Bruce Roemmelt has a fascinating post (here). What he has done is post both his own and Bob Marshall’s testimony before the State Corporation Commission (SCC). Both gentlemen testified to SCC on the Dominion Virginia Power‘s proposal to build the Meadow Brook to Loudoun 500 kV Line. Roemmelt used this testimony to fashioned a “debate”. Undoubtedly Roemmelt believes this debate portrays him in a better light than it does Marshall. But does it?
Different jobs emphasize different character traits. Some jobs require individual initiative and swift on-the-spot decisions. Others require careful study and deliberation. Some require salesmanship and coordination. Others require patient listening. And so forth. We each have a calling — some task for which we are best fitted. When we elect someone to public office, what does the job require? What character traits does the job require?
Rommelt went before the SCC and straightforwardly said he opposed the power line. He spoke about the solution he thinks the public deserves and supports. Marshall, on the other hand, admitted his lack of engineering skills. Instead, he spoke about Dominion’s unsatisfying and inconsistent justification for the power-line. He also spoke about a subject about which he knows much, recent legislation passed by the General Assembly. Marshall closed by expressing his confidence in the SCC.
What does it take to be a good legislator? Sometimes it takes self restraint.
A little knowledge is dangerous. With just a little knowledge, we may oversimplify a complex task. With just a little knowledge, we can easily be tempted to tell other people how to run their business. When we actually have the power to force people to run their businesses our way, that can be dangerous.
In olden days, kings often presumed to tell other people how to run their business. To manage “their” economy, kings would, for example, establish royal monopolies. Even in our more enlightened era, much of our economy is micromanaged and too often run by politicians. Do our leaders know enough to take such tasks upon themselves? From time-to-time, we need consider how little knowledge each of us has. Are our leaders that much more brilliant than the rest of us?
Before the SCC, Marshall admitted he is not an engineer. In effect, he admitted he does not have the competence to tell Dominion Virginia Power how to run its business. Should he tell Dominion how to run its business? Should he tell the SCC in advance what their decision should be?
Consider the problem a bit of humility earned John McCain.
McCain cast doubt on moderator Tim Russert’s assertion that the candidate had said he was no expert on economics. Russert claimed that McCain had repeatedly said, “I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated.” McCain responded, “Actually, I don’t know where you got that quote from. I’m very well-versed in economics.”
Russert’s quote comes from a 2005 interview with the Wall Street Journal on Nov. 26, 2005: “I’m going to be honest: I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated.”
We could not find that McCain has said that quote “repeatedly,” but he has made similar comments recently The Chicago Tribune quoted McCain talking to reporters on Dec. 18, 2007: “The issue of economics is something that I’ve really never understood as well as I should. I understand the basics, the fundamentals, the vision, all that kind of stuff.” (from here)
We say we want our leaders to be honest with us, but all a few honest words got McCain was an absurd amount of flak. When one of our leaders has the humility to admit his ignorance or exercise a bit of self restraint, is that such a bad thing? Don’t we want our leaders to have the humility to make the best use of all the experts they can assemble around them? Doesn’t our country work best when our leaders do not claim to know how to run our business better than we do?
Speaking of humility as well as political courage, it will be interesting to see if Obama displays either and admits that he was wrong about the surge after he speaks with the commanders on the ground in Iraq.
And if he does, it will be even more interesting (and entertaining) to see the reaction of his far Left anti-war supporters.
Well, okay….let’s look at each man’s background. Marshall is a lawyer. Roemmelt is a retired fire fighter and military vet. There WILL be drastic differences in communication styles.
Second, Marshall approached the issue from his lack of engineering expertise. Roemmelt approached it from the standpoint of what the people have asked for.
Last election, I made the comment that Roemmelt would make a great delegate and that Marshall would be better in a position such as Attorney General. We need someone like Roemmelt who will articulate what people are asking for. We also need a sharp, thorough lawyer like Marshall as Attorney General. I think these guys and we would all win with both of them placed wisely in VA government.
kgotthardt – As far I know, Bob Marshall is not a lawyer (see here). At least, he has enough sense not to brag about being a lawyer.
I think Marshall still wants a job in the Senate. If that happens, that will give Bruce Roemmelt an opening. Nonetheless, I still hope we would fill Marshall’s seat with a Conservative.
I have a practical problem with Roemmelt’s approach. It is not about how he communicates; it is what he communicates. Roemmelt wants to pick energy solutions, for example. As a government leader that would be not his job. As a government leader, Roemmelt’s job would be to protect the rights of the People. As individuals, the People choose their own energy solutions.
Humility is the difference between a republic and a tyrannical democracy. Instead of trying to tell each other how to live, we let each other suffer the consequences of our own foolishness. Since we do not like to suffer, we will work to find the best solutions we can. When some of us choose wrongly, and some will, those who have chosen rightly can temper the suffering of those who have chosen wrongly with charity.
