Mike Billington's Blog

An oath is forever

This post is not about writing... just something I thought should be said.


“I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice so help me God.

In October, 1966 I swore that oath when I enlisted in the Army.
I took it seriously then.
I still do.
And because I still do, I must point out that although it required me to obey the orders of the President and my officers during my enlistment, nowhere does it say that my obligation to the Constitution ended when I was discharged.
No, that oath is forever.
Simply put, it means that when I raised my right hand and swore, before God, that I would support and defend the Constitution I committed myself to honor that oath until my dying breath.
That’s why I was so saddened to see a mob of men and women bent on overthrowing the government of the United States storm the Capitol last week. It was disgraceful, it was unpatriotic, and it was criminal.
What saddened me even more is the fact that there were many veterans in that unruly mob who once swore the same oath I did. Apparently, it didn’t mean the same thing to them that it meant to me.
Elected officials and cops swear similar oaths. It was infuriating, therefore, to discover that there were elected officials and police officers from other cities in the mob that was hell bent on bringing down the government. Apparently, the oath they took did not mean very much to them.
What was even more infuriating is the fact that this gang of thugs who rampaged through the halls of Congress claimed to be patriots.
They are not patriots.
Make no mistake about that.
They carried Confederate flags into the very heart of the Union.
Is that what being a patriot means these days?
They wore shirts extolling twisted Nazi ideals.
Is that what passes for patriotism today?
The answer to both those questions is simple.
No, it does not.
In the end, it comes down to this: Those that never swore the oath disgraced themselves, their families, and all Americans who served and are serving honorably in the armed forces of these United States.
And those that once swore the oath forever dishonored themselves by forsaking it.
Why?
Because an oath is forever.

What Sue Bird can teach writers

I've been a writer most of my life.
I was, until my legs went south on me a few years ago, also a basketball player. I've played the game in gyms, on outdoor courts, and once - in Africa - with a bunch of National Guard troops in a jungle clearing.
(They were assigned to the Rwandan relief effort and, as a reporter, I was writing about their exploits. One day a sergeant from Boston attached a basketball hoop to the fuselage of a downed transport plane and the game was on. It wasn't elegant - it's hard to be elegant in combat boots and fatigues - but it was basketball and a welcome respite - at least for an hour - from the horrors of that brutal civil war and its aftermath.)
Which brings me to my point - what can WNBA All Star point guard Sue Bird teach authors about writing?
The answer is, simply, a lot.
For those of you who might not be familiar with Bird, she is among the most decorated basketball players in history. A national champion at UConn when she was in college, she is an Olympic gold medalist, WNBA champion - 4 times - and a perennial all star. She is also an articulate advocate for civil rights causes.
So what makes her so good?
She is, after all, not the tallest, strongest, or - by her own admission - the fastest player on her team.
What she is, however, is a keen observer.
She sees the entire court. Her eyes are open to opportunities either to pass to a teammate or take a shot herself. She is aware of what her opponents are doing and seeks to exploit their mistakes.
To be good writers, authors must also be keen observers. They must see not one or two players, but the entire court. They must be aware of the time left on the clock, the referees, and even the opposing coaches.
In short, the better their vision, the better they write. The more they can see, the easier it is for them to incorporate significant details into their stories. Those details may be anything from a sentence to a paragraph to a chapter but no matter how big or small, those details add richness to the overall story.
And that's important because those details help to give the reader context. They help to put the reader in both time and place. They help to flesh out characters - even minor ones.
Bird is also keenly aware of her limitations. Rather than see those limitations as handicaps, however, she uses her awareness of them to outsmart her opponents. They may be taller, or stronger, or faster but they rarely get the best of her because she understands how they might try to take advantage of her and takes steps to deny them that opportunity.
Authors must also be aware of their limitations. When writing mystery novels, for example, they need to understand that just watching a couple of CSI episodes does not make them experts in police procedure or forensic science. They need to do research - painful, exhausting research in some cases - so their readers don't read a paragraph, shake their heads, and put the book down forever because it's just not realistic.
Finally, authors need persistence.
Bird has suffered through injuries during her long career and yet she did not let them deter her from her goals.
Sadly, too many authors are not persistent. They have great ideas for stories and yet they do not follow through because - despite what some people think - writing is hard work. It demands not only creativity but also discipline.
I'm certain there were days when Bird thought it would be okay to skip practice because she'd rather do anything else but did not because doing so could mean she would not achieve her goals.
Authors need that same sense of discipline, of dedication. Giving in to the temptation to take time off from researching or writing means there is a good chance your novel will never get written.
It's as simple as that.

