Promises made, promises broken. As a campaign theme, that slogan is popular this season. In the current mid-term election cacophony, it seems to be in every Democratic script in every race across the country. Promises made by Donald Trump, like his lies, are almost too numerous to track, but his broken promises are enumerated handily – ending forever wars, reducing grocery prices, opening manufacturing facilities, bringing back overseas jobs, etc. In long ago elections, candidates asked voters to support them because their judgment could be trusted. Candidates were proud of their reputations for fair play and hard work on behalf of others, whether in business or government. Perhaps that’s a bit idealistic or pollyannish; nasty campaigns impugning opponents are hallmarks of American politics going back to the beginning of the nation.  

It doesn’t always have to be that way, but it’s often an early approach by political consultants right after measuring the strengths of their client candidate. It’s easier to demonize another candidate than it is, as my grandmother always advocated, to improve your argument. The initial desire to achieve a victory fairly and squarely is replaced by a need to win at all costs, by smearing their opponent as a deadly enemy, not simply someone whose opinions may differ from theirs. Maybe candidates who allow such smears to be generated in their names are blind to what it says about themselves. Or maybe they don’t care. And that’s a sad commentary on politics and American society today. 

Many candidates disagree when I opine that campaigning is fun; it’s governance that’s hard. Running for office takes a lot of listening, energy, and shoe leather but, once the election results are in, the duty of governance, which is what elected office is all about, kicks in. And that’s where the hard decisions must be made. Regardless of the issue, someone is going to be angry with you, accuse you of not listening, or of breaking promises. Anger is understandable; people will disagree with your approach or with the outcome and voice their displeasure. Not listening is more nuanced. As an elected official, I listened to many disparate points of view to try to find a balance, but a decision had to be made, and that was my responsibility. Decisions rarely are black or white, but must incorporate many shades of the spectrum, which makes governance both stimulating and challenging.  

Campaign promises are easy to make, hard to fulfill, and an easy trap for any candidate.  Perhaps the most infamous promise is the “tax pledge” that Americans for Tax Reform created during the Reagan Administration. Hundreds of Republican House and Senate candidates signed a pledge to oppose any tax increase proposals simply on principle. The pledge essentially tied the hands of those elected officials and removed any independence, or judgment, to address current and future economic challenges that can affect the lives of hundreds of millions of Americans. Promising to work hard on behalf of your constituents is a worthy pledge, one you can easily keep under your control. Promising to end wars or reduce grocery prices, among others, puts you on very shaky ground because there are so many factors outside of your control. That’s a lesson that Mr. Trump and many other officials are learning the hard way.