What on Earth made me think he was a lawyer?? He said he used to teach at George Mason. Was it law? Is that why? I have no brain. Help!
BTW, I wouldn’t want Marshall in Congress because he would probably outlaw me for having my tubes tied! He’s a bit radical in that department.
“Roemmelt wants to pick energy solutions, for example. As a government leader that would be not his job.”
No, but I suspect he has heard ideas from his constituents. That is what I like about him. He’s very much a “common” people’s person from what I can tell. And I don’t mean that term “common” in the derogatory, Victorian sense. : )
Don’t get me wrong. There are things I really appreciate about Marshall as I have mentioned before. I just see him more effective in a different capacity. He’s not “common” enough. And he’s TOO conservative in some ways, just as I believe some leaders are TOO liberal (whatever those terms mean anyway).
kgotthardt — Is Marshall too extreme or is Roemmelt too extreme? I suppose only God knows for certain.
The point of a republican (note the little “r”) ) government is restraint. Please read this post.
My tubes would say Marshall :;
CT
Personally I hope congress can be filled with people that have brains, think independently and use common sense instead of party line ditto and knee jerk reaction.
CT, if you haven’t noticed it by now, the two party system is not only outdated but splintered
into so many segments within each party, the parties are unrecognizable and about as functional as a Chinese fire drill.
If you don’t believe it and would like to get convinced get two televisions and watch the house and senate in action (action being loosely termed) on C-SPAN. I’ve seen junior high school debating teams that put the congress in the dust when it comes to positive debate action.
Tom, I agree that parties are not useful in terms of unifying people. PEOPLE are useful in unifying people. Parties just seem to fragment.
It very much appears that “some” people aren’t very adept at unifying people either, if you and “your laisse faire, let illegal aliens do what they wish” opinions are any indication of it.
Ah Tom….Even though I agree with you one one point, I see you want immigration to take over every conversation we might have. That in itself is an enemy of unification.
Se la vie. I shall leave you be.
Madam you’ve made a wise decision.
Tom/KG,
sorry for the late response but this has been a very busy weekend.
this might be dangerous, but since i’m so late to the game i thought i would weigh in of a few points in your post.
“Different jobs emphasize different character traits”
at the time of the SCC hearing i was challenging Bob for the VA HOD 13th. i felt that the voters could read our statements and make up their minds on who they wanted to send to richmond to deal with the SCC and Dominion.
if Bob wanted to get ‘coached up’on engineering issues he could have asked the Dominion folks about issues when he’s been in thier box for the last several Redskin – Cowboys games at FedEx.
i got my information from PEC’s web site where they did independent research and also quoted Dominion’s proposal directly.
i have a bias for personal responsiblity. it’s not rocket surgery for us to drive slower, conserve energy and urge our energy providers to push demand management.
i also am right in line with Jim Bacon who wants to develop a power generation centric energy system as opposed to a grid centric one.
look i was a fire fighter for 30 years not an electrical engineer, but this is about common sense solutions to problems. i really though my solutions were more pragmatic and could avoid the construction of the power line. Bob’s perspective was much more focused on “here’s what Dominion needs to do during and after they build their line”.
the other comment i wanted to address was your quote “In olden days, kings often presumed to tell other people how to run their business. ” i found myself mentally picturing Bob as the king telling people how to run their personal lives. this is an area where he has had an effect.
Tom you got real close to some kind of Liberatarian perspective there. i know it wasn’t intended to “keep our government out of our homes” but it is the natural extension in my mind.
let’s all be known for our accomplishments – and our failures. i think it was Ceasar who said, “the good men do die with them, the bad lingers on.” as a citizen i want my legislator to solve problems that affect us all. education, health care, transportation, growth management. if we need someone to just be about being on the soapbox, we have op-ed writers in the papers. or bloggers.
let’s face it. bob is principled, but he’s ineffective as a legislator. having his own caucus strip him of committee leadership and give the power to much junior legislators robs us in the 13th of effective legislation.
contrast Bob’s power to Colgan’s even when he was in the minority. huge difference.
and regarding the title of the post i hope you weren’t referring to me as a hero. i’m just a retired fire fighter who thinks he might be able to serve his fellow citizens a bit longer.
b
“bob is principled, but he’s ineffective”
…because he is too radical and less centric, I think, though I respect his positions. He is quite knowledgeable, and I would love to have him as a college professor! However, as much as I connect with him academically, I am not convinced the rest of the world can. It’s a problem with academics and pundits—they don’t speak plainly enough, and if they try, they generally get slammed ! : )
Pingback: HERO OR HUMBLE SERVANT? PART II « Citizen Tom