Listen to “Good Policy. Good Character. Why Not Both?” on Spreaker.
A loyal listener and frequent texter posed a genuine question to me yesterday: Which presidency was worse? A — Jimmy Carter’s or B — Donald Trump’s current term?
It’s a thought-provoking question, one that led me to consider two important measures of any presidency: policy and morality.
Jimmy Carter was, by most accounts, a fundamentally decent and moral man. Donald Trump? That’s a more difficult argument to make, given some of his conduct, his rhetoric and his treatment of those who disagree with him.
Trump seems capable of considerable loyalty and affection for his friends, but offers precious little of either to his enemies. His expressions of decency can seem conditional.
Carter, meanwhile, presided over a series of significant policy failures. Stagflation, energy shortages, the Iran hostage crisis and a general sense that America was losing its footing. Certainly, Carter had his accomplishments, but his presidency was largely defined by what went wrong.
Trump’s policy record? A mixed bag, to be sure.
Tariffs are taxes, and the administration should acknowledge that reality. The war with Iran seems never-ending, with the American people left wondering what the ultimate objective is and when it might be achieved.
But Trump has also had his moments, particularly when it comes to cutting red tape and getting government out of the way.
Consider Tuesday’s announcement that his administration intends to roll back Biden-era regulations on methane emissions from the oil and natural gas industry.
The Hill reports the administration is preparing to loosen requirements, particularly for older, low-producing wells that can face substantial compliance costs.
That could be meaningful for West Virginia.
Smaller natural gas producers, particularly those operating older wells with limited production, can face regulatory costs that are disproportionately high relative to the value of the gas they produce.
Monitoring equipment, inspections and compliance requirements cost money regardless of how much gas comes out of the ground.
Reducing unnecessary costs could help keep marginal wells operating, preserve economic activity and extend the productive lives of existing assets.
That strikes me as good, balanced policy – let it be an example of Trump getting it right.
But here’s where the listener’s question becomes more interesting.
What good is sound public policy without the morality, character and basic human decency we should expect from those entrusted with public office?
And, conversely, what good is personal decency if the policies pursued by an elected official leave the country worse off?
Carter demonstrated the importance of character, even as his presidency struggled with policy and performance. Trump has demonstrated that a president can pursue policies worth supporting while exhibiting personal behavior that deserves criticism – sometimes extreme criticism.
Neither should be the standard to which we aspire.
The answer to the texter’s question, then, isn’t necessarily choosing Carter over Trump or Trump over Carter.
It’s demanding both good policy and good character from the people who seek our votes.
That standard should apply equally to someone running for the local school board and someone seeking the presidency.
So, when you step into the voting booth this election, ask yourself two questions.
Is my preferred candidate sound on policy?
And does that candidate possess the moral character, judgment and basic decency the office demands?
We should not have to sacrifice one to get the other.
And perhaps if we, as an electorate, stopped accepting that tradeoff, we might find ourselves with better government, better leaders and, ultimately, a better country.
That’s not too much to ask.