When former Chilean President Ricardo Lagos entered the lecture room, the atmosphere suddenly became quiet as the audience took in this peculiar sight: an elderly man who looked so down-to-earth and normal. He blended in perfectly with the Harvard faculty in a way that contrasted with the grand, presidential images we had seen minutes before on Google Images and Wikipedia while waiting for his arrival. Sensing this, Lagos humorously remarked, “There is life after presidency.”
Indeed, Lagos’ personal experience working with the United Nations and Brown University since leaving office attests to this fact. The crux of the lecture’s message was that whatever steps Latin American leaders take both during and after their time in office to combat modern problems, they must always think in terms of the future rather than their individual aspirations: “All of us would like to do the same thing we’ve been doing – particularly politicians. That’s a problem … if you’re thinking in terms of the next election and not in terms of what is needed for the next generation, there is a problem.”
However, this not only applies to Latin American politicians but also to those in the United States. It is especially disheartening to see the current political landscape here and how focused our leaders are on doing whatever it takes to stay in office rather than thinking about what is best for the coming generations.
This is not a matter of Democrats versus Republicans. Both sides are guilty of neglecting to take into account the adverse effects their actions (and inactions) could have on society. Just one look at the colossal size of our debt—$16 trillion and counting—makes one fear for the future. Every time Congress kicks the metaphorical can down the road with issues such as the debt ceiling and budget, we may be able to find a short-lived solution for the present, but we will no doubt be faced with serious burdens later.
In some ways, the inability for both sides to make concessions and think about the future led to the recent 16-day government shutdown. Although Congress could have easily averted this fiasco by compromising and passing a continuing resolution, certain members instead remained inflexible and maintained the ideological purity that would appeal to those with political clout. They served whomever would keep them in office rather than think about what society needs in the long term. And what society certainly needs are the $24 billion the U.S. economy lost during the shutdown according to Standard & Poor’s, the same ratings agency that downgraded the U.S. credit rating after the debt-ceiling talks in 2011.
Although members of Congress may claim that they were merely acting on principle, this should not be an excuse for what has happened. When abiding by your principles damages the U.S. economy and its worldwide reputation, perhaps you should reconsider your tactics.
It seems that today’s leaders in the U.S. government do not see that there is more to life than the next election. They need to realize that investing in the future will have a much larger impact than investing in their own political viability. We may have temporarily lifted the government shutdown and avoided default by once again postponing tough decisions. However, we should all hope that Congress does not put us through the same ordeal when the next deadline approaches early next year. Before then, perhaps everyone in office should attend one of Lagos’ lectures.
Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons
