I started my career with a B.S. in computer science and worked for software (mostly) companies during most of my career. When you work in the industry, everything in the world looks like a problem to be solved by applying more software solutions.
In 2001, I completed my M.B.A. degree. This gave me a perspective to see problems in a broader way than as merely “a software problem”. Literally, pre-MBA, everything needed to be solved was somehow turned into a software problem in my mind (and everyone else in this industry).
I also learned that as we invest in specialized training, we are actually taught a way of thinking.
- A nurse is taught to think like a nurse.
- A doctor is taught to think like a doctor.
- A lawyer is taught to think like a lawyer.
- An engineer is taught to think like an engineer.
- An artist thinks like an artist.
- Political journalists tend to be educated in political science and think everything, like a politician, is a political problem. Journalists who think this way, in turn, influence the public. It occurs to me that the tenor of most news reports is oriented towards seeking a larger government role and solution.
- A public health person thinks everything is a public health problem to be solved by applying public health theories.
Each of the above is likely to propose solutions familiar to their way of thinking – rather than soliciting and considering other perspectives. (Years after my MBA, and much later in life, I earned an M.S. in software engineering, which without going into details, also covers the importance of soliciting input from all stakeholders, before implementing large software solutions.)
A politician is taught to solve problems with government programs. To a politician, everything in life needs a government program to provide a solution. Since politicians run government, this explains why government grows larger – and never shrinks. They often do not see how problems might be solved in ways not involving the government.
This is why government is supposed to seek public input from a diverse set of viewpoints and take that into consideration when crafting new rules and regulations. However, while government rule making agencies are – required to solicit public input (except for public health), there is not a requirement they listen to that input. The Administrative Procedures Act, for example, requires rule making agencies to solicit public input but it did not require that they act on that input.
Public health, as practiced in my state and others, acts under an emergency basis and issues mandates with the effect of laws and regulations. In my state, their only input was a Governor appointed advisory board which had, exclusively, health care and public health practitioners. They never actively sought input from the public and ignored unsolicited input. The CDC recently acknowledged that it failed during the Covid-19 pandemic – but rather than solicit and listen to the public who they ostensibly serve – they have created an internal group to draw up a re-organization (prediction – this does not lead to meaningful solutions to their failures.)
This is the crux of the problem with today’s government – it does not listen to the public and sometimes threatens to cancel those who find errors or question aspects of government programs and actions.
The solution is for politicians to recognize they have warped perspectives and to actively solicit, listen and process that input. We need to make this a point – ask politicians how they will solicit input, and when, during their campaigns. Only vote for candidates that make a commitment to listening to the public and a diversity of perspectives.
Not all politicians are a problem. Where I used to live, a neighbor on my street was a state Senator. He held open office hours at a local coffee shop every Friday to listen to constituents. He was known to cancel meetings with lobbyists if a constituent wanted to meet with him, saying that listening to constituents was more important. This is how it is supposed to work!
