While most Americans still face an uphill battle in these challenging economic times, it appears that many of our political figures may not be feeling our pain.
We have recently learned that presidential candidate Mitt Romney makes more money in a day than most of us make in a year and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich has made millions from his political connections. We know that former President Bill Clinton is now doing quite well and that many members of today’s Congress, on both sides of the aisle, are not too concerned about their next paycheck.
Is this further evidence that our political leaders, who live in a different economic universe, are out of touch with most of their constituents? Is this economic divide in our national leadership the root cause of the havoc being surrounding our current and, most likely, our future policy decisions?
Given the deep political and philosophical divide in today’s Congress, it is easy to conclude that the nation’s lawmakers are not only ineffective at their jobs but they might also be, sadly, out of touch with the needs of most Americans. This “wealth gap” is certainly contributing to the belief that we are not being well served by our political leaders and, maybe worse, that we are being thrown under the proverbial bus. Many Americans are concerned and there are increasing calls for a major revolution at the ballot box in November.
All of that said, I’m not convinced that personal wealth is the issue. In my experience, true leadership has always been financially neutral – it was never an issue, one way or another. I have admired wealthy leaders and I have despised wealthy leaders, but it was not their wealth or lack of it, it was their words and their actions, their beliefs about their responsibilities, their definition of leadership.
We tend to associate influence with wealth, whether it’s in government, business, education, or entertainment. We tend to expect a lot from those who have a lot, and while “a lot” is certainly a relative figure, anyone in a leadership position is susceptible to anger, distrust, suspicion, you name it, when times are tough.
We should expect a lot from our elected officials, and today, if we are disappointed, I don’t think we should conclude that their wealth is a factor. To me, it’s really much more deep-rooted than that: it’s how they define leadership. If leadership is defined as moving forward personal and political agendas, narrowly defined, with clear winners and losers, then that’s the issue. It’s the issue because leadership is, in fact, moving forward personal and political agendas, but those agendas need to provide for the greater good, with a win-win outcome. That requires communication, compassion, collaboration, and compromise.
As complicated as that may seem to be and as hard as it may be to achieve, the reality is we manage things and we lead people. It seems that Congress has many millionaires and many managers, but very few leaders.
I vote for leaders!