SOME THOUGHTS ABOUT "PROCESS"

I don’t know about you, but I am becoming increasingly concerned over lack of attention to something called “process.” Way too many politicians talk forever about ideology or philosophy behind policies or programs, but rarely mention the politics of process because they have ignored the notion that often the process itself is the obstacle to implementing the policy in an effective, just and equal manner.

‘Process’ as a noun is defined as: “a series of actions or steps taken in order to achieve a particular end." Or, in other words: “a particular method of doing something, generally involving a number of steps or operations.”

Some synonyms include procedure, operation, action, undertaking.

As a verb, ‘process’ means: “to get something done by a particular method or set of procedures.”

It seems that nothing could be simpler than getting things accomplished by action steps, procedures, directions, or similar methods.  We do it ourselves when we get a disassembled item from some vendor and must rely upon a set of directions to enable assembly and proper functioning!  

As simple as process could be, what do we find people complaining much about in daily living? -- long lines, long wait-time for appointments, wasted time, inconvenience of location, cost of getting to an event because of distance or lack of efficient transport, harried staff rushing us through a process -– it just goes on and on.  People in everyday life seem to complain more about the way things happen (or don't happn) than about the ideology or policy concepts that require the process in the first place (although oftentimes the policy itself is the cause of the flawed process).

Let’s take a look briefly at two important sides of the same coin (the right to vote and process of elections) as examples of this dilemma, and then proceed to look at two process issues that have tremendous implications for all of us – universal health care coverage and mitigating the coronavirus.

1)     The RIGHT to VOTE.  That supposedly inalienable right has been restricted, undermined and under attack throughout our existence as an independent Republic.  I have reviewed some of these problems in past postings (see 11/9/2018, 6/17/2019, 8/28/2019, 11/14/2016 and 1/27/2013) and will mention just a few items that have had lasting effects upon this sovereign right:

a.     the Electoral College

b.     Primary elections

c.      Jim Crow Era Laws and renewal of the intent of those laws in our modern era -- meant to separate out racial groups for targeted negative treatment, and to diminish or prevent minority voting

d.     Gerrymandering that has constructed districts that cluster favorable and unfavorable groups for easier manipulation

e.     Bureaucratic red tape and paperwork – including voter registration, voter records updates, numbers and locations of polls, long lines because of lack of machines and staff

The point being that it is the very processes put in place by legislators and other officeholders that have undermined the right to vote because those processes have been used intentionally (sometimes unwittingly) to advance the vote for one group over another.

It should be obvious, that in order to protect the right to vote, we must pay as much attention to the processes that affect the sacredness of the vote just as much as to the philosophy behind our inalienable right to vote.

The day on which I started this piece just happened to be the one-year anniversary of the passage on 03/08/2019 by the Democratic House of Representatives of HR #1 – The For the People ACT of 2019 – first introduced in the House on the very day (01/03/2019) that the new 116^th Congress was installed by taking the oath of office.

It would seem appropriate to attend to some of the provisions for reforming the processes of voter registration and elections that are prominent in this ACT, with the express purpose of informing you of the lack of concern that the Republican Senate has shown toward the immense importance of this piece of legislation.

 The Senate Republicans have allowed their leader, Mitch McConnell, to thwart any action on this Bill (along with 300 others) meaning that this group of GOP senators have thereby confirmed and accepted the processes of voting that are preventing free and fair elections. Any of those Senators up for re-election this year deserve nothing less than ejection from the Senate on Election Day in November 2020, including Mitch McConnell.

We can’t make real progress on broadening the right to vote until we address process questions and needs, like those clearly addressed by HR #1, such as:

a.     use of the internet for voter registration and updates
b.  voting by mail
c.     automatic voter registration with participation by states and other  agencies, implemented with portable records that are non-purgeable

d.      same day voter registration

e.     internal data-gathering and reporting of statistics and evaluation

f.     prohibition of interference by the states with voter registration and voter participation, with some appropriate penalties

There is always more that can be done, and perhaps one action to be taken is to bring pressure on leader McConnell to bring HR #1 to the floor of the Senate for a vote.  After all, the processes of voting and registering to vote are of great importance for November of this year, and immediate action is needed to reform those processes.

Also, here are a few of my thoughts/suggestion for further consideration:

g.       more substantive penalties for any voter restrictions proposed or implemented by states or local entities

h.      use of internet and the regular mail for voter enrollment and for voting; thus, reducing the need for more voting machines except those needed for persons with special needs and those who choose to vote at a polling place

i.     use of accurate software to oversee the processes and to enable voters to register and to vote; enable state and local registration agencies to transmit enrollments done at their sites

j.        reduction of lines or inconveniences in order to vote – e.g. check-in of IDs should not be burdensome if we use methods already being used in the cyber world: face recognition; fingerprint or eye recognition; driver’s license; bank card, involving check-in machines or card swipes at doors of poll locations

2)     Elections – must be made effective and efficient; inconvenience is counterproductive and arguably a tool for restricting and undermining the votes of certain groups.  HR #1 addresses this issue’s processes and provides some important process solutions and procedures:

a.     paper ballot back-ups in all states

b.     early voting

c.      voting by mail

d.     grants to states for poll worker recruitment and training

e.     tracking and confirmation by receipt of absentee ballots

f.       improvements in operation of the Election Assistance Commission

g.      grants to improve election activities and infrastructure and to undertake security and risk assessments, audits, tests of infrastructure

h.     election reforms such as small donor public financing, campaign finance transparency/Super PAC restrictions

i.        ban on foreign national contributions,

j.        penalties imposed for violations

Again, some additional thoughts/suggestions from this Blogger:

k.      require all primaries to conform to federal guidelines; but reject caucuses

l.        mail or email ballots to all eligible voters (just like absentee ballots!)