Organize my bookshelves... nope...

Throughout most of my life I have been a fairly well-organized person.
I pretty much had to be in the Army - where it was a requirement, not an option - and, later, as a journalist for nearly 50 years during which time I often worked on three or four stories in a day. If I hadn't been organized I would have never gotten them done on deadline.
However, the one part of my life that has never been organized is my bookshelves. I am an eclectic reader and so I've never felt the need to organize my books by genre or author or whatever.
I mention this because over the past few weeks I've seen several YouTube videos from other readers about their day-long efforts to organize their bookshelves and it got me to wondering why anyone would do that.
I can't see a practical reason for it, nor an emotional one.
In fact, emotionally speaking, I'd rather not have my bookshelves organized. Browsing my bookshelves for something to read is an adventure. I'm never really sure what will strike my fancy on any given day and so when I go looking for something to read I might pick up a Raymond Chandler mystery, or an autobiography, or even a romance novel all standing side by side on one of my shelves. In truth, discovering a book I haven't read in a while is a little like unexpectedly running into an old friend on the street... in other words, a real pleasure.
There's another emotional benefit, at least to my way of thinking, for not organizing my bookshelves. It's simply this: It can genuinely lift my spirits when I unexpectedly find a book that I haven't read in a while and remember just how good it was when I first turned its pages. Seeing it nestled between other books can - and usually does - bring back a flood of memories about where I was at the time I read it, both physically and emotionally. I like that, even when those memories might be bittersweet, because it helps me keep things in perspective - and that's a good thing, at least in my case.
Anyway, that's my take on organizing your bookshelves. I'd love to hear how you feel about it.

https://www.amazon.com/-/e/B001KCABGK

The importance of ordinary things

In the painting, a red bicycle leans against the worn brown wall of an old building.
The wall has graffiti sprayed on it: Not street art, no, just undecipherable graffiti.
There are no people in this hyper-realistic painting, no animals.
Just a bicycle to suggest that, somewhere, the rider could be nearby.
I saw this large painting at an exhibition in the Anquin's Gallery in Reus, Spain and it immediately struck me that artist Carlos Diaz was on to something.
Later, when I had the opportunity to talk to him about his work, he said he felt strongly that it is important to capture the importance of ordinary scenes; of ordinary things.
I wish more writers felt that way and included more ordinary things in their novels.
I wish I did.
The reason: It is upon those ordinary scenes, those ordinary things, that great stories are built.
Take this painting - one of several Diaz had on exhibit that night - as an example.
On the surface, this scene is dead ordinary.
But let your mind wander, just a bit; let your imagination flow.
Is, for example, the bicycle a signal? Was it parked against this wall for a reason? If you write spy novels, perhaps it's a signal that the person you are supposed to meet is waiting for you. Is the color of the bicycle significant? Does a red bicycle mean the meeting is called off?
If you write mysteries, you might wonder where the owner of the bicycle is and why he left it leaning against the wall of this old building. The building has graffiti on its walls indicating that this is not a high class neighborhood so why did he leave it leaning against a wall where it could easily be stolen?
And if you write another kind of novel, just maybe the bicycle was ridden to this old building by someone who - born to wealth - has had that money and power stripped away so that now his only means of transportation to a low-paying job is his bike.
Or perhaps he's a young man with a good brain and burning ambition who will one day make a vast fortune?
Or...
Well, you get the picture: This is an ordinary scene with ordinary things that allows us the opportunity to use our imaginations.
And when we, as writers, do that we craft better stories; ones that ring true with readers who see these ordinary scenes and ordinary things every day. They do not live in the rarefied atmosphere of heroic fiction. No, our readers live at street level where the sidewalks have cracks, the streets have potholes, and bored people armed with spray cans vandalize other people's homes and businesses.
As writers, we should pay attention to that fact and help readers relate to our characters and our narratives by recognizing the importance of ordinary scenes.
Of ordinary things.

https://www.amazon.com/-/e/B001KCABGK

Why you should review books...

This will sound self serving but stick with me because this really isn't about an author's desire to get more reviews for his books.
It's about that small percentage of people who actually pick up a book and read it.
It's about some of the reasons why they should review those books.
Simply put, doing so will enrich your reading experience and will also, probably, make it more enjoyable.
The reason: If you plan to review a book you'll read it more carefully. You'll take the time to know the characters, follow the narrative, examine the plot, and admire (or hate) the writer's style.
But, you might say, I do that anyway.
The question is, do you really?
Chances are the answer to that is "no."
Instead, it's much more likely that you'll blaze through a book while you're trying to cram yet one more thing into the next 24 hours. You'll skip a chapter or two, gloss over a few pages that might contain important insights into the minds of the characters but which, for one reason or another, don't seem to be interesting.
Why is that?
If you're an American reader - and, sadly, there are precious few of them - you've been raised on television programs in which, for example, complex crimes are committed and solved within roughly 48 minutes.
You've been raised in a culture that puts a higher value on brevity than it does on content and background. We weren't taught to appreciate nuance, shading, or motivation.
Instead, just like the fictional Sgt. Joe Friday of "Dragnet" fame, we were raised with the idea that story doesn't matter.
"Just the facts, ma'am," Friday intoned week after week to his television audience.
What he was really saying is that motivation isn't important; that circumstances don't count.
He was saying that human beings - arguably the most complex and complicated life forms on the planet - can be reduced to the ones and zeros of a computer program.
And now that we live in a digital world, that mistaken belief has become all but sacred text.
Twitter, Instagram, and many other forms of social media put limits on the amount of story you can tell, for example. Instead, they want you to write what amounts to a headline and then provide your cyber audience with a link to a longer article that you hope someone will actually click on and then read.
But I'm here to tell you that brevity is not natural when it comes to human beings and their need for context.
Their need for storytelling.
The men and women who painted on cave walls understood that need. They understood at some level that it was/is important to create a narrative and not just state the bald fact that a Mammoth was killed.
How was it killed? How many hunters did it take to kill it? Were any hunters injured or killed in the pursuit of the animal? How many days did it take for the hunt to be successful?
The answers to these questions can be found on cave walls across Europe.
It comes down to this: Life is more complicated than a series of bullet points and to fully appreciate that fact we need stories.
And, just as we need stories, we need to read them carefully to understand what the writer is trying to tell us about the human condition.
So, my advice to you is to write reviews of the books that you've read, or at least to read them as though you were actually going to take the time to review them.
You'll get more value from the books you read if you do.
And that, as Joe Friday might have said, "is just a fact, ma'am."

https://www.amazon.com/-/e/B001KCABGK

On cats and creativity

I am a writer.
Two cats live with me.
Now many people would say that they "own" a couple of cats but, to me anyway, that would be incorrect. No one truly "owns" a cat.
That's not PETA talking, that's just a fact. Dogs and cattle have been domesticated. Cats haven't been, not in any true sense of the word. They agree to share space with humans but they retain their independence and, periodically, they feel obliged to remind us of that fact.
That's not to say that they can't be loving companions. They certainly can be and mine are.
But, and this is important, they do so on their own terms.
So, what does all that have to do with the creative process?
For me, there are three answers to that single question.
First, and perhaps most important, is the fact that cats never lose their sense of wonder.
No matter how old they are, they are always fascinated by flies in the summer, by small boxes they can hardly squeeze into, and by random bits of paper. They watch the world through eyes that are alive with curiosity about those things they can see, taste, smell, hear, and touch.
If you are a writer of any stripe - poet, journalist, novelist, essayist - it's a quality that's essential to the creative process. If you do not see the world as a wonderful place - sometimes terrifying, yes, but always wonderful in the full meaning of the word - I can't imagine that you can write a book, a poem, an essay or a news story.
In fact, I can't imagine that you'd even want to do any of those things.
The point: If we lose our sense of wonder about anything and everything we lose the creative spark.
Second, cats are keen observers.
That's another vital part of the creative process. Many people stumble through life in a sort of haze. They don't notice what the people around them are wearing as they walk down the street. They don't register the smell of frying fish coming from their neighbor's apartment or the patterns that shadows make as winter sunlight passes through the branches of a tree that has lost its leaves. They are too busy trying to get someplace, to go somewhere.
Cats aren't like that. In the wild they are both predators and prey and survival demands that they be aware of everything around them. It's possible to startle a cat, but that's a rare occurrence and something that only happens to cats that are living in a home.
As writers we must also be keen observers. If we are, we can add those small but essential details to our work that makes reading a story, a poem, a Page One article, or an essay an enriching, pleasurable, and rewarding experience.
If we aren't, we don't add those details and our work is flat, boring.
Finally, cats are unpredictable.
Completely unpredictable.
They can be playing with a ball or with each other and suddenly stop and wander off for a nap. They can be sitting in your lap, purring as you scratch behind their ears and, just as suddenly, bite your thumb and then jump to the floor and stalk off.
Why?
No one really knows because no matter how long you and your cat(s) have shared living space you can never truly know what goes on in their minds.
As writers we also need that quality.
We need to be unpredictable in the characters we create, the situations they find themselves in, their relationships to other characters, and their reactions to other elements in the narrative.
It's easy, for example, to write about the brave soldier who never flinches - easy and boring. There's no depth to that character. If, however, our brave soldier flinches but goes forward anyway, he's a more interesting character. He's even more interesting if - despite past heroic acts - he not only flinches but runs away.
Is he a coward?
Has he just seen too much?
The point is, being unpredictable keeps the reader interested, involved.
So, I am a writer.
Two cats live with me.
And they are constant reminders that creativity demands a sense of wonder, keen observation and unpredictability.

