Monday, November 7, 2011

"Cain-gate" nothing but an unnecessary distraction

In recent days, GOP presidential front-runner Herman Cain has come under increasing fire, not only for his fatally flawed "9-9-9" tax reform plan, but also because two former female employees are now claiming that Cain sexually harrassed them years ago while head of the National Restaurant Association. This should come as no surprise to anyone who has been following presidential politics for any length of time. Cain has enjoyed a meteoric rise from near obscurity to the front of a crowded field of presidential contenders, many with much more experience on the national stage. And Cain is hardly the first candidate who has had to deal with allegations of past misdeeds. The question is, should those allegations be enough to derail his campaign? I don't think so.
I understand that when someone is running for president, they should rightfully come under increased scrutiny, both by their opponents and the public. This is especially true in Cain's case, since he was largely unknown prior to this election cycle. People don't know him yet. And they have a right -- no an obligation -- to learn as much as possible about the man who might one day be the most powerful person on earth. But I have felt for a long time that there are certain areas of a candidate's private life that should remain off limits to the prying eyes of the media and the public. This is one of those areas.
Proponents of the "bare all" approach to modern campaigning claim that exposing alleged past misdeeds like this is a question of character. They argue that past mistakes offer a peek at the candidate's morality and how they will govern if elected. I don't buy it.
I don't care who a candidate is having an affair with. That is a matter that should be left private, between a husband and a wife, not opened up for public scrutiny and comment. Nor do I care if a candidate experimented with drugs in his early 20s. Everyone has made mistakes in their past, and unless the candidate is currently addicted to drugs, it is irrelevant. The question voters should ask themselves is, what is that candidate doing TODAY?
The problem I have with the current "cut-throat" style of campaigning is that it discourages good, well-qualified people from ever seeking public office. Why would anyone ever run if he or she knows that every mistake they've ever made is going to be exposed to the harsh glare of public scrutiny? In addition, red herrings such as "Cain-gate" only distract the public from the discussion of real issues.
Consider: Prior to Politico breaking this story, the GOP field and the public were engaged in a meaningful discussion about tax reform in America and the inequity of the current system. Now? No one's talking about "9-9-9." They're too busy trying to determine whether Cain is guilty and whether he'll stay in the race.
So, how should Cain handle this? If I were him, I would immediately call a press conference to deal with this issue head-on, before the story gets any bigger. If he's guilty, I simply would own up to his mistakes and offer a heartfelt apology. If not, I would still offer an apology for anything I might have said and done that could have been misconstrued. Then, I would answer reporters' questions as succinctly and honestly as possible. The worst thing Cain could do at this point is to simply ignore the story, hoping it will go away. That's not going to happen. And his silence will only feed public and media speculation that he's hiding something.
It's unfortunate that "Cain-gate" has garnered as many headlines as it has in recent days. Cain must deal with it now. Once he does, we can finally get back to dealing with issues that really matter.

No comments: