Campaigning for a CEO
There are telltale signs that the candidate isn't concerned about you. One of the biggest signs is a candidate saying he or she looks at the seat as a CEO position. This is bad news! The primary responsibility of a CEO is to put the company in the best position to exploit the common workers and con the common consumers to give those wealthy enough to own stock a bigger dividend. This is hardly the mating call of a true public servant.
But, for some reason, politicians will put that in their campaign ads: "a successful businessman." Well, THAT'S no good! Having a history of paying low wages and charging high prices and then BRAGGING about it does not endear someone to me. Yet that campaign strategy seems to work. Heck, we had a lifelong consumer- and worker-advocate running for president in 2002. What did we do? Trampled him like a teddy bear near a beanie-baby sale and elected a businessman. "Call us when you've gotten the taxpayers buy you a baseball stadium!"
Imagine if, say, a Minnesota governor truly turned the office into a CEO position.
Start off with statistics. CEOs always seem to want statistics so they have something to put in the annual report. How many times did you mow the lawn this week? This month? This year-to-date (YTD)? How much snow did you shovel? Did you wave to people driving by? How many times? How many hours of television watching did you perform this week? This month? This year? How many hours did you spend putting up holiday decorations? No, this would not be good.
CEOs also seem to have a warm place in their hearts for downsizing. They don't even wait for losses; they'll downsize you even when "profits are down from last year." Imagine a CEO as governor: "Well, we didn't have as big a surplus this year as we did last year. Surpluses are down, so we're going to have to let some of you go. Pack your stuff, give us the keys to your house, and you'll be on your way." There's always the question: Do we downsize by least seniority or by least productive? It's a difficult decision. That's why we elect the best CEO, er, candidate available.
Along those lines, CEOs like to buy and merge with other companies. A company will merge with another company and that merge-namic duo will combine their resources to buy up another company--downsizing the recently redundant jobs all the while. Imagine the CEO governor's actions: "Minnesota is merging with North Dakota. We'll call ourselves MinNorDak. After that is complete, we're planning a hostile takeover of South Dakota. We'll all become one state with the combined size of Minnesota, North Dakota, and South Dakota. Our name will be Minkota. Oh, by the way, two-thirds of you are redundant and no longer needed. Pack your stuff, give us the keys to your house, and you'll be on your way. If you're the governor of North Dakota or South Dakota, you will each receive a delightful golden parachute. As for the rest of you, why are you still here?"
There will be a lot of other redundant jobs in the Legislature. Combining three governments into one will create a lot of lost jobs. But why stop there? As a CEO governor, why not close the local and state governments and move those jobs overseas--to sweatshops in China, Mexico, Taiwan, Indonesia, or Singapore? Salaries would be lower. Health care and safety standards are non-existent. Think of all the savings! If the sweatshop workers complain, shoot them! It’s just THAT easy!
With a CEO governor, we, as Minnesota citizens, would probably have to watch motivational videos like "Fish!" and "Give 'em the Pickle!" We'd be taught to empower ourselves while making the state an enjoyable and productive place to live in or visit. Yet when we actually follow through and take ownership of our citizenship, we'll be called into the Governor's Office and reprimanded for unprofessionalism or for not taking citizenship seriously. (Perhaps even written up!) Then the Governor will release a memo explaining new policies regarding professionalism. Sound a bit fishy? We'd be in a pickle, that's for certain. Where’s the fun in that?
One thing CEOs seem to love to do is make up dress codes. Okay, shorts and tee shirts are out. Dockers are okay this week but next week they'll be a violation. Three weeks from now, the CEO governor will be wearing them followed closely by people wearing nasty glares. Fridays will be dress down days. That means you can wear Dockers or Capris pants. I mean, as long as they look professional. Which they do, except for the weeks that they don't. Mindbogglin! I'm just glad I'm not female. Nylons all day every day? No, thank you.
Here's the good part! No taxes. First, no CEO likes taxes. Second, CEOs have discovered an amazing thing: the Bermuda Triangle Tax Scheme. You have your state wherever--let's say Minnesota or Minkota. Then you reincorporate in Bermuda (all it takes is a post office mailbox there). Then you establish residency in Barbados by having your annual meetings there. (Sounds fun.) The money the state makes is sent to Barbados in the form of franchise (or some other) fees. That money is transferred to the Bermuda branch. Bermuda has no income tax, so your state would have to pay nothing! All income free and clear. Oh, wait! A state's income is taxes. Taxes come from us taxpayers. But, using the BTTS, the state could claim that they received no taxes. So we pay our taxes to the state and the state doesn't have to provide any services because they didn't technically receive our money. Taxes but no services. That stinks!
What does management seem to spend most of its time doing? Attending meetings and reading e-mail messages! Is that what we want our governor doing? That's what gives us our dress code changes and policy changes. Management runs out of e-mail messages to read and meetings to attend. They get bored and start looking for things to do. So they start butting into the day-to-day tasks of the rest of us. We have enough to do without them ignorantly finding solutions to problems that don't exist. ("Maybe it'd be better if you folded the laundry and then dried it ... " or some other cockamamie idea demonstrating less leadership and more lunacy.) The Governor should be working on plans to make this a better state, working with legislatures to pass bills through the legislature, ... uh, wait. I've seen some of the legislation passed and plans hatched. Maybe it would be best if governors simply read e-mail messages and went to meetings. Less harm that way. Yes. Less harm that way.
Have you ever noticed that CEOs like to buy naming rights to things like sports arenas, parks, college football bowl games, television show segments, buildings, etc. What happens when a CEO becomes governor? Naming rights will be sold. First, the Capital building. Oh, I'm sorry, the CapitalOne building. In the capital city of St. Paul. Oops, the capital city of State Farm Insurance. At least it will be in the great state of Minnesota, right? Wrong! Try the great state of Motorola. So state laws will be passed in the CapitalOne building in State Farm Insurance, Motorola, USA! Oops, might as well change "USA" to "INC." Naming rights: As American as apple pie. Oops, again! Naming rights: As Incorporated as Apple iMac pie.
You know when you buy the table with "some assembly required" printed on the box (often in English)? You open the box and it is a log. Imagine if the governor were a CEO. “Here’s your tax rebate. Um, but there is some assembly required.” Then he mails you a loan application! How about this marketing ploy: “9 out of 10 gas station owners recommend my gas tax reduction plan.” “Four of five HMO executives approve my health care reform bill!” Do we really need this aggravation? I say no.
Those are some of the potential nuances of a CEO governor. Play at home: try to determine what a CEO senator would do. Or a CEO representative. Or a CEO mayor. Or a CEO sheriff. Or a … well, you get the idea.
On the bright side, if the candidate can be a CEO, you, as a voter, can be a union boss. When a CEO-visioned candidate asks for your vote, negotiate with him or her. Ask about the salary. Ask about the pension plan. Dental plan? Health care plan? Make sure it is all there. And, for shareholder’s sake, CHECK THE CANDIDATE’S IPO!
After all, you have a vested interest in the winner!
return to Commentary index
The opinions expressed here are solely those of the writer and do not neccessarily reflect those of the rest of the family.
© 2002, Mark Wentz