Over the years lots of bad things have unfolded in the political arena and the ability to sample the public’s opinion is high on the list.
Back in the day before polling weaseled its way into the system, elected officials were pretty much flying blind when it came to making tough decisions. That office holder would gather their trusted inner circle advisors around the table and would seek a collective wisdom on whether to promote this policy or that.
It often came down to doing what your gut told you to do since there was no reliable method to test the public waters for what the majority wanted other than letters to the editor. To be sure there was some broad issues where you had a sense of where the public was but other less universal issues were a tough call and from a political standpoint riskier than all get out.
At the end of that day, the official did what he or she thought was best and was relegated to letting the chips fall where they may.
Given the fact that every elected person wants to please the public, when the infant industry of political polling began to grow in the 1930s with George Gallop it carried a good shot at giving weary elected leader a magic sauce to do what the voters wanted with hopes that that would get those citizens to vote for that leader. Just stick you finger in the wind and whichever way the winds were blowing, based on the data, the temptation to follow that was often overwhelming even though it might be inconsistent with what the person truly believed.
Let’s look at one practical illustration of the dangers of voting the will of the people in all cases.
In 1994 at the height of the war against crime, a whopping 80% supported the death penalty. But right now the figure is 53% which is a five-decade low. So what would you say to the families that had loved ones put to death when the public and the politicians wanted revenge only to find other years later that public opinion is now wholeheartedly against it? Saying you’re sorry probably doesn’t appease anyone from those families.
Philosopher Edmund Burke in 1774 wrote to voters and lectured them that their representatives owed the citizens his judgment and he is not serving you if “he sacrifices it to your opinion.” Old Ed, of course was right, but who cares when the job of getting reelected is paramount.
For something a little more modern day we turn to former Michigan Gov. William Milliken who served up this poignant bit of advice in a private conversation.
“The definition of good political leadership is doing what you believe to be the right thing to do and not worry about the next election.”
He also was right, but polling has helped to obliterate that wisdom in favor of self-political- preservation the critics of polling would argue.
And as the survey industry began to prosper in the 1970s, now instead of inviting their closest advisors into the room for a skull session, it was the pollsters with realms of relative data who had a more important seat at the table. Using the polls for major decisions was not perfect but a darn sight better than trusting your gut and then getting booted out of office.
The point that Gov. Milliken was making: If you don’t pander for votes you can look yourself in the mirror every morning without any guilt. True you might be out of office but he concluded standing for what you hold to be true is more fulfi lling.
Plus he argued, the public will look at your body of work on a variety of issues and may reason this way, “I don’t agree with every vote he or she took but they were voting in good faith based on what they thought was right and that should be rewarded not denigrated.”
Back in the 1970s when he was governor that lofty principle actually had merit.
Today? Not so much. Now elements of the electorate are eager to recall anybody who dares to vote the “wrong way” on only one issue meaning that the Milliken principle of an educated and informed electorate willing to consider the politician’s body of work before deciding how to vote is a relic of a bygone era and sorely missed.