Mike Billington, author of "Blood Debt"
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00OJCCII2

Why don't more Americans read?

There have never been more opportunities for Americans to read a book.
Never.
You can buy a hardback book, a paperback book, read online, even on your cellphone. You can store books on other mobile devices and read them in parks, at lunch, on airplanes and trains, even in your car or on your boat. You can read them at home, at the beach, at lunch, in your office, or while sitting around the campfire during a weekend in the woods.
And there has never been a time when more books are available for Americans to read. Thanks to the emergence of independent publishing, there has been an explosion of books by new authors in every genre imaginable. A Steampunk fan? Yeah, you can find thousands of Steampunk books online. Like detective novels? Yes, they're available too as are romance novels, short story collections, poetry anthologies, science fiction books, and... well, you name it and it's available often at bargain basement prices.
So, why don't more Americans read?
As a retired journalist turned novelist and a lifelong reader, I've come to think there are three main reasons why the vast majority of Americans don't read. I could, of course, be wrong about this but, honestly, I don't think I am.
The first reason is that for more than 40 years now reading has been de-emphasized in public schools.
An example: When my son was in junior high school, I discovered that despite the fact he was apparently doing well in his classes, he was functionally illiterate. He couldn't spell simple words and hadn't ever been required to write a book report. I spoke to a couple of his teachers about this and they told me that the "new emphasis" was on math and science, not the "soft" subjects like English and literature.
But not being able to read and comprehend what is written on a page is critical to math and science just as it is to every other subject in the curriculum. That's what I thought, anyway. His teachers, however, disagreed, Filmstrips, lectures, and other aids were taking the place of reading some dusty old book about algebra or chemistry.
I went home, canceled our cable television service (much to the horror of his mother) and my son and I began reading "Treasure Island" after dinner. When we finished that we read "Moby Dick." Within six months his reading levels were far beyond the junior high level and these days (I'm happy to say) he's a former English teacher turned junior high principal who puts a real emphasis on reading at his school.
The second reason why Americans don't read is the myth - and it is a myth - that Americans are just too darn busy to read.
We like to think of ourselves as busy, busy, busy; always on the move, always hustling to get ahead, get a promotion, get a new job.
But are we really?
No.
We're not.
How do I know this?
I know it because we're a nation that spends endless hours in front of television sets and computer screens watching re-runs of shows that we've already seen so often we can recite the dialogue from memory.
When we're not doing that we're watching professional football programming (including both pre-game and post-game analysis) from noon to 9 p.m. on Sundays, for half the night on Mondays, all day on Saturdays during the collegiate season, and for hours on end on any other night that a game is being played.
We watch March Madness at the end of the NCAA basketball season, baseball games in the summer and fall, and any other sporting event that looks even mildly interesting.
Too busy to spend 30 minutes a day reading?
To borrow a phrase from ESPN: "C'mon Man!"
Finally, based on my observation, millions of Americans don't read because doing so could force them to see the world through different eyes.
That's not something many Americans are comfortable doing. They're locked into certain beliefs about what the world SHOULD be like in their minds. Because reading books might force them to consider that what they've been told by their favorite sports stars, or movie stars, politicians, pastors, or their neighbors might be wrong they just aren't willing to take that risk.
That's really too bad because reading has enriched my life for these past 70 years. It's taught me tolerance, patience, and brought me both joy and sadness. It's taught me how to throw a knuckleball (you don't actually use your knuckles but your fingertips), how to be a better bowler, how to make codfish taste like lobster, bake a pie, and even how to take apart, clean, and put a carburetor back together. (I know, cars don't come with carburetors these days but when they did, I knew how to fix them thanks to books.)
My point is this: Opening a book is akin to shrugging into a backpack, walking out the door, and heading down the road just to see what's on the other side of the hill. Reading really is an adventure that can take you to distant places -including distant planets - where you can meet fascinating people, both real and imagined.
And it's useful, especially if you're single and need to know how to cook something other than spaghetti.
So do yourself a favor America, pick up a book and give reading a try.
Who knows... you might even like it.

