Okay folks, the rest of the blogosphere seems to have died down (or perhaps died from the heat), so I will exploit this lull in the action to put forth my pet peeve for debate (since Colonel Yingling apparently fell asleep after challenging everyone with his pet peeve).
Here is the deal. Military service and political office do not go together.
What do I mean by that? I am not just referring to the rare instance in which someone does both simultaneously. I am referring to four situations, in descending order of egregiousness:
Serving in the military while also serving in elected office.
Serving in elected office soon after serving in the military
Serving in the military soon after serving in elected office.
Voting while in the military
Why do I see a problem with any or all of these? I will hit on the basic philosophical issue first and then hit on each situation individually.
The gist of it
My primary concerns are the health of the military profession and civil-military relations. The military is not served well if the wrong people are attracted to it. One of the most critical attributes of a servicemember is a commitment to the values of his or her service branch. Find me a set of values from one of the service branches that includes self-serving opportunism. Not in there? That is why I am concerned about the attractiveness of military service to people with political aspirations. Our military is viewed, at least partially by some and nearly wholly by others, to embody our values. Our servicemembers are easy to put on a pedestal and be declared above criticism. What an attractive prospect for someone seeking political office, particularly in a time of war.
For some recent examples of what I am getting at, consider Congressman Mark Kirk, Congressman Duncan Hunter, and former Congressional candidate Charlie Summers. How often have we heard these people invoke the phrase, “as an Iraq veteran,” or some similar phrase before asserting a semi-controversial position on an issue? When others observe the success of these candidates, military service as a means to obtaining political office becomes more attractive (Summers lost probably because he was a Republican in an anti-Republican year (2008) in a left-leaning state with no major military bases). If you join the military in order to obtain political office, are you serving the nation or are you serving yourself?
See also, my earlier post in which I typed:
You want to exacerbate problems in civil-military relations? Encourage people with political agendas to join the military. Encourage existing members of the military to run for office. Paint those in uniform who have aired no political views or aspirations as left- or right-wing, Democrat or Republican. You will create tension between the military and political parties. This will create incentives within the military to align with one party versus another to gain favor when power shifts in the government from one party to another. Rather than there being interservice rivalry, there will be political rivalry.
One of the ways in which a veteran demonstrates his
bona fides is to assert himself as being on the side of the military (creating a false dichotomy of with us or against us). The individual will make foolish statements
like this (why do I think this is foolish?
See here). Or pork-barrel spending disguised as “helping the troops” can be advocated for because, hey, I’ve been in the shit and I know that the troops need that new umpteen million dollar jet to provide them with support if we ever invade Costa Rica. There is also the reinforcement of the perception that veterans are somehow endowed with superior judgment on military affairs than non-veterans. The last thing that we need is more group-think on Capitol Hill and more ceding of control over military budgets and long-term strategy (if we ever develop one) to people who all think like people in the Pentagon. Congress is not there to be a yes-man for the Pentagon, or a buddy, or a like-minded friend. It is supposed to be a watchdog, a frugal trustee, a stern nanny.
So that’s the gist of it. Now, the specifics.
Serving in the military while also serving in elected office.
If you don’t see a problem with this one, then you probably disagree with every word of this lengthy post. When a servicemember holds political office, that individual obtains power over the military budget, over high-ranking promotions, over various policies, and so on. In short, that individual gains authority over his superiors. That is a problem. It puts the superiors into a compromised position and puts the politician into a compromised position. Consider Senator Lindsey Graham (or Colonel Lindsey Graham - whichever you prefer). In addition to being a Senator and Air Force Reserve Colonel, he is a lawyer. If a lawyer were to represent a client and that client were his boss and the matter for which the client sought representation related to their work environment, then the lawyer would probably not be able to represent the client. Why? Because there is a likely conflict of interest. But Graham, as Senator, can hold a powerful political office, cast votes to approve promotions of General Officers appointed over him when he is Colonel Graham, cast votes upon bills that influence funding and policies that impact the ability of those Officers to do their jobs and what priorities they will take up… and that’s okay? Perhaps if the military budget were a couple orders of magnitude smaller, then we could overlook this problem. But it’s not. These are kind of high stakes.
