Something we left behind
Saturday, February 3, 2007 at 11:44PM I have been thinking about lack of eloquence of the people we elect to represent us, or, in the case of G.W. Bush, the people we almost elect, but not quite. When I listen to the news on the radio, I wince when one figure or another reels out a prepared statement so obviously crafted and repeated that I can visualize the wear marks on the diphthongs. These people pile euphemism on cliché and dip it in pabulum before daring to present it to the public. There is nothing a politician’s handlers fear more than the opportunity or necessity for spontaneous speech.
I should note that there are a number of clever high school students in debate teams who could embarrass our congressional leaders in a true academic confrontation. By debate I mean the establishment of a proposition, the presentation of arguments for and against it, and the rebuttal of opposing points. The alternating recitation of stump speech fragments is not a debate, even if the networks call it so.
This is not just a matter of my taste for true debate. The lack of substantive debate in the public eye allows sloppy thinkers with sloppy ideas to ascend to high office. They never have to deeply understand what they are talking about. They know that their opponents will be delivering entirely predictable statements in predictable venues, and that they will have time to prepare their carefully crafted, emotionally satisfying, entirely irrelevant responses.
Something we left behind when we parted company with the British Crown 230 years ago was the custom of Question Time. At first only written questions were submitted to the government, but by the late 19th century, the Prime Minister and the ministers in charge of his departments had to face direct verbal questioning.
From a fact sheet published by the British Parliament:
“Procedure at Question Time
Question Time currently takes place in the House of Commons at about 2.35pm on Mondays and Tuesdays, 11.35am on Wednesdays and 10.35am on Thursdays, after Prayers. In practice, the question period lasts about an hour on each of these days. Oral questions are not taken on Fridays.
The Speaker sets the process in motion by calling the Member whose question is first on the printed Order of Business. The Member stands up and says, "Number one, Mister Speaker". As the text of the question is set out on the Order of Business it is not necessary for the Member to read it out. To follow the proceedings clearly it is necessary to have a copy to hand. The Minister then answers the question. When the larger Departments, such as the Home Office or Trade and Industry, answer questions, the Secretary of State will be accompanied by several junior Ministers who will share the task of responding to Members.
Supplementaries
From that point further exchanges are unscripted. The Member who asked the original question is normally the first to be called to ask a follow-up question, or supplementary, on the same subject. When that supplementary has been answered by the Minister, the Speaker may call other Members to put supplementaries, usually alternating between the Government and Opposition sides of the House. Quite often, Members will rise from their seats in order to attract the Speaker’s attention. This is known as “catching the Speaker’s eye”.”
Watch the following video clip and try to visualize George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, or any senior U.S. politician avoiding utter humiliation in this exchange:
GW standing in for Tony Blair? It is beyond the power of my imagination.
This kind of debate, repeated four times a week, would filter out the human tape recorders that dominate our government. It would also make CSPAN a contender with Comedy Central. In order to survive an exchange like this a politician has to actually have an understanding of the issue at hand. Agree or disagree with Blair as you like, but you have to admit that he has significant mental firepower compared to our own leaders. With this kind of performance as a job requirement, low wattage bulbs like George wouldn’t even be considered as candidates, much less elected. Think of Question Time as a form of intellectual, if not ideological, quality control. Perhaps it isn’t too late to import the custom.
Reader Comments (1)
I ageree with you Hilton, but you have to remember that the last politican willing to speak off the cuff on the national stage was Howard Dean. He was no Winston Churchill, but he was ingenuous and willing to give and take with questioners. When he let a little unscripted emotion slip into his victory speech, the corporate media whores, stunned or frightened by his genuine excitment, repeated gang raped him on national television.
Here's another idea: perhaps there could be a public speaking version of this American Idol show. People could perform speeches, original or historical, instead of songs.
Cheers,
Robby