Yesterday, I was reading Charlotte Alter’s book while pondering its relevance to both the pandemic and leadership crisis of the moment. Then this thought-balloon burst. My attention was drawn to the unwelcome sight of rust on one of my patio chairs. It was gnawing away at one of the interlaced iron strips that supported the seat. As a result, the plastic casing that protected the metal from rust was breaking up and slowly exposing more of the seat to deterioration. The resulting corrosion would eventually make that chair unable to support me or any human—unless I repaired it. The irony I found in this predicament was in the title of Alter’s book, “The Ones We’ve been Waiting For.” In this case, I was the one. But she was writing about the prospect of a new generation’s ability to stop a slowly engulfing existential crisis: the insidious corrosion of our democratic republic. If the American experiment is to continue its back-and-forth progress through history, who can keep it on its path towards a more perfect union. Who are the ones we’ve been waiting for?

If you are among the thousands that read this blog, you are well aware of what I term a “leadership crisis.” But the spread of the Covid-19 virus has exacerbated this crisis by raising the stakes. We are not only witnessing an abdication of national leadership and a deterioration of a democratic republic but also the loss of lives and livelihoods of many Americans. A stealthy corrosion has crept into both our experiment in self-government and the security of our way of life.

“Corrosion” does not need to be defined. We all know that it is a slow process of degradation that can go undetected until it is too late to reverse. For example, what is the cost of incompetence in government? Well, the world’s response to this global pandemic offers us an answer. The South Korean government, for example, reacted quickly and responsibly to the health crisis this Covid-19 virus presented. It incurred its first Covid-19 case on the same day as America in January of this year. Immediately, they shut down their economy and commenced extensive testing and contact tracing. By the beginning of May, South Korea had reduced their previous 255 cases/day to zero with only 2 deaths. Recently, after opening their economy, a second outbreak occurred. But the Koreans were prepared to test, trace and quarantine. They understood how to mitigate and control a virus for which humans have no immunity. Unlike the American disaster, they recognized the need to act quickly to a highly contagious virus. Their government proved itself competent to protect its people. It is true, of course, that South Korea has only about 15.2% of the population of America. How then can one compare its numbers with the American experience of more than one and a half million cases and over ninety-one thousand deaths (as of 5/19/2020)?

Our President, of course, abhors this comparison, exclaiming that America tested more cases in eight days than South Korea tested in eight weeks. The problem, of course, is that he made this comparison in March, not in January when testing would have been both strategic and appropriate. Considering the difference in the South Korean population (50.8 million versus 335 million), America’s eight days of testing should be multiplied by a factor of 6.6, which amounts to nearly 8 weeks (paradoxically). How many more tests per capita should have America performed to match South Korea’s effort? How about 6.6 times! But the real difference in this comparison is not the amount of testing. It is the fact that America started almost 2 months later than Korea. And now, four months since its first case, America has still not ramped up its testing to the per capita level of South Korea or even begun contact tracing at a national level. What competency has this American Administration shown during this health crisis?

Amongst all the nations of the world, only America has chosen not to address this pandemic with a national strategy or even adhered to its self-proclaimed tactical goals. By definition, a pandemic does not have a cure, otherwise every nation would be vaccinating its citizens to prevent contagion. So, the only defense is mitigation, which includes home isolation, safe hygiene practices, testing, and contact tracing. Without a cure, contagion will spread, and people will die. Any sane government would attempt to mitigate as much as possible while supporting the development of a vaccine. But President Donald Trump chose a different course. The goals and strategies offered by the CDC (Center for Disease Control and Prevention) he ignored. The pandemic response plans of previous Administrations, he ignored. The role of FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) in maintaining emergency supplies and a logistics supply network, he chose to undermine. Initially, his Administration failed to restore its emergency supply and replace expired equipment—even after three years in office and after being warned of the pandemic in January. Subsequently, the President chose to circumvent FEMA’s disaster response network by appointing his son-in-law to source and distribute protective equipment and testing supplies. And he put his Vice President in charge of the medical team responsible to develop a strategy to address this national health crisis. Both initiatives were started late, as mentioned above. And they failed to accomplish their missions. Why?

The President’s son-in-law established an “air bridge” distribution system that sidelined the pre-established logistic capability of FEMA. In support of this system, he allowed government agents to high jack medical supplies ordered by individual States to address crisis situations in hospitals and care facilities. He claimed these supplies belonged to the Federal stockpile, not to the States. Perhaps he meant that these supplies were stockpiled for distribution to the States. But his team was less responsive to State Governors’ requests than to the VIPs he listed as friendly or beholden to the Administration. His distribution system was not strategic in addressing needs and not efficient in managing the usability of expired equipment. No one has praised his performance, other than the President. What is the price paid for this incompetency?

