Compulsive Opposition

Harper Collins labels compulsive those people or their behavior when they cannot stop doing something wrong, harmful, or unnecessary. A recent headline “Compulsive Opposition” caught my eye, leading me to examine this factor in more detail. I consulted the dictionary for synonyms of compulsive, neurotic popped up.  The dictionary suggested that there are no cures for compulsion, it is a chronic disease.

Unprepared for Defeat

Clinton’s defeat at the presidential polls on November 8, 2016 unleashed a number of powerful and unprecedented reactions.  It was in the bag, so to speak, that Hilary would win hands down. No way that Americans would elect someone that Democrats labeled a racist, homophone, misogynist, xenophobe, chauvinist, and worse. No way voters would turn their back on making history by electing the first woman president. No way that voters would be so stupid to elect someone who in their eyes was an imbecile and a narcissist.

When the votes were tallied, the results were crystal clear. Clinton had lost the election, albeit she had won the popular vote. Supporters were shocked and inconsolable. How could this be happening? Surely, this was too hard to swallow, impossible to accept, or with which to come to grips.  It was a sad spectacle to see a whole slice of our society uncontrollably disconnected, looking for answers to a counter-intuitive outcome.

This huge loss followed shellacking at the polls starting in 2010 that had given Republicans control of the two Chambers of Congress, the presidency, and victories in 32 governorships.

Mass grieving and some hysteria enveloped parts of the electorate. It was a defeat hard to swallow and so unexpected. Scare tactics took over: the newly elected President would undo the safety net, people would die for lack of healthcare coverage, elders and children would be forced to eat dog food, and the poor and the disabled would be at the mercy of a heartless regime.

 Fishing for Answers

Immediately, supporters everywhere began to look for ways to thwart the people’s choice by employing ways to stop the insanity of this unacceptable result.

A long checklist of actions followed: court challenges, recounts, demonstrations, confrontations, attempted bribery of Electoral College representatives to change their vote, calls for secession from the Union, elimination of the Electoral College, gratuitous medical diagnoses of Trump, suspected Russian involvement, leaks, fake news, and so on. In the end, distraught supporters are still grieving and unable to accept reality.

Clinton lost, Trump won!

When Democrats failed to achieve the intended result, the battle cry morphed to resist, resist, resist … followed by the ominous by any means. Repeating the redundant slogan was to emphasize that there would be no stopping, no matter what. The goal became to resist, period. No time or interest in solving mounting problems or looking for better solutions. Anything coming from this election result would be illegitimate, crooked, heartless, or worse.

Resistance has become a compulsive action, unstoppable and vociferous. Compulsion, we are told, is a condition… an irresistible and persistent urge to behave sometime antagonistically. That’s where the by any means scares me. It could encourage some deranged sympathizer to resort to the unthinkable.  Resistors still refuse undemocratically to accept the will of the people. They are willing to resort to fascist ways to continue resisting. Gratification and satisfaction come only from resistance. For some, it has become an obsession.

The Kabuki Dance

Wikipedia tells that Kabuki is a “term used by American political pundits as synonym for political posturing. It is a drama carried out in a predictable and stylized fashion.” It is designed to give the appearance of an uncertain outcome, when in fact key players know the outcome beforehand.

Allegations of collusion by the Trump campaign with the Russians to defeat Clinton explain why the election was lost. Inference that if the election had been held on October 27^th, or prior to Comey’s revelation of more emails, Clinton would have won the election. A special counsel to investigate the Russian connection and Trump’s team surely would uncover illegal acts and doom Trump’s nescient presidency. Calls for a select commission would be necessary in the end for people to know the details behind what if anything is discovered by the special counsel. Suggestions that Trump be impeached make many left-wingers lick their chops, even though there is little or no chance that it would come to that.

Examining the Paradox

As an organization development specialist, I learned many years ago to follow Chris Argyris model of evaluation. Chris taught us that one way to assess an organization’s, a movement’s, or a political party’s performance is to examine the theory and philosophy they espouse versus their theory and philosophy in action. Gaps between the two would show the degree to which some talk is just that as well as the degree to which the subject is out of sync with its own philosophy and theory.

The left has espoused for years tolerance, bonhomie, compassion, inclusiveness, and respect for the environment, just to name a few. Examination of this philosophy in action shows a complete reversal of the espoused principles.

Some are not tolerant of ideas and views that differ from their own, and go out of their way to muzzle others’ speech. Bonhomie (affability for those not familiar with the term) applies only to those they like or think alike. Compassion only applies to certain people, those who agree with one’s philosophy, inclusiveness does not mean that you include people who differ from you. Respect for the environment applies only to the masses, rich proponents are excused when driving their guzzler SUVs, fly their private jets, or power their luxurious yachts.