Serving in elected office soon after serving in the military
This one is a little less egregious, but still problematic. While the prior issue goes to issues of conflict of interest in political office, this one goes to self-serving interests in the military. These are the folks who set the example for the self-serving opportunists. But I will add a caveat to this one. The issue is not about timing so much as style. If you leave the military and immediately run for public office, then that in itself is not a problem. The problem is if you tout your service as your primary qualification, or a significant qualification. That is what sets the horrible example and helps to create the perception of great potential personal gain for people who desire political office and are willing to gut out a few years in the military in order to obtain it. Probably the most outrageous example of this is the link above to (thankfully) failed candidate Charlie Summers. Summers was a Reserve Naval Officer who essentially used a low-risk deployment to the Green Zone as a taxpayer-funded campaign stunt. His wife campaigned in his place and every other sentence out of her mouth was something about her husband being in combat.
The greatest strength of our military is the quality of our personnel. That strength will be partially compromised if the military attracts more people who are only in uniform for self-serving purposes and are not dedicated to the organization and the missions that it takes on. While we cannot know the motivations of the individuals whom I named above, I think it is fairly obvious that they inspire people who do not belong in the military to join for the self-serving reasons discussed.
Stealing another quote from my recent post, this could apply to either of the issues above:
I do have a problem with people… using their military service to strengthen a weak argument…
I have long argued … that one of the problems in civil military relations is the pedestal that service members are put on. They are above criticism – which is fine when they are following lawful orders and focused on their duties. But that immunity should not extend when a servicemember sticks his or her neck into the public arena and seeks to use prior service to the country as a bludgeon to squash political opposition. This incentivizes military service for a political purpose and attracts exactly the wrong people into the armed forces. The military is about serving the country, not serving your own selfish political aspirations.
Serving in the military soon after serving in elected office
Wait a minute. Seriously? I’ve even got a problem with this? Yup, though it is less egregious than the previous issue. I would also add that, similar to the previous example, it depends more on style than timing. If you quietly step down from your position as Senator of such and such state and then join some branch of the military and you keep quiet about the fact that you were on the Used Diapers Oversight Committee or Select Committee on Misappropriations, then no problem. But if you join up and remind every superior whom you work for that you were uber-important Senator So and So, former co-chair of the Sub-Committee for Resisting Modernization of Personnel Policy, then that’s an issue. This is probably an infrequent event, but I am also throwing in here people who temporarily suspend their political duties in order to serve in the military. Hello, Congressional members of the National Guard and Reserves. I am talking about you.
Voting while in the military
I saved the best for last. Some may recall this one from my recent post:
… I think the divide between military and politics should be thick and bright. Not only should Officers not air their views publicly, I do not believe they should voice them at all, whether through advocating for a candidate or even registering with a political party. When it comes to national figures, they shouldn’t even air preferences in the privacy of a ballot booth.
Why do I take this apparently extreme view? Because it helps to reinforce the apolitical character of the Officer Corps. Your vote is silent and private, but you still make a political decision, take a political side, and act out that decision when you cast that vote. Want to vote for dog catcher or local council member? Go for it. They are not your civilian leaders, nor are they responsible for establishing your budget or influencing the policies that impact your duties. Want to vote for President? You just went too far. That guy is your Commander in Chief. You are not to take sides for or against him on political grounds. You are a servant. Vote for Governor if you are on active duty, vote for mayor if you are in any component of the military. Hold off on voting for President until you ETS.
I will recycle one more quote from my previous entry.
I seem to be a lone voice on this issue. Generally that is a sign that you’re full of crap. But it is an issue that persists in nagging at me because, while everybody seems to disagree, I have not heard any decent reason why.
Yes, that’s a challenge to you.