I wouldn’t do it, that’s for sure. I don’t have the guts or the moxie or the commitment. I don’t have the dedication or the ego or the sense of self-righteousness.
Now, some of those might sound like pejoratives but they aren’t meant that way. No, I simply don’t have some of the qualities it takes to run for public office — but I admire those who do.
You see, The Columbian’s Editorial Board has spent much of the past several weeks meeting with candidates for various public offices. We met with four candidates for Clark County sheriff, three for Congress, and a whole battalion of people seeking various positions in the Legislature. In advance of the Aug. 5 primary election, we sat down with 23 candidates for seven positions, and for me, it was my first trip to the rodeo.
I became The Columbian’s Opinion editor in August, and in advance of last year’s election we had maybe one or two Editorial Board meetings with candidates. Nothing like the parade this time around.
Anyway, the point of this process — and no, it’s not to boost our egos and confirm that we hold some position of importance — is to serve our readers. You see, The Columbian, like all newspapers across the country, considers it our mission to inform the public. And, let’s face it, most members of the public don’t have time to meet with everybody who is running for public office. They don’t have time to explore the candidates’ positions or compare them side by side or ask questions that might go a little deeper than office-seekers’ talking points.
So, after meeting with the candidates for a particular position, the five-member Editorial Board discusses our impressions of them — their positions on the issues, their ideas, their personalities, their ability to think on their feet.
We then distill those thoughts into an editorial to share our thoughts for readers and make recommendations on how people should vote in the primary.
Do we expect you to blindly follow our suggestions? Of course not. You’re too smart for that. But hopefully we can provide a little insight that you had not had access to, and hopefully we can help inform your opinion while not dictating it.
And throughout this process, I have been struck by one immutable truth — I couldn’t do what the candidates are doing.
You see, running for office is a largely thankless endeavor. You share your opinions and you shake hands and you knock on doors and you try to raise money to assist your campaign. And in the end you might get rejected by the voters. Talk about a blow to the ego.
Benefits of power
Sure, we hear about how people in the most high-profile of political positions reap financial and social benefits from being in power, but the vast majority of elected positions are accompanied by more headaches than benefits. The vast majority of candidates are simply citizens who think they have something to offer through public service and a desire to make our county or state or country a better place.
That is admirable, even if politics is one of the few professions with a lower public-approval rating than journalism. The bottom line on that: The public might like to complain about politicians and journalists, but they would really miss us if we went away.
“Politics,” Winston Churchill is credited with saying, “is not a game. It is an earnest business.” Fortunately, the candidates we have met with have been earnest and forthright and, for the most part, thoughtful. They might disagree with each other on particular issues, but it is those disagreements that forge the strength of our political system.
That strength is laudable, as are the people who put themselves out there for the benefit of the community. Plato once said: “One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.” After meeting with the candidates on this year’s ballot, I think Plato was wrong about that one.
Morning Briefing Newsletter
Get a rundown of the latest local and regional news every Mon-Fri morning.