Gaps suggest a malfunction of the moral compass, perhaps a diminished capacity for integrity, or just plain phoniness.

So What’s Next?

Cable News is the big loser as each of the Kabuki acts fails to come up with any smoking gun. With the special counsel in charge, much of the investigation will retreat to the background and secrecy takes over. The usual suspects will appear nightly fueling viewers’ curiosity and conspiracy theories. 

Resistors will run out of gas as their actions prove ineffectual or impotent. They will have had enough time to vent, much time to grieve, and to lash out at anyone who disagrees with them. Anarchists, among the resistors, will continue to look for opportunities to wreck havoc and destroy private property. Ill-advised young leftists will continue to use fascist methods to deny adversaries their right to speak by claiming that whatever they have to say is hateful speech anyway.

Let me emphasize that one size does not fit all. Many Democrats have moved on and have come to grips with reality, however unpleasant that might be. Those suffering from the compulsion of resist, resist, resist will continue to be stuck in its involuntary repetition or neurosis. 

Bill Bridges, in his widely acclaimed work on personal transitions, warns us that you cannot move on to a new beginning unless you are willing to let go of the past. Some folks just cannot let go dooming themselves from experiencing a new start.

This is also a warning to Republicans! Stop gloating! The pendulum will swing the other way, and it will be your turn to experience despair, hysteria, and melt down. None of us is immune from a bad case of compulsion or neurosis. History has a funny way of repeating itself!

What is Left of Obama's Legacy?

It has been about 120 days since Donald Trump became President. Adversaries trumpet, no pun intended, that he has not been able to accomplish much. Supporters, on the other hand, believe that he is delivering on his campaign promises.

Let’s examine how Trump’s actions might have impacted Obama’s legacy. Although 4 months a trend do not make, it is interesting to examine the trajectory. In 2008, it did not take Obama long either to erase Bush’s accomplishments. We might be witnessing the same.

As I discussed in my previous post, with a two-party system, America oscillates back and forth, on average, every eight years. That means that we take a couple steps forward before we go back a step and some. The wider the gulf in the political positions of the two parties, the more widely will the pendulum swing.

Obama Care

It was supposed to be Obama’s signature legacy. The House about 15 days ago repealed and replaced the law, pending Senate action. There are many things in the House bill that need to be buttoned down and changed. The Senate will surely come up with a gentler and more compassioned version. The reconciliation will smooth out those items that need rework. Obama Care will disappear, as we know it, once that happens. 

Obama Care, in my view, was instrumental in making many Republicans come around to the notion that healthcare should be a human right. In the rush to get it approved, Democrats made the colossal mistake of not seeking a bi-partisan solution. Senate Republicans hopefully will not repeat the Democrats’ mistake.

Foreign Policy

The Obama legacy was on shaky grounds for some time. Events on the ground have shown its timidity and inconclusiveness. President Obama, immediately after his election, chose a path that gave him initial but short-lived victories. Some folks suggested that he preferred to be loved rather than being respected.

He flew to Cairo to promise a new, more enlightened era under his rule. He quickly embraced the Arab Spring, before fully understanding its consequences or shadow benefactors. It did not take long before events on the ground began to unravel to be followed by increased conflict. Much of the Middle East erupted in flames. The fire is still smoldering in Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Lebanon, and Syria. Red lines were set and red lines crossed in Syria, highlighting the weakness of the U.S. resolve.

Troops were hastily removed from Iraq, in order to deliver on a campaign pledge, only to be brought back a couple years later, albeit in smaller numbers, to fight ISL. Troop levels were reduced in Afghanistan only to be increased a few years later to combat increased Taliban and Al Qaeda activity.

Russia annexed Crimea and aided secessionists in Ukraine. Obama responded with timidity and ineffectually. Sanctions have hurt Russia, but also have emboldened President Putin to challenge the U.S. in many areas and sectors. In Syria, in particular, the Russians have enlarged their footprint by expanding their naval and air bases, and by pretty much taking over the war against the insurgents.  They have also stealthily narrowed American involvement to just fighting ISL.

After setting some imaginary lines in the sand with respect to Iran’s nuclear activity, in the end, Obama forged an agreement that slows but does not end the Iranian regime’s quest for a nuclear capability, which will surely be followed by a Saudi Arabian response in kind. To his critics' chagrin, Obama freed billions of dollars sequestered by the Carter Administration after the hostage fiasco.

North Korea shows the same pattern. Threats and lines in the sand followed by impotence. The rogue regime is a huge threat to world peace and an existential threat to its neighbors. They are now developing ICBMs capable of reaching the U.S. mainland with nuclear weapons.

