Perhaps It Is Time to Consider Change
It’s hard to remember the last time that the climate for change was a strong as it is this election year. It’s the mantra for the presidential campaigns and clearly resonates with a large segment of the population.
Here, in the Virgin Islands , it’s also a popular topic – but often the momentum ends with a spirited conversation and progress is difficult to achieve. Change must be managed and focused in those areas where it can be most effective. Change just for its own sake can actually have negative consequences if not carefully considered.
Change is most resisted in those areas that have become a habit – we’re not sure why we do it, we’ve just always done it. And while the phrase “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” may be relevant in some areas, in others it is clearly one of those barriers to constructive change that is rooted in habit.
One of those “habits” is our practice of electing our Senators every two years. We are accustomed to the rhythm of that timing. The signs go up, the fish starts to fry and the whirlwind begins. Sometimes it seems a campaign season has just ended and then begins again. We seat the Senate and often before any substantive progress can be made, it’s time for the election again. In many ways the current campaign cycle is a distraction and can result in the candidate with the most marketing savvy repeatedly winning a seat, his or her legislative record notwithstanding.
Here’s a point to consider. Perhaps it’s time to look at a change in this cycle.
It is generally agreed that one of the critical elements to move the Territories forward is new people with a fresh approach. In many areas the old ways simply are not working and the issues remain the same year after year.
But the current system and the two-year cycle may be contributing to that stagnation. Consider this.
A new Senator is elected to a two year term. Let’s call him or her a “freshman” senator. Once the campaign frenzy dies down, it’s time to get to business. That assimilation process, from selecting a staff to learning the mechanics of how things are done, takes a significant amount of time. At the same time, the astute “freshman” realizes that it is critical to lay the foundation for those items that were central to his/her election and to begin to move forward on those initiatives that got them elected in the first place. Assuming that the groundwork for progress on the candidates’ platform issues have been well organized prior to election, a significant indication of potential progress can be illustrated during the first term – but at maximum, 18 months into this timeframe, it’s time to start campaigning again.
Let’s consider an alternate scenario. Instead of all Senators being up for reelection every two years, adjust the structure as follows:
1. Candidates run for a Senate seat with an initial term of two years
2. At the end of the first term, Senators who choose to run again are running for a four-year term and the four-year term becomes the standard Senate tenure as long as the legislator is consistently reelected.
3. If a Senator loses his/her seat, or chooses not to run again and later decides to reenter the political arena, he or she is again running for a two-year initial term with subsequent terms as outlined above.
Some of the advantages of this approach are:
1. It brings the opportunity for some much needed stability into the Legislative body of the Territories by eliminating the disruption of the entire group stopping to focus on campaigning every two years.
2. It forces all Senators (but newly elected ones in particular) to concentrate on targeting one or two issues where the ability to affect change can be significantly illustrated to the voting public, thereby setting the stage for the longer, and more productive, four-year opportunity of the subsequent term.
3. The extended term will provide the opportunity for legislators to enact planned, considered solutions to the major issues facing the Territories rather than short term, band-aid solutions that may appeal to a soon-to-be-voting public but that do not address the underlying problems that cause our chronic issues to continue.
4. And, depending on how the plan was implemented, this approach would stagger the Legislature’s election schedule so that the entire Senate would not be up for reelection at the same time. This combination of the new and the established legislators allows for a balance of experienced individuals and less experienced but newly energized talent that would be entering the “freshman” ranks under the new system.
To be sure, this turns up the heat on the first-time Candidate and certainly raises the stakes to make that first two years as productive as possible. But aren’t these the people that we want in our Legislature – those who can formulate a platform that results in the first election and then demonstrates the ability to begin to execute those initiatives in a well considered and effective manner?
This approach may also place incumbents under a higher level of scrutiny. Voters may be more inclined to seriously consider past records and indicators of real progress if the commitment they are making with their vote is for a four-year term instead of two. New blood with new energy that proves their ability to make real change may pose a real challenge to those whose tenures currently rest on maintaining the status quo.
It’s clear that if we really want to move the Territories forward, we are going to have to reevaluate old “habits” to see where change can be most effective.
