Oh, I wouldn’t say that. I’m pretty much a progressive, and I think the same thing. If you have a job (elected politician or otherwise), you should not be spending any significant percentage of the time you’re supposed to be WORKING in finding a different job. That’s just not ethical.
But, invoking Bricker’s post(s), most of the U.S. seems quite sanguine about this system.
I’ve always thought it akin to my not teaching classes because I’m lobbying to be the college dean and it takes all my time (illustrative only: I’d only take a dean position at gunpoint – and maybe not even then).
Does anyone know if the contemporary ignore-your-current-office-to gain another election system matches past practice?
A lot of voters feel that way. I’m across the river, and this voter couldn’t care if DiBlasio or Cuomo are in their respective offices or on a beach in the Bahamas, as long as they are actively managing the situation. As I said, it’s the 21st century. You can coordinate and manage remotely. I’m more concerned about how effective their management is, not where it takes place. Ones Mileage May Vary.
It’s ethical, in my opinion, because there’s no deception–the “second job” is disclosed and above-board.
But I agree it’s not what the office holder should be doing. It’s poor performance, and it invites the inference that the current job can be performed part time.
From your second cite:
This is what you are upset about?
In the age of telecommunication, is it really necessary for his flabby but to be in the chair? Could he not direct his staff via telephone, e-mail and skype?
And for weather related emergencies, I would think plans are already in place. He has a Chief of Staff there and any problem requires the Governor’s muscle could be done by phone. Am I missing something?
If there was a headline stating he was on his way back from the campaign trail to handle the emergency, would not some folks also call this a bit of media grandstanding?
Bricker is right. People holding elected positions have campaigned for other elected positions positions ever since we had elections. I believe our Commander in Chief was a sitting Senator when he campaigned.
My thoughts exactly, but angry voters who feel he should be present are loud and TV stations love angry voters. He doesn’t need to be present, but it is in his best interest to be present. Maybe by the 22nd century we can drag the electorate into the 21st.
Germane to this conversation:
Christie acknowledges that his approval rating in NJ is plummeting because he’s looking for a new job:
“That approval rating has gone down once I started to run for president, and it should be no shock,” Mr. Christie said. “You know, the fact is, when you start looking for another job, your current employer gets a little miffed. And that’s what has gone on here in New Jersey.”
As a resident, I’d say approval rating in NJ is plummeting because of job performance and policies which have not stopped the state from lagging behind most of the others during the recovery from the recent Depression.
In the end, yelling “sweet-heart” didn’t get it done. I see residents here who are sick that the recovery which every other state seems to be enjoying always passes them by.
The One Percent are not helping anyone but themselves (and with Both Hands) here and many feel that its time to get “business people” out of the seats of power.
This is what I’ve seen; I don’t know what others are seeing, especially those from out of state. YMMV. Feel free to state your own POV (no need to re-state mine).
I’d argue that your opinions are not only unworkable, but also undesirable, and furthermore, against the principles of citizen-governors that were at the heart of the foundation of the nation.
It’s standard job seeker advice in 99% of the world, don’t leave your current job until you have the next one lined up. This is such an ironclad rule in the modern employment landscape that most articles about it are about the FEW EXCEPTIONS to the rule because it’s assumed “In most cases, it’s important to have an offer elsewhere before quitting.”
In the realm of politics especially I’d argue that the politician becoming a profession has done more harm to the country than almost any other change. It’s been an insidious effect, like the 24 hour news cycle. It has created entire professions of lobbyists, strategists, campaign professionals, etc. It’s led to the creation of layers and layers of laws, with inscrutable overlaps. It’s led to fragmented constituencies with less attention on the substance of the politics than the trappings of appearances and sound bytes. It’s led to endless re-election of the incumbents and the party system which locks out new people who don’t tow the party line. It has bloated the government at all levels, driven up the cost of the bureaucracy, and contributed to the military industrial complex that is still one of the largest expenditures of treasure the US outlays.
Making it impossible to campaign for one office while holding another would effectively limit the offices to the independently wealthy who could sustain themselves and their families between campaigns on their wealth. This would further drive the representatives of the people away from the realities of their constituents. There is already a great gap between the financial realities of the typical Federal officeholder and the mainstream household. Deepening that would mean they would need even more vision and empathy to accurately represent the interests of the men and women of their district/state/etc.
On a historical note, the founding fathers were very clear about their desires for citizen-governors, not professional politicians. Their structure of part-time Congressional sessions and requirements to have homes in the areas they represented are clear intentions that these were to be men of the people, not men away from the people. Washington spoke eloquently against creating political parties. Jefferson believed without term limits a president would be in power as long as king. Addams spent most of his term back home in Massachusetts, ignoring the political clamor of the politicians in the capital.
On a more modern note, we have this.
One might argue that the remedy to the professional politician is to scale back their duties and demands of their office, so it may be done by someone who is a part-time politician and part-time doctor/lawyer/farmer/etc. as the founding fathers were. This would allow them to do their day job alongside their duty to their constituencies. Of course that would also undercut the idea that their elected office is a full time one which precludes the free time necessary to campaign in a state a few hours drive away.
Enjoy,
Steven
May I assume, from your location listing, you got to experience Christie’s GWB hi jinks first hand?
Heh. Pretty much. You just go through six states on the way.
Def does not make for good optics
Go back to your home state, grab a shovel, and get press photos of your fat ass looking like you are trying to help.
I get Iowa is a caucus, so theres more person to person networking involved, but in the long run, going back to NJ grabs more voters for future primaries. Not winning Owa is not the end of the road.
Three states (MA, CT, NY). I grew up in New England, so I’m aware of what the distances are like. But living in CA for decades, it does seem funny to think of that as some huge distance, when here it wouldn’t even be the distance between SF and LA. We only have 3 states on the entire West Coast, and ~ half of that coast is CA. 
Today he mocked people that have several feet of icy water in their homes.
People looking at him from afar, be aware almost everything he says is a lie or a distortion. He’s a bully and a jerk.
If he was in the race of his life, neck and neck for the top of the polls I could kind of understand his hesitation to not come back but his is a fool’s errand. He’s in the basement and will be lucky if he comes in 5th in NH. Like lots of conservatives he doesn’t believe government can do anything and does his best to prove it.
Is the trip really on the taxpayer’s dime? For stuff not related to his government job (being Governor), does the Gov or does he not foot the bill himself?
I count the ones I touch – NH, VT, MA, CT, NY, NJ.
I wasn’t there that day, but I wasn’t all that far away.
It’s funny you should ask this. This morning 1-2 hundred extra cars just emptied out onto the roads near me from 2 nearby highways… for no apparent reason.
It frustrated my neighbors, the crossing guards, etc. It shut down the area and made life a headache.
Now, that’s very likely just an accident and a coincidence.
But if it wasn’t, and if it was your town, and if you found out some asshole just did it for shits & giggles… wouldn’t YOU want to see an investigation and any/all responsible prosecuted for abuse of power and negligence?
He should have been impeached and prosecuted.
NPR had a program on BridgeGate last week; can’t recall his name, but the author of a Christie bio was on. He had even more details about CC and his mafia giggling and emailing one another as they “punished” the Jersey mayor via ungodly traffic on the GWB.
I would want people responsible prosecuted, yes. But criminal liability isn’t vicarious.