Trump policy of relying on the former president’s questionable instincts backed by fringe scientists who agreed with him. No new regulation could escape the Center for Disease Control without being adversely scrubbed by pro Trump political operatives. By mid-summer, the former president was ignoring the pandemic and had placed all implementation responsibility on the state governors.

Now we have the Biden administration’s welcome transparency on COVID-19 policy under the slogan that his team will “follow the science.” His staff holds daily briefings, and there are centralized plans for winding down the crisis.  The president displays an empathetic concern for those affected economically and for those who have lost their lives.  Currently, Biden is moving a 1.9 trillion dollar stimulus package through Congress. 

While I am pleased with the turn of events since the inauguration, I am skeptical of the Biden claim that he is simply “following the science.” I find this a misleading slogan to explain the complex pandemic decision-making at the federal level. In truth, other factors besides empirical science are under consideration in addressing the virus. The new administration should clarify this fact for the American people.

To rely on science as the determining influence on policy is to misunderstand what science is. All scientists are by definition trained in the scientific method.  This process uses data gained through observation to remove uncertainties around a hypothesis in an effort to determine the truth. Scientists utilize proven facts to understand the world. The validity and importance of the scientific method is well documented. During the pandemic the scientific method has worked well to standardize the mitigation directives of mask wearing and social distancing.  

However, the process of organizing scientific knowledge in order to formulate policy through institutions and advisory committees is driven by more than raw data.  Politics, economic concerns as well as social constraints are also a part of the equation.

Sociologists have carefully studied the interplay between science and governmental policy.  On the surface, it may appear that public health policy depends solely on scientific information. By digging deeper researchers have found the process is more convoluted.  When faced with a new problem, policy makers tend to deconstruct the basic science depending on the ultimate goals of public officials and the political interest groups they serve. This is followed by a reconstruction of the fact-based science to achieve a plausible scientific rationale for the proposed action.

Rather than a monolithic scientific approach to the pandemic, we have observed this process of deconstructing and reconstructing scientific findings play out over and over on the world stage.  It is significant that there have been a long list of conflicting scientific studies over how to cope with a rapidly expanding, changing and mutating viral pandemic. Given this plethora of scientific studies against a background of divergent political, social and economic considerations, no two countries have “followed the science” according to the same prescription. Some national plans have succeeded better than others.  None has been perfect.  All have been different.

Anyone who believes that the Biden administration is only “following the science” in cobbling together the stimulus bill now before Congress would be way off base.  Certain provisions of the proposed law are designed to shore up the Affordable Care Act by making it economical to more Americans.  Other provisions that provide funds to assist financially strapped state and local governments and to distribute enhanced unemployment benefits are based on unemployment rates in each state. Democratic states that had shut down earlier and longer benefited the most from these proposed distributions. Overall, Republican states had briefer shutdowns and lower unemployment rates. This will limit their ability to receive assistance from these programs.

There is also Democratic favoritism concerning the dispersal of the vaccine and most recently, free, high quality masks.  Centralized mass distribution sites in Democratic urban areas are more effective in reaching citizens than vaguer decentralized plans to inoculate individuals and provide free masks in Republican rural areas. Moreover, Americans outside of population centers often do not have access to the internet services needed to sign up for the vaccine or to apply for federally enhanced unemployment benefits.

The Biden stimulus package is a good one and has wide support because of the financial payouts to all Americans.  I support all of its goals.  However, many provisions have little to do with empirical scientific data and everything to do with fulfilling campaign promises and rewarding the Democratic base.

Instead of “follow the science” as adopted by the Biden administration, a more accurate phrase would be, “We consider the recommendations of the best science in a changing pandemic environment in conjunction with our political, economic and social goals.”

The White House must take both credit and responsibility for its decisions separate and apart from scientific data.  In the end, Biden’s use of science to implement Democratic goals is far better than the plan of the previous administration to “ignore the science” and wait for the virus to disappear on its own.

