There was a dispute between Thomas Mann and Albert Einstein dealing with how quickly or slowly time passes. Einstein, in his theory of relativity, maintained that the faster an object moves, it has the effect of slowing time. Mann, writing in his most famous work, “The Magic Mountain,” contended that boring times “could dissolve, indeed, the largest units of time until they seem nothing at all.”
I do not know which of these two gentlemen was right, but I do know that both agreed that time must pass for all of us. I did not realize as a kid — fresh out of high school and on my way to college, when a new president said in his inaugural address, “… that the torch had been passed to a new generation of Americans” — that someday it would be historical and not contemporary.
I was two generations behind the new president, John F. Kennedy, so that must mean that time has passed not only for me but all my age and the greatest generation as well.
Here is the reality. Public servants, like elected officials, tend to retain power more than many others under the mistaken belief that they are leaving a legacy for future generations. Maybe a little, but the harsh reality is that the future belongs to those living in it, not those whose time has passed by.
Which raises the question: Why do old people, particularly old, elected officials, hold office for so long? The current answer among the leadership of both political parties seems to be simply to remain in power. When should the torch be passed on or just taken away from an older generation unwilling to ride off into the sunset? And should they be cast aside, if still functional and valuable, like former Congressman Neal Smith, who was so effective even through his last days in office and for the remainder of his lifetime?
Part of the problem, to be sure, is that, thanks to medical and lifestyle progress, people are living longer and retaining intellectual function at a high level. We even have a name for them, “super agers.” Plus, most legislative bodies are rewarded and promoted based on seniority.
Believe one who has been there, there is a significant difference between a freshman member of Congress and the chair of the House Appropriations Committee. States benefit from having seasoned and influential congressional representation. So too for state legislatures, experience is always to be valued.
However, experience, though helpful when properly used, can also lead to stagnation. The dead hand of history will, if permitted, crush innovation, new thinking and the search for alternative paths to solve new and old problems that perplex those still in power.
I firmly believe that if you asked the younger and emerging leaders what they want in the next Congress is for the Schumers and Pelosis, the McConnells and Grassley (sorry Chuck) to get the hell out of the way. Individuals, conservatives and liberals alike, in their 30s, 40s and 50s are going to have greater impact on the future if just given the chance.
As for our elders, I have a suggestion: You should not step down from your lifetime of work. You should step back and advise when asked. Yes, the new leaders will make mistakes. But I remember what Averell Harriman, the former governor of New York and U.S. ambassador under both FDR and JFK, said while lecturing in a college class.
A student asked him, “How to you get to be a great statesman?”
The former governor responded, “Experience.”
“But how to you get that,” the student demanded.
Harriman simply stated, “Bad experience.”
As elders, we do have the opportunity to ensure that the new generation of leaders does not make the same mistakes we did.
About the author: Dave Nagle is a former Iowa Democratic Party state chairman and three-term U.S. congressman from Iowa. Iowacapitaldispatch.com
