The Case for Old
I am sixty-two years old and retired. I spent thirty-five and a half years teaching and administrating in public school, and forty seasons as a track coach. When I was a younger teacher in the 1980’s and early 90’s, I worked in an amazing middle school. Kids absolutely came first and the staff was excited: we made a difference and changed lives. We were a mix of young and old, led by a veteran Principal who cared about us all. We often experimented with new ideas, but we always valued what worked in the past.
Once in a staff meeting, after getting our attention by playing the Steve Winwood’s “Roll with It,” our “older” principal (younger than I am now) told us to be glad we were teaching then. He knew education was changing, getting more complicated and would become very different profession in a few years. He wanted us to keep doing what we were good at, helping kids, and hoped we could “roll” with the changes. He was right. In the end teaching got hidebound with paper and regulations; the reports were more important than the impact on kids lives. Red tape and “annual growth percentages” counted: the light coming on in the eyes of a kid who just figured out a new concept did not.
There is nothing wrong with new ideas, youthful energy, and differing philosophies. But as an “old” teacher, I discovered that with the new came a loss of values; ignorance of institutional history and traditions, and a disregard for the successes of the past. The “new” way of doing things swept out the good with the bad, and disregarded and disrespected any who disagreed. When I left, it was a good time to retire.
What would be best is to respect what was done, employ what was working, and alter what needed to be changed. A melding of the best of the old and the new and a recognition that while new ideas were good, old experience had value as well. The excitement and surety of the young combined with the history and values of the old, like my principal did in that amazing middle school, is that “magic mix” that changed lives.
Nancy Pelosi is seventy-eight years old and has been in Congress thirty-one years. She has had a storied career; the first woman ever to be Speaker of the US House of Representatives. She represents the “old;” the traditions of the Democratic Party in Congress. Pelosi has been vilified, made into the “bête noire” of the Republican right. She represents everything they hate: a woman and a liberal from San Francisco where you can pick you right-wing poison: gay rights, sanctuary city, environmental concern, even taxing businesses to help provide for the homeless; the Haight-Asbury home of flower power and the hippie generation.
Pelosi has proven to be an effective leader in the House. As Speaker, she managed the Affordable Care Act passage, willing to risk her House majority to change American lives by providing insurance. It did cost the majority, but she has worked since to bring that majority back. She is the “queen” of fundraising, she has given support to all of the successful new Democratic Congressmen. And she has allowed them the space to “run away” from her when they needed to, not forcing some artificial fealty to her leadership. She achieved her goal: winning back the House Majority at a time when America needed it most to serve as a check on a runaway President.
We are in a time of national crisis. The next two years will continue the “stress test” on our Constitutional system. Whether impeachment is in the future or not, Democrats and Americans will still need an experienced hand on the gavel in the House of Representatives.
Nancy Pelosi is that experience. She will be like my “old” principal, melding the energy and values of the young with the history and tradition of the old. She may ask her members to “Roll with It,” and if the Mueller investigation warrants it, she may ask them to risk their majority for the good of the nation. And like my old principal, she will look to those younger Congressmen to take on roles in leadership, so that her ideals won’t be lost in the future.
I hope the Democrats in the House can see her value, and find the courage to combine tradition and youth. We need her strength, and her wisdom.
You had me when you extolled the virtues of caring, cooperative principals and teachers facing an onslaught of government rules that victimized the teaching process, but you lost me when you used that as the basis for supporting an uncooperative partisan to be Speaker.
Congress is dis-functional not because of new rules, but because multiple factors have made its members more extreme and more partisan. This includes Dems like Pelosi and Republicans like Jordan. Both are candidates for Speaker – what’s wrong with this picture?
We desperately need a strong Democratic Party (OK-I’m not one) to deal with great Trumpian dangers. That means we need Dem leaders who can and will work across the aisle. We need Dems who can capture the vast American “middle”. As well as Dems did in this election, despite greatly out-spending Republicans, they lost ground in key states like Ohio. That can be laid directly at Pelosi’s door step. It makes no sense – classic hard working middle class Ohioans identify more with the Republican Party???
The Dems desperately need “a new style” of leadership. There is still a role for Pelosi – she has skills – but her new role should be as a teacher – sharing what she does well such as fund raising, etc, with the next generation of leaders.
Whatever her skills, the fact that she’s become the poster girl for Republican enmity will hinder her chance to succeed just as Hillary was mortally wounded as a candidate after 24 years of Republican attacks.
The Dems need new Leadership who must have the right aptitudes even if lacking in pure experience.
Two points in response.
1. Dems should not allow the GOP imaging of Pelosi to control their selection.
2. I don’t agree that Pelosi or anyone outside of Ohio is responsible for GOP gains here. Ohio will vote for good Dem candidates – Sherrod Brown is the example. Even here in Central Ohio – Danny O’Connor made a great run for Congress in a huge RED district. But the statewide candidates – led by Cordray – are “good guys” but uninspired candidates. To move Ohio you need more than the Dem party has offered.
Oh and 3. The Jordan Pelosi comparison is a false equivalency. Jordan is an ideologue – committed to a truly radical conservative view. Pelosi has been willing to work (including with Trump) to solve problems.