What "Qualifies" a Candidate for Public Office?

[Truth2Tell]

Lately a number of my friends and family have been considering runs for public office – from political novices seeking local City Council seats to experienced politicians considering runs for Congress. In discussing these plans with the potential candidates and with others, the question I seem to hear most often is some version of “am I qualified,” or “is he or she qualified?” Everyone seems to wonder if their background or the background of the candidate includes enough preparation for public service. Everyone seems to wonder if resumes are sufficiently padded, degrees sufficiently earned or contacts sufficiently made. To me, these questions always seem to miss the mark, and have led me to think a bit about what I really believe “qualifies” a candidate for public office. Here are my conclusions.

Based on twenty years of involvement in political campaigns and many more years closely observing legislative bodies at work, I would suggest the following list of what makes for successful performance in elected office and what are, therefore, the most important “qualifications” of office seekers:

1. Humility. Candidates who know and understand their own weaknesses, rather than candidates with large egos, are the most qualified. The most qualified candidates do not crave the spotlight nor do they hold inflated opinions of themselves, either personally or politically.

2. Critical thinking skills. Candidates who possess the practiced ability to critically examine everything they are told. The most qualified candidates are those who will never take at face value any information provided by “experts,” more “qualified” politicians, or the media.

3. Empathy. Candidates who have a genuine compassion for their fellow human beings are the most qualified for public office. Candidates who can relate to the suffering of others and place such concerns above their own ambition are generally the most effective.

4. An ability to learn and an interest in learning. Curious and engaged candidates are the most qualified. At almost all levels of government, staff and outside experts do the heavy policy lifting. The job of the politician is to absorb information and apply their own values and their constituents values to the decision making process. Those most interested in learning will perform the best.

5. The ability to work well with others. Candidates who make friends easily and naturally practice conflict-free relationships are the most qualified. This is one of the hallmarks of actual leadership.

6. Integrity. Candidates who take seriously their commitments to others, and practice honesty, generosity, loyalty and devotion to a set of core beliefs are the most qualified for public office.

Of course the above list is not all-inclusive. But any potential candidate for public office who fits most of the above definitions should have no qualms whatsoever about their “qualifications.” Nor should anyone else.

On the other hand…

What attributes are not necessarily qualifications for elected office? Items on the following list can certainly be helpful in some cases. But our political system is packed with people who meet these criteria yet fail utterly as representatives of the people. The following are therefore not, by themselves, “qualifications” for elected office:

1. A law degree, nor any other diploma or degree from a school or University.

2. Intelligence. It certainly helps to be smart, but a high IQ alone is not a qualification for office.

3. A background in government service, nor participation in government commissions, boards or other quasi-government bodies.

4. An encyclopedic knowledge of public policy.

5. A background running a business, non-profit, or any other institutional hierarchy.

6. A forceful personality, traditional “leadership skills,” nor unlimited personal ambition.

7. The past successful accumulation of wealth.

8. The ability to make great, articulate speeches.

9. Relationships with many powerful people.

Again, this list is nowhere near all-inclusive. The above are just some of the widely used false “qualifications” for public office. Candidates and voters should give credence to these at their own peril.

These lists are just my opinion, based on my own observations. But I would encourage anyone thinking of further participating in our democratic process to give them some serious thought. And consider supporting candidates for office, or running for office yourself, if the right “qualifications” are already there.

[Truth2Tell]

1. I should qualify this

by suggesting that some additional qualifications may apply to those seeking executive roles in very large organizations, like states or nations. But barely.

[Truth2Tell]

2. kick. Just cuz It took me some time to write.

:P

[cliffordu]

3. $$ squared, apparently