Former Secretary Clinton once commented that a ‘do no harm’ foreign policy is not a strategy. The major Obama accomplishment was that, under his watch, Osama bin Laden was apprehended and killed. History has shown that Clinton was right in her assessment.

In international trade, both the Transpacific (TPP) and the European trade agreements were perceived as not being fair trade agreements, and that much was being traded away at the expense of the blue collar worker in the name of the global economy and the building of better relations with our allies and friends. Critics argued that more cleaver negotiators on the other side managed to clean our clock repeatedly.

Discontent with NAFTA has been fueled by the perceived notion that the agreement is not balanced. Some saw that Obama was loath to disturb our relations with Canada and Mexico, thus ignoring glaring issues in the pact.

Domestic Policy

Besides Obama Care, the landscape is a mixed bag. A flurry of Executive Orders divided the nation at a time when the nation needed desperately a unifier in chief. His lack of interest in working with Republicans and to micro-manage implementation, loaded businesses with thousands of regulations, thus increasing the cost of doing business and weakening their ability to compete on the international arena.

In all fairness, Obama inherited an economy in free-fall, and markets in disarray. Unemployment had jumped to over 10%. Many businesses were at a stand still. Drastic actions were surely in order. However, many of his initiatives were perceived to be half-baked. During Obama’s first two years, he controlled both chambers of Congress and could have had whatever he wanted. He chose to make healthcare his priority when focusing on the economy would have been wiser.

The shovel-ready jobs never materialized. The country’s national debt doubled during his tenure. The number of folks not working jumped to an old time high of 95 million. The number of people on food stamps jumped to more than 45 million. Home ownership rates took a hit. He did manage to rescue the auto industry. However, the real beneficiaries were the unions, not the shareholders.

He was lolled to sleep by the numbers published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). People who exhausted their unemployment insurance were not counted in the unemployment rate, giving the false impression that the country was doing much better than it really was. The number -of-jobs-added reports made it sound like the country was on the rebound when in fact it was slowly climbing out of a huge hole, and the incremental gains were a slow recovery of what had been lost.

During Obama’s tenure, we witnessed an explosion of regulations, some very much needed, others not so. With regulations came a larger bureaucracy, which increased costs and slowed down management action across several business sectors. Some of the regulations were based on ideology rather than common sense practice thus dividing the nation further.

The Legacy Thing

Facts are stubborn things. They fail to go away and give rise to “inconvenient truths.” Here are some of them:

·      During the eight years of Obama’s presidency Democrats lost control of the House in 2012 and control of he Senate in 2014. He leaves behind a party in disarray, not sure of what direction to take, and in the hands of leftists.

·      900 elected office positions were lost to the Republicans. The Democrat party has become a regional party, strong along the west coast and the Northeast corridor. He left the heartland more Republican than he had inherited eight years earlier.

·      The military was shrunk, thus weakening our ability to fight on more than two fronts. Morale declined as mismanagement of the Veterans Administration hit the evening news.

·      The national debt stands a little over 100% of our gross national product, saddling the budget with a large debt service. The increased debt interest charges reduce the amount of money available for infrastructure and social programs.

·      Many hoped after Obama’s election that he would be a great catalyst for improved race relations. Although he appointed many minorities to high positions, race relations actually took a dive.

·      DACA spared about a million young illegal aliens living in the shadows. These aliens were young kids brought over by their illegal immigrant parents through no fault of their own. Compassion was and still is the right thing to do.

·      Our image on the world stage has been diminished by our lack of resolve and indecisiveness. Russia is imposing its will on its neighbors and destabilizing some of our friendly nations. Many of our allies have quietly questioned our leadership.

·      People give Obama a high approval score. They see him and his family in favorable light, although they might not approve of his policies or question his accomplishments. Critics point out that his aloofness prevented a better working arrangement with Congress. This is in contrast to Trump, where people dislike his style and bombast, but seem to like his policies.

·      Trump in just 100 days has managed to erase many of Obama’s accomplishments by reversing most Obama’s Executive Orders, by approving the Canadian pipeline, withdrawing from looming trade agreements, reversing some climate initiatives, and tightening our immigration policies.

In the end, Obama appears to be joining George W. Bush in the dustbin of history leaving behind a dubious legacy. When he was elected, he raised expectations beyond his ability to deliver. He will remain, however, a beloved personage and a symbol to many for years to come.

Oscillation Rather than Advancement in Healthcare Legislation

The House today votes on repealing and replacing Obama Care. 

I watch the proceedings with much horror as House Republicans are repeating the mistakes the Democrats made in 2010.