https://www.amazon.com/-/e/B001KCABGK

Barbara Bush was a champion for literacy

I have been a writer for most of my life but before I ever put pen to paper I was - and still am - a reader.
I know, I know... that sounds old fashioned in a digital world in which sound and images fly at us from television sets, laptops, and cellphones but it's true. So, while most Americans boast that they haven't actually read a book since high school or college, I still carry a couple of them in my backpack as I go for my daily walk and I have a couple hundred on my Kindle.
Which brings me to the point of this blog: I'm writing this now by way of commenting on the passing of former First Lady Barbara Bush and an incident that occurred back when I worked as a business columnist for the Sun-Sentinel in Fort Lauderdale.
In those days, I focused a fair number of my columns on the importance of education, specifically the need for those who want to be successful to read a wide variety of books. In one of those columns I wrote about South Florida teachers who were so committed to that idea that they were spending their own money to buy books for students who couldn't otherwise afford them.
After writing it I then wrote a letter to Mrs. Bush and included a copy of that column because, as First Lady, she was a champion for improved literacy. I must admit that I didn't actually expect to hear back from her; my letter was little more than an effort to let her know that there were people out in the world who agreed with her position. I was, therefore, more than a little surprised to receive a letter from the White House saying that she appreciated the fact I had let her know about these remarkable teachers and that she had personally written to each of them to thank them for what they had done on behalf of their students.
I mention this because she didn't have to do that. As First Lady she received thousands of letters from people on a range of issues. But while she could have simply filed my letter, she took the time to respond to me and to those teachers - I hadn't asked her to write them - because literacy was a cause she truly did believe in. It wasn't, for her, some public relations issue - something that her advisers dreamed up but which she didn't really care about.
I thought about that letter of mine and her responses to me and those teachers when I heard the news of her passing and it struck me once again how deeply committed to literacy she really was. Since then I have heard from many friends and readers who took a moment to share similar stories. Some are teachers, a few are librarians, and at least one is a doctor at a hospital where Mrs. Bush spent time reading to children when she visited it.
Now, I have to also admit that I did not agree with many of the policies of her husband or her son when they occupied the White House. That said, I also have to say that I was terribly saddened at her passing because her death means the world has lost a real advocate for the cause of literacy.
Reading is, as Tina Fey once said, the foundation of everything. If you can read you can learn mathematics, write computer codes, pen a novel or a movie script, or simply spend a quiet hour or two relaxing with a good book.
Barbara Bush understood that.
I just wish more people did.

https://www.amazon.com/-/e/B001KCABGK

Hallmark Mysteries? Really?

