More to elections than winning

KENNETT, Mo. -- Americans are inclined to view the final returns of an election as the ultimate decision, and frequently we voters wash our hands of any further responsibility for the next two or four years or until some special issue arises. Unfortunately, there's more to citizenship than this, although convincing citizens of this fact is a difficult, often impossible, task.

If you will permit me, I'll take a swing at it.

None of the above implies that campaigns like the recent ones in our own state aren't important. They are, terribly so, since choosing the right candidate for the right job is no less critical than choosing the proper medical procedure for correcting an illness. It does little good for the surgeon to perform an appendectomy on a patient with a broken leg, and inappropriate treatment can often result in greater danger to the patient than before. The same is true for elections, where misguided or too-clever politicians are sometimes accorded direct control of programs that require considered, sympathetic governing. Let it be noted that sympathetic oversight of essential public programs is neither mandated nor made a part of the swearing-in process of any office-seeker. The responsibility is implied but never stated.

Just as the successful candidate faces no further questioning of his dedication to public service after an election, there is no constitutional requirement for voters who have elected the campaign winners to maintain any vigil of future administrative responsibility or performance.

While momentarily scorned as a breach of old-fashioned honesty, the candidate who suddenly reverses his support and vote for often mentioned "unavoidable circumstances" is seldom hailed for his success in locating new judgment material. As for individual voters, we accord ourselves full pardon, not even faced with making our decision conform to any higher authority. We can change our mind as often as irresponsible politicians can change their measure of support.

There once was a state representative from central Missouri who carefully noted and recorded the number of campaign promises he had made in his initial two-year term of office and the number he honestly considered broken, beyond repair: 14. Since I had no frame of reference, I didn't have the data to question his evaluation, and -- this is important -- neither did his constituents because the number of letters he received from constituents angered by broken campaign promises numbered two. Ah, the forgiving nature of the unwashed voter!

The voter tendency of ignoring how their candidates perform once in office is a classic one, and we voters have a perfect excuse: we have other things to do, other fish to fry and, besides, who has time to check and double-check political wind shifts when there's a Super Bowl or a World Series or an NBA playoff for our attention? And don't ask a worker if he has studied the voting record of the candidate he assisted in a campaign phone blitz or wrote letters for in the last election. Have you never heard of the essential responsibility of monitoring weekend football games?

As for our newly elected officials, particularly those just chosen to join a state legislative branch, who has time for counting issues when there are rules to be learned, such as how to refer to the "other legislative body" or discovering how much work is involved in securing approval of an amendment to a bill that hasn't yet been filed with the appropriate chamber's clerk? While we should be grateful for their minority status, voters send new representatives to Jefferson City who experience considerable difficulty locating the Capitol restrooms; anything more complicated should properly rank as nuclear science.

The point is, campaign winning is merely the first shot of a 24-month or 48-month marathon; moreover, more than just speed is required for this race, which means the runners learn from the start and are still learning as they approach the ending. The same is true of citizens for whom the runners are competing. Not only are they needed to choose the relay participants, they are required to know how fast their runners can go and whether they can maintain that speed to the finish line. If their candidate is about to collapse from the speed required, they need to be aware of the dangers of having a nonperforming representative or senator, or both, occupying office space in the state Capitol.

Here in Missouri, a number of races are about to begin, following the Nov. 5 marathon that lasted 48 years. The last time Republicans claimed control of the House of Representatives, Harry Truman's presidency had ended and Dwight Eisenhower was occupying the White House and a young politician from Southwest Missouri, Rep. Richard Webster, would be named House speaker following the death of L.A. Vonderschmidt.

There's little denying that winning an election is a delightful, always-to-be-savored experience, for nothing buoys an American spirit more than knowing he or she has the support of fellow citizens and is given something known as carte blanche -- or skillful neglect-- from the folks back home. Yet no idea is more dangerous than the belief this support has tenure throughout the political lifetime. Rather, it is a short-term lease on a job that has never promised anything more than a short leash.

Citizenship, like leadership, is a 365-day, year-round job, requiring the best that is in us. Otherwise Missouri will never be able to feed the hungry, care for its sick, treat the children and serve 5.6 million men, women and children who are waiting, not always patiently, for the benefits of our democratic form of government.

God bless the Republicans. Missouri needs all the help they can get.

Jack Stapleton is the editor of Missouri News & Editorial Service.