The title of this page is a slight alteration to the following document's title, because the information needs to be expanded in its considerations beyond a personalized perspective of one's political party. Commentary will follow the presentation.
By: Daniel Webster, 1st Republican Speaker of the House of Representatives in Florida and current Congressman from the 10th District of Florida
If a widget maker produced flawed widgets, the owners could choose to make significant alterations by offering additional colors, new packaging, and special pricing. They also could employ new marketing techniques like Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. Although well intentioned, none of these improvements will fix the flawed product. It is the process by which the widgets are made that is flawed.
If the process is flawed, the product will be flawed. The only way to improve the product is to fix the process.
By his own admission, the midterm election was a referendum on the President’s policies, and those policies received a strong rebuke. The American people have made their voices heard.
Does that mean that, by default, the Republicans are the answer? No; that verdict is still out.
Republican leaders from Washington and across the country have said that our GOP brand is tarnished and must be fixed. Low public approval of Congress speaks clearly of a flawed process.
The only way to improve the GOP brand and make good public policy is to fix the process.
Republicans now own the Congress and must change the way they lead. Not just a change in packaging and marketing, but a different process – one that is focused on principle, not on power. We only have one opportunity to prove we can lead. Our opportunity is now.
A pyramid of power in a legislative body always works the same. A few people at the top of the pyramid make most of the decisions with the bulk of the members at the bottom – unless needed. A legislative body that is founded on principle pushes down this pyramid of power and spreads out the base so every elected member becomes a player.
Power and principle cannot coexist.
Power focuses on self-preservation; principle focuses on making ideas successful. Power tends to protect itself merely to maintain its own status and control. Principle gives up power for the sake of the highest good and to create the best public policy.
Power demands to be heard; principle earns the right to be heard.
Power focuses on rights; principles focus on responsibility.
One of the most significant contrasts between power and principle is how it treats policy. Power tends to view an idea based on the position, loyalty, rank, or seniority of the sponsor. Principle focuses solely on the merits of the idea itself.
The Republicans have a choice. This is it. This is our moment. We only have one opportunity to make a first impression.
Flawed widgets or solid principles; which will it be?
The basic idea of Mr. Webster's is well understood and could be applied in multiple contexts to a variety of interests. It is not his intended application that is flawed, but that its greater value is being imposed with stringent limitations, just like the practice of Democracy. His idea about a flawed process should be applied to the overall functioning of the government. The government is flawed because of the underlying process to which it is fashioned to conform with standards of greatness and excellence that produce widget illusions the mind of the public is told to accept as a true reality.
Whereas the workers are provided with a comment and suggestion box, the comments and suggestions are then contoured to fit in the perspective of those whose positions rely on the design of the business. It is a structure they are not willing to alter to improve the widget product if it requires them to step down or acquire a lesser managerial role. If the workers themselves are allowed to discuss and work on a plan for improving the widget, and the typical managerial staff are found to be an over-paid superfluous resource consumer, the workers may then decide to create a workplace environment that is more productive and constructive without them.
If the public is permitted an increased practice of an Actual Democracy, it may be found that the present governing structure is anti-thetical to production costs, sustainability of the company, and progressive adaptability to changing environmental trends.
When it is recognized that both Republicans and Democrats are part of the process, and there is an awakened need to improve upon the process in order to create a better overall product; it must be further recognized that the structure within which the processes occur needs to be substantially altered so as not to breed occasions for such processes to bog down the production and create faulty widgets.
Improving the widget becomes complicated when those involved with the process do not see themselves as part of the problem, and adamantly view themselves as part of the solution. Neither the Republicans or Democrats, or for that matter the Independents, can see themselves as part of the process-problem. It is they that are keeping the general workers chained to a conveyor belt of thought by enforcing the usage of an antiquated set of tools with which to build a better widget. In other words, the type of Democracy being used by the larger public is a limited variation of democracy that the managerial staff is permitted to exercise.
Improvement in a process can not be acquired by returning to "fundamentals" or some presumed "standard operating procedure", if they produce a widget that is itself the product of a bygone era, regardless of the name-brand logo attached, the extent of its guarantees, or how solid a reputation the company (America) has. The democracy widget has a lessened value and desirability because it exhibits antiquated standards that are less than optimal for current social conditions and desire for future growth of the company.
The widget called the voting system is flawed. The Foreign policy widget is flawed. The economic stability and growth widget is flawed. Changing the current political process(es) by a mere shuffling of old philosophies which create these flaws will produce other similar flaws though they may have a different label of identification.
The current political party processes are flawed because they call for a continued suppression of an increased ideal outlined in the word "Democracy" itself. It is inevitable for the people to experience a host of flawed widgets while living and working for a Company (America) whose "Democracy" statement of mission and bylaws neither live up to the name or value. Widgets which come from such a company are bound to reflect the reality instead of the illusions so often dismissed by political rhetoric... however well-intentioned and sincere its speaker may have voiced a need for improvement.
If the engineers can't correctly identify the necessary process to be fixed, the workers themselves will of need be forced to protest. When the type of engineering protocols are part of the problematic overall process, there may be no other way to correct the problem except through insolvency.
Date of Origination and initial posting: Sunday, October 11, 2015