I'd stopped by Dani Smith's apartment in Westgate, Florida to talk about a sequel to "Murder in the Rainy Season" and was surprised when Dana Redwing opened the door.
The reason for my surprise: Dana is a character in my Steampunk novel "The Ashtabula Irregulars."
"Don't just stand there with your mouth open," Dana said. "Come in."
I entered the apartment and was surprised yet again to find Dani and four other female characters from my novels scattered around the living room. They were watching a movie on a wall-mounted, large-screen television set.
"Ladies," I said. "What's the occasion?"
"We're watching Hallmark Mystery movies this whole weekend," Dani said as she made room for me on the couch. "Take off your jacket and stay awhile. We've got sandwiches, a big pot of chili, and plenty of wine and beer."
I shrugged off my jacket and, after settling onto the couch, I asked what, to me, seemed like a couple of obvious questions.
"Hallmark Mysteries? Really?"
Six pairs of eyes swiveled to stare at me.
"What's so unusual about that?" asked Marcy Pantano, the main character in my novel "Corpus Delectable."
"Well, I, uh... well, I mean, you are some of the strongest, most independent women in fiction and I, well I just didn't think Hallmark Mysteries would be, you know, your cup of tea."
Dani, a former MP who is now a police officer, shook her head.
"Have you ever watched any of these mysteries?" she asked.
I shook my head.
"Well, then, you should," said Melanie Palazzo, a reporter and one of the main characters in my mystery novel "Jacks or Better."
I shook my head.
"I don't get it," I said. "Aren't these movies a little, well, fluffy for women like you? I kind of pictured you all as fans of more action-oriented films."
Beverly Gray, who plays a major role in "The Ashtabula Irregulars," sighed.
"Spoken like a true man," she said and smiled. "You just assume that because we're strong females that we'd be more interested in James Bond than Hallmark Mysteries."
There were nods of agreement around the room.
"Let me explain," said Marlene Thomas.
"Please do," I said.
"Okay, it's like this," she said. "First of all, we're watching mysteries that feature strong, independent, smart, and very capable women. They just happen to be Hallmark movies.
"Second, most of these movies are based on books that were written by women and most of the screenplays were written by women."
"Okay," I said, "but..."
"But nothing," said Marlene, a state legislator in my novel "The Session."
She looked around the room and then continued.
"Let's take Hannah Swensen, the main character in the 'Murder, She Baked' mysteries. She runs her own successful business. She's not just a great baker, she's a great person who's even willing to help a rival succeed. She gets involved in a murder case and solves it when the police are stumped. She's a women who has some doubts about herself when it comes to her love life but she doesn't let that slow her down. She's attractive and blonde but no airhead. What's not to like?"
"But the cases these women get involved in... aren't they, well, a little on the light side?" I asked.
"Well," Beverly said, "if you think murder is 'on the light side' then we really need to discuss just why you'd think that."
I leaned back.
"Okay," I said. "What's this one about?"
On the screen a blonde woman was on the roof of an old house. She was peeking through a small window.
"One of my favorites," Dana said. "A family disappeared a few years earlier and no trace of them was ever found. The heroine, an assistant librarian, and her boyfriend are looking for some evidence about the disappearance. The reason: They discovered some bloodstained towels in a walled-off closet in the house she just bought and is renovating. The police closed the case years ago because they never found any bodies or any indication of foul play."
"So what happens?" I asked.
Dana grinned.
"You'll just have to watch and see," she said.
I did.
In fact, I wound up spending the entire weekend with them watching more than a dozen movies.
And in doing so I discovered that what the ladies told me was true. The mysteries were engaging, the female characters were smart, determined, and believable. The dialogue was intelligently written, the plots were logical, and the productions were well done. The stories relied more on characterization than on violence and the settings were realistic.
Frankly, I found myself wishing that more writers would take a cue from Hallmark and start creating female characters with those attributes. I read too many books where the women are - to be blunt - little more than window dressing.
I also learned a valuable lesson: Don't discount books and movies because of what you THINK you know about the genre.
Judge them on their merits, something you can only do if you take a chance and read or watch them.

To learn more about these characters of mine, visit: https://www.amazon.com/-/e/B001KCABGK

You can't run government like a business...

