Politics is failing Minnesota and America because we the people are failing politics.
We have allowed our systems of policymaking and governance to be taken over by too many who lack experience, knowledge and temperament; they desperately cling to the past – to the interest groups and ideas that elected them – while promising to lead us into the future. Certainly, there are talented people of integrity serving in public office, both in elected offices and government agencies. But they are hamstrung by a system that embraces extremism in politics and shuns innovation in policy.
We have become a state and nation of people who seek companionship in like-minded partisans. Increasingly, we live, worship and recreate with people like us. And no wonder why we make these choices: A Pew survey found that majorities of both Democrats and Republicans believe members of the other party are less intelligent, more close-minded, more dishonest and more immoral than their fellow partisans. Who wants to be associated with them!
Last year’s elections that produced a 67-67 tie in Minnesota House of Representatives isn’t evidence of a purple state but one deeply divided. Only 10 Democrats and 10 Republicans were elected with single-digit margins. The remaining 114, red and blue alike, won by 10% or more.
Politicians are deaf to the admonition that has been part of texts from Greek philosophers to popular fables to the Bible: “Physician, heal thyself.” And why should they change? The system works for those in power. When 85% of elections to a legislative body are non-competitive, both parties have a stake in the status quo – caucuses, conventions and primaries that discourage participation until the general election in November when the outcome is a foregone conclusion. Bipartisanship between the DFL and GOP reigns when the call is to protect the duopoly by opposing ranked choice voting, open primaries, campaign finance reform and other changes that would open the process to more candidates and new ideas.
The result of this broken system is that policy ideas get dumped into a political environment that doesn’t easily move on from the past. Policymakers are promoted and funded by interest groups on the right or left with narrow, mostly self-serving interests. They are elected by voters with a shared ideology. To expect bold change to emerge from this political system is naïve at best.
Minnesotans no longer can afford to leave the future to politicians. The state needs the innovation of creative policymakers, business and civic leaders and the non-profit community that transformed Minnesota from an also-ran state in the 1950s to the “State that Works” in the 1970s. And, it needs a group committed to engaging people at every level in both understanding why change is needed and willingness to flex the political muscle needed to make it happen.
We need to create the next Minnesota by taking decisions about the future away from politicians and special interests with narrow, self-serving agendas. Minnesota needs to marry the thoughtfulness and diligence of a peer-reviewed journal with the populism of crowd-sourcing and the support of a public engaged in ideas not ideology.
What’s needed is a well-funded, non-partisan organization that proactively solicits great solutions to Minnesota’s biggest challenges. The good news is that Minnesota remains a state of brilliant innovators, people in all walks of life who have bold solutions to the state’s most pressing challenges and promising opportunities. Minnesota does not suffer from a lack of great ideas; it is held back by a lack of political courage.
Of course, not all big ideas are great ideas. Soliciting the best of these reforms is step one. Step two would be to submit the ideas to a panel of cross-sector experts – the people who understand the nuts and bolts of public policy – for evaluation against three criteria:
- The reform must make a significant and quantifiable improvement in the outcomes in at least one of five critical focus areas: economic development; academic excellence (early learning through post-secondary); attainable housing; responsible and affordable financing of government; and, environmental protection.
- There must be a clearly defined and articulated goal that can be tracked by incremental benchmarks. Policies should have objectives that can be measured on a regular basis so that changes can be made as policies evolve.
- The measure must be feasible economically. Is it affordable, who pays and who benefits?
Notably missing from the criteria is whether the proposed reform is achievable in today’s political world. It’s a given that a reform of the scope and scale needed in Minnesota would hardly get a hearing in today’s political world. A critical component of any initiative to boldly tackle Minnesota’s future challenges and opportunities must be be backed by broad-based support from grassroots and leaders alike. Substantial resources would be required for public outreach and awareness campaigns to engage Minnesotans in understanding and promoting reforms.
The initiative cannot be a “meet-in-the-middle” organization to promote political comity. Cases must be rattled, vested interests confronted and and long-held assumptions tossed aside, whether they are held by conservatives or liberals. Kumbaya is not part of the initiative’s lexicon.
This isn’t an indictment of politicians as much as it is an acknowledgement that Minnesota is held captive by a political system that is broken. Government must be part of the answer, but it’s not going to succeed without a lot of help.
It’s true there are many organizations in Minnesota that contribute much to public policy, from the policy wonks at Citizens League to the conservative thinkers at Center of the American Experiment, from the academicians at the state’s colleges and universities to the market-oriented business leaders and their advocacy groups. We are a state blessed with trailblazers in non-profits and faith communities. And on and on.
Certainly, there is a need for this effort. Minnesota is facing strong headwinds. The task at hand is greater than tinkering around the edges. It needs a broader mission than that of any one of the entities that exist now. It is important enough, though, to make room at the table for all. This conversation should continue. The task is too important to ignore, nothing less than creating the next Minnesota by making this a state of security, prosperity and opportunity for every person.
I’ve attended every DFL caucus for over 50 years and attended dozens if not hundreds of conventions over that span. I’ve done my share of doorknocking, phone calling, and convention sitting, You have to be more than a concerned citizen, if you wish to participate in the DFL. Party leadership becomes focused on the best organizers, rather than the best ideas. Conformity in support ot each other prevents appropriate internal debate. The absence of average joe and jane in our process became the underpinnings of our current crises.