The government shutdown last month and the snafu with the Obamacare website have made me scratch my head. How could something like these happen to one of the most sophisticated, advanced country in the world? There seems to be such fighting between parties that it hardly makes sense to go forward with an initiative vehemently lacking in agreement.
New Jersey Governor Chris Christie speaks out, pretty bluntly, about the state of affairs in Washington DC. He confirms what I suspected. My notes: People in government don’t talk to each, and when they do, they don’t do it civilly. They don’t develop relationships. They don’t build a sense of trust. So when problems arise, they become big difficult, contentious problems. Obamacare is wrong, it’s a failure. It’s the most extraordinary overreach by government. It’s being run by people who’ve never run anything. Just a year after winning elections, Obama is being shoved out the door, and people are asking, Who’s next?
It's a doubled-edged sword, I'd say: The Governor is right, in that dismissing the President makes it difficult for him to be an effective leader. Yet, I watched a press conference, soon after the shutdown, and the President took a decidedly partisan stance. It was astounding that the topmost leader in the country reinforced an Us vs Them divide, instead of stepping above it all and taking a more reconciling approach.
There are all sorts of ways to resolve this conflict among people, but it requires first and foremost a bipartisan, or neutral but involved, leader. Conversation off the bat between parties isn't something I'd recommend. Instead, the leader must address issues, concerns and ideas with key individuals, on one side, then the other side, first. The leader works not just at understanding people as deeply as possible, but also at laying the foundation for conflict management and ultimately problem resolution.