m.  set at least one month for return deadline by email, mail, or at polling place

n.     more attention needed to set up polling places at every community library; state and/or county office; utilize non-profit organizations, churches, synagogues, mosques and other community entities such as fire stations, and let those who choose to do so, register to vote there as well

o.     recruit enough volunteers to adequately staff all locations

p.     all boards of election employees should become enforcers of new procedures and protectors of voters’ right; their job is to record (enter data) and count votes within 1-2 days

With all this attention being paid to processes and procedures involved in voting, as well as in election campaigning, is it not appropriate to wonder why the federal government cannot seem to pull together the necessary steps and procedures for combating, or at least containing, the spread of the deadly coronavirus or CONVID 19?  

Instead, we are becoming victims of the patterns of an administration intent on placating and idolizing their leader.  We have been hearing more about placing blame, excusing incompetence, self-aggrandizement and politicizing sickness than we ever needed to endure.

Let the scientific and health professionals lead the procedures, involve the expert people and entities, and undertake the instructing and training that must be done.  Government should be the right-hand, cooperating and collaborating with those leaders, and with every entity – like the public health system and the private drug companies – that has a role in the approach to this pandemic.

There is nothing wrong with having a Task Force in the administration dedicated to this end; in fact, it is a necessary and responsible action.  But having a non-scientific coordinator is not a best practice. Pence should be there as the representative of the administration, putting the resources and the assets of the national government into the mix whenever a need is identified.  It should be Pence’s job to identify, activate, oversee and monitor the response of the national government, not to coordinate the plan or procedures for combatting the virus – that is the scientist’s job.

For instance, the administration needs to concentrate on how to bring government assets to meet the needs already identified by the experts --  the testing kits, the medicines to treat symptoms and a vaccine to slow and perhaps prevent the disease.  Calling a consultation with pharmaceutical and drug companies was a beginning but what was accomplished there for follow-up?  What are the next steps in the process?

Perhaps one follow-up step might be to fund and nurture the research and efforts of NIH to find a cure for this virus. 

And finally, information released to the public should be carried out not by the politicians, but by the scientists (or their spokespersons).  This is not the time for politicizing the problems and making them look smaller or less important or someone else’s fault.  It is time for truth, for instruction, for assurance, for direction from experts, not from propagandists.  For instance, Dr. Anthony Fauci’s guidance for older persons (with underlying conditions such as heart disease) on not taking planes or cruise ships right now was useful to all parties concerned.

 

 “Process” is not something that excites the general public – at least not until a poor process shows itself to waste our time, cost us money, or simply cause inconveniences that interrupt our “pursuit of happiness.”  Procedural steps for getting things done cannot easily be omitted, ignored or abandoned.  They are essential for accomplishing the good outcomes we seek in our lives.  Yet, human nature being what it is, we often balk at following the dictates of directions, rules, procedures, and action steps.

 We like short-cuts; we don’t even mind surrogates who take care of niggly “fixes” for complicated items.  And, too many of us don’t seem to mind the lack of competent processes that exist in government.  Many seem quite pleased when their president chooses to ignore, undermine, or de-construct certain necessary procedures, like being briefed on intelligence-gathering.   But then, a global crisis comes along (that is more perceivable than climate change) and we find that when necessary processes for combatting a pandemic are being ignored, delayed or criticized for their cost or their political consequences, we are the potential victims of a disease that could be devastating for ourselves and/or our loved ones. 

Suddenly, we become much more attuned to the steps that must be taken to protect ourselves and others from this scourge.  We then wonder why our government is not acting fast enough to rid us of this threat.  And we find to our dismay that the Executive of our government isn’t that concerned about the numbers for they are relatively small, but the scientists tell us there is more to the story than that and we must get busy if we are to avoid the deadly effects of this global disease which seems to be spreading quickly from country to country.  Luckily, Congress took this more seriously and appropriated an additional $8.3 billion package to address this crisis.

Take Medicare-for-all as another example of the need for effective process.  It sounds good.  It could solve many of our heath care and health insurance problems. Something like it works in other developed nations.  But it is now only a proposal here at home.  I want to know something about how it would work and what it would require in dollars and cents.  Don’t you?  I want to know the process by which it would be initiated and maintained.  I want to know who would run it and how it would be administered.  I want to know what would not be covered, about how much I would have to pay in premiums and co-pays and deductibles, and whether I could keep my current supplemental if everything would not be covered.  There is more I want to know, of course, but process-type information is not available to any satisfying degree. 

We need an action plan, and we need information that will inform that plan.  We have neither.  We have some opinions from agencies and office-holders and we have some spending estimates from non-partisan government agencies like the Congressional Budget Office, but we don’t have enough actual evidence from single-payer systems already in existence in Canada, UK, Australia and other developed countries.

 

In my estimation, it comes down to information and statistical gathering and analysis, planning step-by-step implementation, experimenting in certain states as laboratories to test parts that need testing, and then the formulation of a step-by step process.   An over-simplification perhaps, but a list of necessary basics.  Without such planning, a sudden changeover to Medicare-for-all could prove to be disastrous.

      

 It’s time for citizens to get serious about questioning how things are being done – questioning the processes and procedures involved in our daily lives, in both the public (government) and private sectors.  PROCESS is not an option.  It is a necessity that requires closer scrutiny.