House Democrats in their attack on the bill decried the lack of bi-partisan input and missed opportunity to repair rather than repeal the law. They invoked the traditional scare tactics of years past: Armageddon, millions will die, thousands will go bankrupt, heartlessness, devastation, inhumanity, and so on.  They accused House Republicans of mean-spirited intent and of shifting 600 billion dollars to the wealthy (whose money it was in the first place). They lament that Republicans were shoving the legislation down their throat, just like they had done in 2010 to the Republicans. Thus completing the oscillation cycle.

It is not over yet. Senate Republicans will get a chance to fix some of the glaring problems of the House bill. They will have the opportunity to include Democrats in the process, thus ending the revolving cycle. The nation needs a bill on which people can bank on for the long haul, not from legislature to legislature.

Polarization and animosity, not just in Congress, but also in the electorate, are preventing us from addressing the healthcare issue in a more united and collaborative manner. Republicans’ victory will be Pyrrhic and shortsighted without Democrat involvement.  The current zero-sum approach used by both parties will take us in the direction of a lose-lose outcome. We need a win-win solution!

Obama care was flawed… surging costs, lack of competition in some States, failure by some exchanges, and so on. But it had some good elements too: coverage of pre-existing conditions, inclusion of dependent children until age 26, and inclusion of several procedures previously uncovered, to name three.

To make my point clearer, this blog includes a bit of theory. I hope it helps illustrate the conundrum we find ourselves in, of our own doing, I might add.

Here Comes the Theory

In graduate school, I learned about the inescapable laws of organizations. To oscillate or to advance. These laws are followed by specific principles and guidelines.

Oscillation is about moving from one place to another, any advancement is followed by reversal. Like in a rubber band, we discover that when you stop stretching it, it goes back to its original position. Advancement, on the other hand, is about moving from one place to somewhere else, a movement that achieves end objectives.

Organizations often neutralize their own success. How? Success in one area causes difficulties in another area. By focusing on individual pockets of success we can miss overall nullification. This has been the Achilles’ heel of Obama Care.

Every eight years or so, we witness an oscillating pattern of success. We elect a president from one party only to precipitate the eventual election of a president from the other party. As the pendulum swings, the nation starts to shift its priorities and policies. But, it is often a sign of another impending election win by the opposing party. The rubber band effect maintains continuity, but it avoids or makes it tough to achieve real change or to engage in real change.

Research on organization behavior shows that you cannot fix an inadequate structure. You simply cannot move from inadequacy to a suitable one. Fixing means taking “the what is” and repairing. Redesign, on the other hand, means you start from scratch and rethink your basic premises. You cannot fix an oscillating structure so that it will be a resolving one that advances. 

Problem solving has a built-in tendency to oscillate. Why? There is a huge difference between demolition and architecture. Problems often are accompanied by a biased view. Solving problems is very different than preventing them. The healthcare debacle is a great illustration of this concept.

We need unifying principles. Common purpose permits better coordination of countless activities. Purpose is intangible, and often, beyond words. Good intentions are not enough. It takes a good design to tie the parts together. Like all masterpieces, designs are governed by unifying principles. Plaques on the wall are not the solution. Rhetoric or slogans trivialize the most meaningful concepts because they rely on watered-down, simplistic declarations.

We need dominant values that displace competing, lesser values. This requires leaders with clear substance, and a shared approach to reducing conflict and facilitating shared goals. Unifying principles can lead to fairer ground rules and fewer games.  Successful presidents such as Lincoln, FDR, and Reagan, over the years have demonstrated the power of this concept.

Leadership theory also teaches us that not all problems are created equal. Some problems are easier than others; other problems might even escape resolution.

Leaders are confronted with two types of problems: tame and wicked. There are solutions for tame problems. Experts can be brought in to find them and implement them. There are no solutions however for wicked problems. No experts to whom to turn. The problem is so complex that no one seems to know how to successfully solve it.  The healthcare problem is such wicked problem. It affects 20% of the U.S. economy and impacts different people in different ways. It is a very costly and controversial program indeed.

What Next?

Best way to solve wicked problems is through bi-partisan collaboration. Both parties need to start from scratch and come up with a set of unifying principles around the role of government in the healthcare of its citizens.   This exercise provides guidance as to the super ordinate goals to be achieved, followed by specifications to follow when architecting the proposed bill. Evaluation is measured by how well the initial objectives are met, not by secondary data points.

Unless we break the cycle, in four or eight years we will revert or oscillate back to Obama Care, only to be followed four or eight years later a return to Trump Care. You know, the wide pendulum swing that keeps the electorate confused and angry.