 

 

 

 

CHARITABLE NONPROFITS & SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS MUST PLAN FOR THE FUTURE

Washington County has a vibrant history of charitable nonprofit and service organizations that promote underserved residents and important civic events. From the disabled and mentally ill to our libraries, the Whiskey Rebellion Festival and the Washington Symphony, the array of activities supported in the community is impressive.

Nonprofit and service organizations play a vital role in building a healthier, well-rounded Washington County. The leadership of each entity is often the loudest voice to champion the people and causes they serve.  However, in this decade of growing needs and shrinking governmental resources, these organizations are being asked to do more with less. The one area where our citizens can step up, at little financial cost, is in providing human resources as board members and volunteers.

The two obvious questions are: 1) what expertise and background are organizations seeking and 2) how does an interested party get involved? In addressing the first question on needs, former County Commissioner Bracken Burns had some wise and relevant thoughts. Since retiring as commissioner, he has continued to serve on over twenty-five boards, commissions and organizations. While his input may be stretched to the limit, he has been able to perform the valuable function of cross-pollenating ideas among the varied interests he serves.  Over the years, Mr. Burns has concluded that diversity in four areas is the key to maintaining a strong nonprofit or service organization.

Racial Diversity.  All organizations must be sensitive to recruiting minorities to serve on their boards and as volunteers to foster social cohesion and stronger social support networks.  This is particularly important where the community being served includes minorities.  I am reminded of a draft web page developed for a mental health nonprofit on which I have served.  Our sole African American member pointed out that no people of color were depicted on the masthead.  Her input on this and other sensitive matters was invaluable to the social integration of our mission and purpose.

Age Diversity.  Recruiting young adults to serve is difficult. Often both eligible spouses have full-time employment with children. However, seeking out interested young adults is crucial to the survival of our organizations that tend to be “top heavy” with much older members.

Age diversity can bring a richness and new insight to a discussion of critical issues. Bracken would not hesitate to add a college student (or younger) to a board where the participant had a vested personal interest in the business of the organization.  Enthusiasim and a fresh perspective make up for the lack of wisdom that comes from experience.  Moreover, no single age group has all the answers.

Skill Diversity.  An important consideration for both recruiting organizations and individuals seeking a place to serve is the skills brought to the board meeting or volunteer effort. It is important for the professional skills of the charitable board members to be well rounded.  Legal, finance, accounting and business backgrounds are four basic needs for most supervising boards.  No less important are experience in fundraising, communications and marketing, performance management, technology and strategic planning.

Geographical Diversity. The fourth and final diversity factor was not as obvious to me as the others were until Mr. Burns explained. He has found over the years that a board of directors made up of only East Washingon members, when the organization services a much larger area, is a mistake. Washington County has city, suburban and rural communities within its borders. In addition, the Mon valley has its own distinct personality. He strongly believes that when an organization services the entire county, it needs representation from all of these areas.

We have explored the types of individuals who are essential to perpetuate the health of Washington County charitable organizations.  The question now becomes how to match up the requirements of individual charitable nonprofits with those who may be interested in becoming involved. For this dilemma, I turned to the one person who has her hand on the pulse of charitable giving in Washington County, Ms. Betsie Trew.

Betsie is the President and CEO of the Washington County Community Foundation (WCCF).  Under her leadership assets have grown to more than $39 million, with over $15 million in grants and scholarships awarded. Like former Commissioner Burns, she is in a position to understand both the needs of the county’s charitable nonprofits and the available talent pool.

Unfortunately, there is no single database to match up nonprofits with potential board members or volunteers. There is, however, a comprehensive alphabetical list of all organizations which participate in the WCCF Day of Giving on its website. Anyone interested in service work can review the list or a subset by category and click on an entry for contact information. (Goggle: WCCF Charity Search)

Another resource for future board members and volunteers is the training program sponsored by Leadership Washington County (LWC@palwc.org).  LWC has been identifying and preparing future leaders through its program since 1998. After completion of the program, LWC provides participants with opportunities for board membership in order to stay actively involved in the community.

Throughout the past pandemic year, charitable nonprofit boards have been meeting virtually to keep the doors open and to prepare for the new normal. Any organization would be grateful to be contacted by new recruits ready to lend a hand for the greater good.

