A judgement of leadership

As I observe President Barrack Obama from afar, I'm struck with the stark contrast between his immediate action to implement unpopular decisions, and the surrender of Governor Luis Fortuño when faced with opposition.

From the Attorney for the case against Governor Luis Fortunño's leadership:

"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury I submit that when Governor Fortuño backed away from implementing the recommendations of the Consejo Asesor de Reconstrucción Económica y Fiscalto (CAREF), he was quite clearly retreating from a swelling tide of opposition. He surrendered and retracted the proposal rather then implement unpopular decisions and fight a potentially long campaign to get the recommendations approved.

I also submit that politics is not for the weak. It is a complex game of negotiation, compromise, and consensus building. All of these actions require political capital. Politics is like poker, you never show your hand before your opponent calls. And most importantly, when you are caught bluffing, you quickly lose respect, power, and political capital.

So when the Fortuño camp claimed that they were merely testing the political waters with the announcement of the CAREF's proposals, they were merely attempting to save face (read spin) for having been caught bluffing. By making the recommendations of the committee publicly known it was his full intention to follow through with those recommendations. There was clearly time and opportunity to vet these proposals with special interests (in private) and build consensus before their announcement."

From the Judge in the case against Governor Luis Fortunño's leadership:

"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, your services are no longer required. Never before have I heard such a clear cut case. I'm ready to render my decision. On Wednesday January 14th of 2009, the Governorship of Puerto Rico by Luis Fortuño was over. In what will be seen as the shortest span as Governor of Puerto Rico, he became the third straight "lame duck" Governor. Much like the well accepted strategy of never negotiating with terrorists, Gov. Fortuño has exposed himself as weak and yielding. He empowered all of the gridlocked special interests, thus sowing the seeds of strong opposition to any future attempts for change. After only 12 days in office Gov. Fortuño sentenced Puerto Rico to four more years of stagnation and economic recession.

In contrast, on only his second day in office, President Obama signed three executive orders, without regard to their opposition and potential unpopularity. In these simple actions he demonstrated that he was going to comply with his campaign promises. But, more importantly, he was going to make decisions not based on popularity or repercussion, but upon his belief in what is in the best interest of the country which he now leads."

Oh how we need a leader in Puerto Rico who has the conviction, charisma, and internal fortitude to make and implement tough decisions. Where is our "savior" in our time of need?

Fortuño: Tear down this wall!

When the results of an election bring distinct change, as has happened here with Fortuño and with Obama, there is a feeling of hope, of closure, of finally being able to move on and focus on something else besides how bad things have been. They often call these times a catharsis, for they bring about "purification", "cleansing" or "clarification."

Another such moment was the famous challenge from United States President Ronald Reagan to Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev to "Tear down this wall!", by which he meant destroy the Berlin Wall.

Reflections on an election

For me, there has to be something very seriously wrong when during an election, every candidate from every party runs upon a platform of change. What does that mean? It is especially confusing when the party with the incumbent candidate vows to bring about change; just how does that change work? Vote for me, I know I've really screwed the pooch so far, but I promise I'm going to screw things up less next time?

In Nuero-Linguistic Programming it is said that people are motivated by either moving away from pain or moving towards pleasure. So many are saying that people voted for Fortuño because he represented "the hope for a return to better times", in other words, pleasure. I say poppycock (see below for translation). If there was any mandate, in my opinion, the results of this year's election indicate a complete rejection of Acevedo Vila and eight years of the worst leadership this country has seen. Need proof? Over 53% of the un-affiliated, 39% of the voters affiliated with the PPR party, 17% of the voters affiliated with with PIP party, and 6% of the voters affiliated with PDP party voted for Fortuño. While many cry (supposedly 51%) that it was the economy that most influenced their vote, many, like me, just couldn't tolerate 4 more years of the same lack of leadership.

Looking forward...

While the pots already on the stove, and Fortuño is stirring things up, we won't know whether his soup of change has made a difference for quite a while. He faces a constituency which is very "picky" and has many different tastes. So I guess, while most people are hopeful, they are also realistic and recognize that Fortuño will need a magic wand to fix all of the pressing problems we have. I do believe that he will be successful and be able to ease the burden we have suffered in the form of high energy costs, the IVU, and other "taxes" like the large increase in the tolls. But I believe that it is fantasy to hope for Fortuño to save our economy.

Let's be clear. The only thing that can save our economy is jobs. What kind of jobs? High paying, specialized, technology-based jobs requiring a highly trained (prepared) work force. We can not sustain our economy (or the illusion of growth) based on retail or food service industry jobs, which seems to employee a larger percentage of our population every day. It's certain, that Fomento will be successful in attracting some jobs to fill that need. But even if succeed beyond their wildest dreams, the number of new jobs will only number into the tens of thousands. But it won't be enough.

Statistics indicate that over 1/3 of our workforce is employed by the government. I believe there are around 1 million people working and paying taxes (let's forget, for now, about that other underground work force). That means that over 330 thousand people work for the government. Most economists agree, that Puerto Rico must reduce that number. However, any candidate that entertains any thought of re-election must not piss off that block of voters; which are large enough to affect any election.

If you accept that, if we reduce the government by 1/3 or half (as some call for), that means there will be between 100 and 165 thousand people newly unemployed. Notice how large a discrepancy there is between those numbers and the amount of jobs Fomento could possibly attract?

Painful conclusion

In my very humble opinion, the only path which leads to the growth we need is through great suffering, involving both sacrifice and investment. SO, for me, if Fortuño wants to "save" Puerto Rico's economy he must do two things. First he must "Tear down this government!" and he must place us firmly on a path towards foreign oil independence. For while re-inventing the government is going to cause havoc, pretending to be able to sustain (or grow) our economy with anything less than essentially starting over, is, what's that word again, oh yeah, poppycock. And while I'm saddened to see Rogelio Figeroa's platform of energy independence swirl down the toilet, I know concede that he was right.

Translation of poppycock: Anglicized form of the Dutch pappekak, which literally means soft dung or diarrhea (from Dutch pap pap + kak dung) - is an interjection meaning "nonsense" or "balderdash". Hehe, I think I'll be using this interjection more often. Certainly sounds more sophisticated than saying I think that sounds like shit.