Tag Archives: religion in politics

Neither Democrats Nor Republicans Can Afford To Be Sheep,Louise Annarino,1-14-2013

“A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.”
 Edward R. Murrow  

My first foray into political activism began when I read about apartheid in Rhodesia and South Africa. My eight year old mind was stunned at the racism which was stamped “approved” by the Rhodesian government. Even more shocking was its apparent acceptance by the United States. I had heard about boycotts,and their use to end segregation. Thus,I could not understand why we were a willing trade partner spending millions of dollars in Rhodesia. My father suggested I ask his childhood friend and our congressman, Rep.John Ashbrook (R-OH) about this when he held his next week-end office hours. I made an appointment for the following saturday. At 10 a.m. I found myself dressed in my sunday best outside the door to his office at the Licking County Court House, nervous but serious about getting answers.

Congressman Ashbrook respectuflly overlooked my awkward effort to hoist my short self up into a chair placed before his desk. He did not even smile at the picture of my legs sticking straight out,too short to even bend over the edge of the seat. He took my concerns seriously and respectfully explained the realities of global politics. At that time Rhodesia was the largest producer of chromium, which we sorely needed for miltary and defense industries. He explained why we needed it and what we had to overlook to get it. He agreed that it was a deal with the devil and not to be taken lightly. He promised to put pressure on Rhodesia and South Africa to end apartheid, to seek alternative sources of chromium and other trade items with countries practicing apartheid, and to look for other ways to address the issue of racism.

Every time anyone in Congress discussed an issue realted to my concerns or new related legislation was introduced he mailed me copies of the legislation and or discussion printed in the congressional record. Over the years,until his sudden death while running for the U.S. Senate, we corresponded on a variety of issues. Few of which we took similar positions on. By then I had become a registered Democrat,but remained an appreciative constituent of the ultra-conservative John Ashbrook. I was starting to love politics.

When Sen.John F. Kennedy ran for president I was ten years old. All of my friends,and the nuns at school,swooned over his good looks and were thrilled to support a Catholic candidate. Our religion and patriotism was under attack by democratic Senator Hubert Humphrey during the primary,and I decided to set the record straight. I researched American history,looking for Catholics who had served in government as patriots to illustrate the ill-considered attacks made against Sen.Kennedy’s ability to lead the country without allowing Catholism or the papacy guide his decisions. By the time I was finished I had ten pages of Catholic patriots on my list.

I learned that the father of the U.S. Navy John Barry,the first captain commissioned by the Continental Congress refused 100,000 British pounds to dessert the American navy and captain any British ship of his choosing. He was outraged. John Fitzgerald was General George Washington’s private secretary during the Revolutionary War. The treasurer who held and disbursed funds during the revolution was Catholic as well as two signers of the U.S. Constitution one who a signed the Declaration of Independence. Lafayette and Pulaski were Catholic. Page after page I listed individuals entrusted by fellow patriots to serve and protect the cause of revolution and the establishment of the new government. I mailed the list to Sen. Kennedy and asked him to use it to put Humphrey and others in their place when they used Catholicism to cast a cloud over Kennedy’s ability to lead the nation. I still have the letter Sen. Kenndy sent in response,thanking me for the information. Imagine my surprise a year later when he quoted from my list during the general election debate, when Vice-President Richard Nixon brought up the issue. My Republican Dad was cheering on Kennedy and patting me on the back for a job well done. I was hooked on politics.

It was years later,while an intern at the Ohio Attorney General’s Office the summer between my second and third year of law school that I really began to understand the inner workings of political institutions, and the people who run them. I did not expect politics to intercept law so easily. The tension between the two is a strong undercurrent. Fortunately,most individuals handle it deftly,appropriately, and ethically. Those who don’t are called to account. What amazes me is not that some try to manipulate government institutions,including courts,for political and economic gain;but that so few do so. Also, the ready aceptance of bi-partisan cooperation,until recently,has been quite impressive.

I recall a case in which the state of Ohio hoped for an outcome which would protect the state and state coffers. However, Ohio law dictated a different outcome, unless we could find strong precedent which would allow the Ohio Supreme Court to oveturn Ohio law on the issue before it. The Democratic AG and the Republican-led Supreme Court each knew that the failure of the legislature to change the law earlier had brought the state to this unfortunate impasse. Several interns worked around the clock to find a case strong enough for the court to hang its hat on. They succeeded and the state’s interest,and taxpayer’s interest was served by the court’s final decision. Politics and law at a crossroads is an exciting intersection for a legal intern.

What I abhorred was the quiet assumption that government workers would donate to political parties,increasing their chances of retaining their positions. This was not stated outright. No such request was ever made. But one could see that attending political events,fund-raisers and showing party support bolstered one’s professional standing whether democratic or republican. I decided I wanted no part of politics. I just wanted to practice law and rise or fall on my merits,not on my political contributions.

After law school,I worked for the non-profit Legal Aid Society of Columbus where my focus was on my clients and the law,without the subtle pressure of financing candidates or political parties. I continued to volunteer for candidates,make contributions to their campaigns, knock on doors, stuff envelopes,do lit drops etc. But these efforts were unrelated to my practice of law. When I left the Legal Aid Society five years later to become Associate Director Of Legal Affairs at Ohio University I made sure during my interview that the position would not be a political appointment, and that I would never be asked to contribute to a specific candidate or party. I was assured that was the case.

However, when the next Attorney General was elected he realized Ohio law had not been strictly followed by his predecessors and announced he would do so. Ohio law stated that only the Attorney General could represent a state agency or institution in any hearing or court,before any agency or commission. The hiring of each attorney by state universities would require approval by the Attorney General, and each attorney would be appointed his Assistant Attorney General. I was right back where I had started!

When I met with the Attorney General he agreed that no one from his staff would ever request my political participation in,nor contribution to any political event or campaign. And, he never disappointed me. Nor did he allow my failure to attend such events to color his view of my professional performance and standing with his office. Other attorneys were appalled at my unwillingness to mingle politics and my legal practice. But,I refused to be a sheep and follow the flock. It would be too easy to be eaten by the wolves which surely would appear. It only takes a few wolves to decimate a flock.

When I see what is happening in republican political circles I worry about all those republicans who are fair and reasonable,who seek consensus, who prefer bi-partisan discussion, and who understand that legislation can be improved by listening and learning from the other side of the aisle. They have allowed wolves to come among them in sheeps clothing. Democrats are not immune from such an incursion,especially if they act like sheep. We are watching too many republicans being eaten alive not to understand it can happen to democrats as well. No one in either party can afford to act like sheep.