Meanwhile, the Vice President’s only contribution to the coronavirus team seems to be sourcing some ventilators the States’ Governors were unable to obtain. He also obtained testing devices, but without the required reagents and apparatus to perform actual testing—a pyric victory of numbers over substance. It is not clear what, if any, contribution he made to the health crisis team he allegedly managed, other than spouting meaningless statistics of supply acquisitions to cloud the absence of any strategic progress in delivering them where needed. But his work was consistent with the President’s plan of holding the Governors responsible for mitigating the virus, to include obtaining equipment where needed and dealing with the surge of patients and deaths. As the President sheepishly stated, “I take no responsibility at all.” He abdicated personal responsibility even for his Administration’s policies. But, at the same time, he claimed success for his Administration. Combined with the medically harmful advice he volunteered from the podium, his self-serving re-characterization of abject failure as success added confusion to the chaos he created. How many Americans have suffered at the hands of the highest elected officials in our government?

Today, America accounts for about 29% of the world’s cases of Covid-19 with only 4% of the world’s population. That statistical imbalance does not speak well of this Administration’s leadership. In fact, it highlights the corrosive nature of incompetence in government.

But incompetence is not even this government’s worst problem. Corruption is. There are so many examples of corruption that they surpass the total of all such incidents throughout American history. We have no precedent for a presidential political campaign inviting foreign interference in an election, for obstructing a counter-espionage investigation, and for punishing the investigators by questioning their procedures and firing or demoting them for doing their job. As if this type of corruption was not enough, the President even trumped the Russian GRU by bribing a foreign nation to adhere to a baseless conspiracy theory that undermines a political adversary and attempts to subvert another national election. But these transgressions are just prologue to current examples of corruption—from appointing surrogates complicit in corruption to eliminating whistleblowers and inspector generals who investigate/report on instances of corruption. Since the beginning of April, the President has fired or demoted four inspector generals and two CDC truth tellers. Moreover, he has effectively made his Attorney General his consiglieri, tasked with keeping convicted felons like Manafort, Stone, and Flynn out of jail while building a case against political opponents. The American public will now be bombarded with baseless accusations of Ukraine conspiracies and of a newly hatched “Obamagate” conspiracy. Investigations—like the ongoing one into the Special Prosecutor’s successful prosecutions—will continue through the Fall elections. The President has turned our government into a weapon to serve his political interests. Have we ever witnessed this level of abuse of power in American history? An incompetent Presidency is subject to the will of the electorate. But a corrupt Presidency must be subject to the law and the Constitution. If not, what price must we all pay?

The Enlightenment inspired our forefathers with the values expressed in our founding documents. But those documents only expressed the will of about 3 million colonists who rebelled against tyranny. Today, America has more than 100 times the population of the 18th Century. We have made many changes in our government, as witnessed in Amendments to our Constitution and the various laws that have addressed the social safety net, institutional racism, voting rights, corporate and government malfeasance, and so on. At this point in our history, we are confronted with challenges created by the technology revolution, the unequal distribution of wealth and income, climate change, international issues involving respect for borders, safety of refugees, and security from terrorists, and the President’s attempt to dissolve/undermine an interdependent world economy previously governed by rules and free trade ideology. There is no possibility that America can return to the nascent context of 1776. We have evolved in concert with the world. The political battles of the moment that attempt to shift the balance of power to the Presidency or to demonize socialism are a clear and present danger to our government and our way of life. Clearly, the President’s and his lawyers’ claim that his Presidency is above the law is fiction—really a distraction, albeit a dangerous one. And the fear of socialism is ridiculous in a nation that has laws authorizing labor unions, social security, Medicare/Medicaid, comprehensive public education, job safety, food, air, and water regulations, and so much more. Socialism is not communism. But fear of socialism is just another distraction. It drowns out any constructive discussion on real issues like climate change preparedness, the diminished opportunities of the working class, infrastructure investment, campaign reform, exorbitant college tuition costs, and so much more. Relevant to this blog, the President’s claims of “total authority” and warnings against socialism draw our attention away from our Federal Government’s pervasive incompetence and corruption at the highest levels. We cannot even begin to have constructive discussions on the pressing issues of our time until we address the corrosion of our government from within.

The arguments about Presidential incompetence and corruption have always lurked in our political landscape, perhaps more so since Watergate. And the aura of Jefferson’s vision of a liberal state composed of freedom-loving landowners did not even last “four score and 7 years,” when Lincoln endeavored to redefine American society and the Constitution’s “more perfect union.” Each generation of Americans have dealt with permutations in our vision of a liberal democracy and of a society where all are equal before the law. Now it may well fall to millennials to clarify that vision for the 21st Century. If they adhere to the values expressed by our founders, they will act to correct an aberrant definition of Presidential power and the restoral of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” for all. That restoration is not possible where incompetence and corruption persists in our government.

Above I stated that the word “corrosion” does not need to be defined. It is well understood. But many of our words are built on metaphors which suggests a deeper meaning at their roots. For example, “corrosive” shares the same Latin root as “rodent” (rodere, to gnaw). The rusts that is slowly eating the metal seat of my patio chair is like the rats that gnawed their way through the dry wall in my pantry some years ago. You see, the metaphor suggests a more aggressive response to corrosion than just a paint over. For example, I put mouse traps in my pantry to stop rats from destroying my food store. What do voters do with rats gnawing away at their government?

__________________________________________________________

Reference: “We Become the Future We Seek.”

Still my question of the day: is it possible to reform our economy and our government without serious campaign reform that honors voting rights and replaces unlimited fund raising with equitably disbursed public funding? Or is there another way to return sovereignty to the American people?