Let’s have some open dialogue on this topic.
It is, after all, a point to consider.
Loading ...
Reading Mr. Springer’s editorial, he seems to be suggesting that voters look beyond a “freshman” senators’ inexperience and qualifications and hope that they somehow divine how to become an effective politician over the course of six years. Is this guy serious?
So the people are suppose to wait around twiddling our thumbs for two years, while your figure out legislative procedure? Tell you what Mr. Springer, rather than rolling the dice for two years hoping that you understand the difference between protocol and procedure, you could spend that time in school getting a degree that qualifies you to be an effective politician.
Concerned Citizen – interesting comment. However, my conclusiion after reading this article is significantly different from yours.
The concept outlined here offers the electorate an opportunity to evalute an individual’s effectiveness based on the progress made toward objectives during the first two years in office. Based on that evaluation, which can now be made based on reality rather than campaign rhetoric, the voters can choose to return the individual to the legislature with a four-year endorsement to continue with those initiaves begun in the “freshman” term. Or, they can choose not to return the individual to the governing body, based on this same evaluation.
And actually, rather than causing the electorate to “wait around twiddling our thumbs for two years,” this approach really raises the bar for the new Senator to show his or her ability to gain real momentum on those initiatives that were prominent in their campaign, while also negotiating through the protocols that operate in this most intriguing Legislative body, in this intitial two-year term.
It adds the opportuity for stability and the chance to implement some longer term, more realistic approaches to the problems facing the territories than the current system allows.
Frankly, it also adds to the urgency for the new person to get their act together sooner than later.
I would venture to say to no sitting Senator knew how to negotiate the ropes of the Legislature in his or her first term so I’m not sure why you present that as a negative activity in this proposal. Furthermore, the “degree” comment is one that holds little water as I seem to recall that some “degrees” of questionable authenticity are held in the Legislative body at this time.
The ability to separate the merits of a concept from the concept’s creator is essential in the rational evaluation of a new idea. Perhaps you should step back and evaluate the proposal in the light that it is presented, rather than in your view of the light of the presenter.
Just my thoughts……
note – word in first sentence should be “conclusion.” sorry for the typo.
Yes I must concur with you Cintron, that definitely clarifies Mr. Springer editorial….I must say Mr. Springer always took a stance on issues that have affected this territory particularly St. Croix when our elected officials have chosen not to. If “Concern Citizen” is please with the status quo as it relates to the misrepresentation in which he or she is receiving…well let them continue to elect the misleaders that are within the Senate.
Its curious, both of you (Hansen/Cintron) seem to have the same writing style. Nonetheless, I’ll put in terms you both can understand.
You can’t apply for a position at Hovensa and explain to them that;
“You know Mr. Human Resources, I’m not really qualified for this job, nor do I have any practical experience as a Chemical Engineer, but if you give me two years, I’ll try to learn and understand as much as I can.”
No. The correct path would be to go to school, get a CE degree, then apply for the Hovensa job once you have a fundamental understanding of the job you’re expected to perform.
The Senate is not the place to seek OJT. That’s why most of the “freshmen” senators get chewed up, manipulated or kicked out. Good intentions are not a survial skill recognized by a politician.
My advice to both of you is to campaign for a qualified, properly educated candidate who can hit the ground running from day one…to borrow a phrase from HRC.
Ah CCrucian,
Patronizing, sarcastic, traditional, stagnant – passionately committed to the old ways and comfortable only with the familiar.
Exactly what I’d expect from one who quotes Mz. Clinton as wisdom.
We’ll let the voters decide.
oh yes, that’s ccitizen.
the point is the same.
Yes, Cintron/Hansen/Springer, or whatever the hell your name is) I am committed to the traditional and familiar path of hard work and education.
You however, (Mr. SpringHanTron) seem to happily ensconced with the patronizing, sarcastic and stagnant shortcut approach to politics in the VI.
Springer, I think the scenario would actually help the likes of Senators Serville and James, both serving their second terms. Can you imagine if we had to deal with them until December 2010/January 2011? They would have plenty of time to “correct”, or should I say overshadow, their votes for Act 6905. I’m curious to see what the Constitutional Convention has come up with.