Separate the policy from personal

In May, two authors from the University of Maine published an essay in the Sun Journal about the decline of public discourse. The writers, Michael Hastings and John Mahon, said the gradual disappearance of civics from the classroom was the culprit.

"The ability to approach a difficult policy issue with data, reasoned arguments and logic is not an ingrained skill," they wrote. "For example, all of us need to understand that while personal attacks against opponents may have a place in character debates, they do not have a place in serious policy discussions."

Few truer words have been written. Yet while Mahon's and Hastings' desired audience was citizens — to encourage them to pay greater attention to their dialogue — they easily could have also addressed elected officials, whose discourse is a very public model of right and wrong. If discussion among those responsible for setting policy devolves into sniping, improving debate in the public becomes even harder.

This is a roundabout way of saying that displays such as what occurred in Auburn earlier this week shouldn't happen again. Two city councilors, Ron Potvin and Dan Herrick, had a significant disagreement about a policy matter — the funding of the city's rescue vehicles.

Potvin supported expansion. Herrick supported cuts. Herrick's opinion carried the council, which should have ended things. Instead, this decided matter boiled into allegations of collusion, police reports, angry recorded telephone calls and, this week, a very public model of a venting session.

And for what? Rescue funding was decided in May, so hanging this dirty laundry in public had little practical effect. The policy debate had ended. This was more like an illustration of the state of diplomatic relations between certain councilors. (Neither warm nor fuzzy.)

What's worst, though, is this situation illustrated what Mahon and Hastings asserted — the apparent inability to separate the personal from the professional in policy debates. These intermittent flare-ups — which happen in every community, eventually — is a failing of civics.

And, in their opinion, this is because civics is no longer taught from an early age. Maybe so. There are likely many causes for its decline, with education being only one. The effect, however, is clear.

It is what happened in Auburn this week.

What do you think of this story?

Login to post comments

In order to make comments, you must create a subscription.

In order to comment on, you must hold a valid subscription allowing access to this website. You must use your real name and include the town in which you live in your profile. To subscribe or link your existing subscription click here.

Login or create an account here.

Our policy prohibits comments that are:

  • Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
  • Excessively foul and/or vulgar
  • Inappropriately sexual
  • Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
  • Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
  • Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned from posting comments.



Good points editorialboard -

Good points editorialboard - I saw this simmering and it seems as though in the frenzy to cut everything, some councilors let themselves get carried away and let things get personal. No one comes out of this looking like a saint but it isn't difficult to read between the lines and see who's intentions are in the right place.

Tron, you may not realize it but the way some of your own statements that paint with a broad brush feed right into this concept of the degradation of public discourse. Politicians on all sides of the spectrum make comments that add to the problem and it is unfair to single out the side that you happen to disagree with.


Stay informed — Get the news delivered for free in your inbox.

I'm interested in ...