 

 

UNDERSTANDING JOE BIDEN

 

It is remarkable that an elected official like President Joe Biden can serve in public life for over 50 years and yet remain so misunderstood by most Americans. The Trump wing of the Republican Party and many other conservatives have labeled him as a far-left progressive, ready to take the country down the road of free spending socialism.  On the other hand, progressives see a President who is too eager to compromise with his political foes at the expense of needed social, economic and political reform.

Few observers have grasped the obvious. President Biden is and has always been a liberal humanist in the catholic social tradition, one who does not adhere to any steadfast political ideology. Biden is guided by tolerance toward human differences and is of the opinion that disagreements should most often be resolved through compromise and debate. 

A socialist revolution or a populist tearing down are not in the moderate Biden toolbox.  As so aptly described by Adam Gopnik, in his excellent analysis, The Moral Adventure of Liberalism: “Liberalism is a hatred of brutality, a recognition of the primacy of sympathy as social cement, a feeling for frailty and for mercy and for humanity before dogma.” These are the empathy driven qualities that have defined Joe Biden throughout his career and that remain at the center of his thinking. 

In the first weeks of the Biden administration, those on the right are crying foul, as the President issued a number of executive orders addressing immigration, climate change, LGBTQI rights, health care, the economy, the census and the Coronavirus. These executive orders were not radical policy revisions.  They were promulgated to reverse Trump policies that had imbedded right wing extremism into the bureaucracy. Overall, the orders returned federal policy to moderate pre-Trump positions.

There has also been a great deal of Republican consternation that Biden will utilize the budget reconciliation process (requiring only 50 Senate votes and a Vice Presidential tiebreaker instead of 60 votes) to pass his stimulus bill. The claim is that if Biden wanted to govern as a moderate compromiser, he would avoid this partisan result by working with Republicans to develop a bill that would satisfy both parties.

To his credit, the President has met with Republican leadership and listened to their position on a comprehensive stimulus package. However, he is concerned that further delay would damage the economy and cause unneeded hardship to millions of Americans.  Moreover, the public overwhelmingly supports all elements of his plan.  This approach is not an attempt to use the slim Democratic majority to force through radical new policies. He views the stimulus bill as a practical, necessary move to save the economy.

The concept of political unity has been discussed in many forums since Biden took office. Unfortunately, those who disagree with the President often misunderstand “unity”.  Political unity connotes common agreement on facts and evidence, not necessarily on policies or results. In seeking unity both sides must work to understand the problem, then define the problem and lastly to apply solutions which may differ.

Political adversaries must be willing to agree that the other may be right and to base a final resolution on practical concerns not ideology or partisanship. As negotiations play out over Biden’s term in office, ask yourself whether the White House or the Republicans are basing each of their respective final positions on pragmatic problem solving or on unbending dogma. Over time, Biden will be the clear winner when it comes to encouraging unity.

The President is well aware that there are five distinct groups of Americans with differing political views that must be reconciled to move the country forward. The progressive and conservative political elites are “conviction” factions that have embraced specific ideologies on how to run the federal government. These two groups are well educated, wealthy and make up many of the elected officials and activists in both parties.  They as well as their close allies contribute large sums of money to support the cause.

The next two groups are aligned to one of the two elites through “necessity” as opposed to conviction. First, minorities, recent immigrants, young voters and members of the LGBTQI community see their path to social and economic equality linked to the progressives.  Second, white, middle-class, middle-aged and rural voters have most often hitched their wagon to the nativist, populist positions espoused by Donald Trump. They view this alignment as a necessity to recapture family values, social status and lost economic opportunity.

The fifth group is a coalition of apolitical Independents. Independents favor predictability and minimal, negative impact to their economic interests. This group consists of suburban and upper middle-class voters. Similar to Biden, Independents tend to view government in practical rather than ideological terms.

As the Biden administration progresses, it will find paths away from the destructive tribalism of the last four years. The President will move the country toward unity.  Once the public square is governed by transparent facts rather than lies, disinformation and divisive statements, millions of Americans will discover it is not in their best interest to be at war with each other. 