Marlene Thomas sat down on the park bench beside me and sighed.
"So," I asked, "what's bothering you?"
Her shoulders slumped a little and she sighed again.
"It's so frustrating," she said, "to listen to so many elected officials blather on and on about how we have to run government like a business. It just makes me want to scream."
I nodded.
"I don't know how many times I heard that when I was covering politicians," I said. "I'd always follow up that statement with a question: 'How, exactly, should we do that?' No one ever had an answer. It was always just something that fell out of their mouths because they thought it sounded good to voters."
Marlene, one of the principal characters in my political mystery novel "The Session," seemed surprised.
"Really? You mean they didn't have any idea how to run government like a business?" she asked.
"Not one of them," I replied. "And I covered politics in Albany, Tallahassee, Dover, and Washington, D.C."
Marlene shook her head.
"Would you like to know how to do that? Run government like a business, I mean," she said.
"Sure," I replied.
"Okay," she said, "here's how it would work."
She reached into her purse and pulled out a notepad and a pencil. With quick strokes, she sketched an outline of the United States.
"In the first place," she said, "let's assume the U.S. is a Fortune 500 corporation. The President is the CEO and Congress is the board of directors. The federal judiciary is the corporate legal team. With me so far?"
"Yes," I said.
"Now, we won't go way back into history but if we did I'd start with the Civil War. After the Union defeated the Confederacy any good CEO would have suspended or fired employees who were that insubordinate. In the case of our fictional corporation, that would have meant stripping the people in those states that were part of the rebellion of their rights as citizens. In essence, they'd be living in territories under U.S. supervision in the same way, for example, that the citizens of Puerto Rico do. That means people in those states cannot vote in national elections and they can only send non-voting members to Congress."
"So," I said, "they'd be treated as second-class citizens?"
"Exactly," Marlene said.
"But," she added, "we all know that's not what happened. Instead, the federal government has poured billions upon billions of dollars into the South over several generations and Southerners like Lyndon Johnson and Jimmy Carter were even elected President. Tell me that would have happened at a mega-corporation."
I shook my head.
"It wouldn't have," I said.
Marlene, who is a state Legislator in my novel "The Session," used her pencil to draw a square around what would be the states of Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi.
"So, instead of going back to the 1860s, we go back only 50 years," she said. "If we do a cost/benefit analysis of these three states we see that the federal government gives them many times more money than it gets from them in taxes. We build highways, bridges, maintain military bases, and what do we get in return?"
I shook my head.
"I don't know exactly," I said.
"Very little," Marlene said, "and every time a hurricane hits one or all of these places, we're stuck with huge reconstruction costs."
"So?" I asked.
"So if I was the CEO of a Fortune 500 corporation I'd sell them off. And even if I didn't want to, my board of directors would demand that I did. They're sucking up huge amounts of money from the bottom line while contributing very little. They'd have to go."
"If," I said, "the government was run like a business, you mean."
"Yes, if the government was run like a business we'd revoke their status as states. We'd take away their right to vote and stop pouring billions of taxpayer dollars into states that consistently rank among the lowest in education as well as health care for the poor and middle class."
"That's harsh," I said.
"No," Marlene said, "that's business."
I thought back to my days as a reporter in Delaware when the DuPont Corporation sold off many of its low-performing businesses.
"I see what you mean," I said.
"There'd be another, hidden benefit, if we did that," Marlene said.
"Oh?"
"Yes," she said. "Other states that are in the same boat would likely start making improvements in their social and health care programs. They'd likely start doing all they could to prove to the rest of the country that they are worth keeping around as states. They'd boost their state tax rates so they could actually start paying for infrastructure work they need rather than whining to the federal government about their bad roads and bridges. They'd start cleaning up their own environmental messes rather than asking Washington to do it."
"That wouldn't be such a bad thing," I said.
"No, not on the surface it wouldn't. However," Marlene said, "the United States is not a Fortune 500 corporation and government isn't designed to run like a business.
"Government exists to meet the country's needs whether that means providing for a common defense or taking care of its poorest citizens. It is supposed to protect the people from harm and that includes protecting them from sleazy businesses that try to rip innocent people off or pollute our rivers and lakes. Government's only true purpose is to serve the people who pay taxes so that it can, in fact, serve the people - all of the people - who live and work in this country."
I nodded.
"You've convinced me," I said, smiling.
She smiled back.
"Now, if we could only convince those blowhards in Washington, then maybe we could move on and do some real work for the people who pay their salaries," she said.
"We live in hope," I said.
"Yeah," she said, "but let's also hope we don't die in despair..."

To read more about Marlene Thomas in "The Session," visit Amazon at https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00DVXID0W

https://www.amazon.com/-/e/B001KCABGK