Underserved urban and rural voters alike will join with Independents in the practical goals of Biden liberalism to defeat COVID-19, to create jobs in the new economy and to rejoin the world community as the leader of the free world.

 

 

 

CULTIVATING THE GREEN SHOOTS OF RECOVERY IN WASHINGTON COUNTY

 

In 2020 the United States was stress tested to its limits by the pandemic, social unrest, the chaotic White House and the disruptive presidential election. It is not too early to look ahead, with some optimism, to what the economic, social and political recovery might look like later in 2021.

Many pundits will tackle this forward-looking task at the national level.  My commentary will attempt do the same for Washington County.  It is my view that with some carefully managed cultivation our local “green shoots” of post-pandemic recovery will flourish this spring and beyond.

First, consider pandemic relief at the local level. For most of us this means receiving our inoculation against COVID-19. Keeping residents informed on the status of the vaccine roll-out has been confusing at best and non-existent at worst. Each state seems to have taken a different muddled path with planning even more obtuse at the local level.

Washington County government and local media must do better.  It is no longer enough to report new COVID-19 infections and the number of deaths within our county borders.  There should now be a daily press release reporting the number of completed inoculations with clear instructions for those eligible to receive a shot, along with locations and schedules. The elderly living alone are often not computer literate to locate and fill out on-line applications. They will require hands on assistance to arrange an appointment and may need help with transportation to receive their inoculation.

Vaccine information may change as conditions and availability are altered. All citizens have a right to be kept informed about the latest strategy. This approach will lower anxiety and increase transparency. It goes without saying that to encourage participation elected officials should be publically vaccinated when it is their turn in the roll out.

Our county leaders must also demonstrate a strong and vocal buy-in toward infection prevention by enthusiastically supporting President Biden’s 100-day mask mandate as a “patriotic duty.” This includes all county residents, even those who have already been inoculated or who have avoided mask wearing in the past as a political statement. Leadership by example and through encouraging words will make a difference in this next phase to defeat the virus. Only the continued simple prescription of mask wearing, social distancing and hand washing will save lives and restore the local economy with minimal delay.

There are several moving parts to Washington County’s economic recovery following the pandemic. First, economic aid must flow freely to the plethora of small businesses impacted by prolonged loss of revenue. To the extent that federal and state programs fall short, the county must be prepared to step in and to offer this aid for struggling employers. When other sources of funding are available the county should provide free services to guide business owners in the application process to receive these funds. 

Fifty-four million Americans have faced food insecurity during the soon-to -be yearlong pandemic.  Washington County has suffered more than its share. County leaders must continue to publicize the continued need for food distribution and financial contributions to the food bank.  County funds should be utilized to supplement private contributions until Washington County has recovered.

Oil and gas companies are experiencing a limited resurgence as OPEC works to restrict supply and support the price of hydrocarbon products. The local fracking industry can benefit from this trend by using common sense to regulate drilling until the economy has a sustained, post-pandemic recovery.

Washington County must look past the “boom or bust” fracking industry and encourage the local development of “new economy” businesses such as renewable energy and technology.  This forward-looking policy will provide for commercial expansion, new employment and a tax base for the next generation of county residents.

 The Washington County court system has sustained significant postponements and delays due to the inability to schedule both criminal and civil jury trails.  It is important that county and state officials work with the courts to hire staff, senior judges and to provide temporary courtrooms to reduce the backlog. The old legal adage that “justice delayed is justice denied” has never been more relevant.

Washington County was fortunate that the civil unrest following the killing of George Floyd and others at the hands of police officers did not erupt into local violent confrontations. However, the past summer of protest should serve as a warning that the county is not immune and should be proactive in addressing racial concerns.  I have long advocated for a county diversity commission as a starting point.  Now is the time to dedicate resources to this initiative.

The public sector including local governments have learned a great deal over the past twelve months.  It would be a mistake to not take advantage of this knowledge to hasten our recovery.  Now is the time to pull out the hoe and plant some “recovery” seeds and “unity” bulbs. Both efforts will surely result in green shoots followed by the beautiful blooms of a new Washington County renaissance.