What if parents had to be elected?

Would a Kid Vote for a Spanking?

The View from the Middle

Brenda and I have had the joy, challenge and responsibility of raising two daughters who are now grown and married, but the other day I was reflecting about what transpired, especially in the early years. 

First, I remembered the good times.  Parents get to do some great things with their kids.  There were the gift giving times like birthdays and Christmas.  For those of you who don’t have children yet, there is nothing like watching a little girl or boy come down the stairs for their first Christmas morning.  There are big eyes, laughter and hugs all around. 

Birthdays are special too, even when they don’t completely understand what is going on.  As early as two they understand that this is their special day, and they grasp the concept of “presents” early on.

Then there are the times when parent get to be heroes.  Children will always get sick and parents get to (have to) nurse them back to health.  There are skinned knees that we get to bandage and bumps and bruises galore that we will sooth.  If this was all there was to parenting, parental approval ratings would always be 100%.

But unfortunately, there is also the discipline side.  Parents must teach lessons that will benefit children later in their lives, but cause pain in the present.  A spanking at age two can teach a child that they have to respect others and their possessions.  Not everything is “mine”. 

Later in life, parents may have to tell an extravagant child that there is no more money for their latest desire and they may actually have to do without.  Resources of all kinds are not unlimited and the sooner a child learns this, the better.

This got me to wonder.  What if parents had to be elected every year?  Would they cut back or even eliminate the discipline side of their jobs?  Would the children have the wisdom to vote for discipline that will benefit them in the long run?  Would they actually vote “for” a spanking?

That’s when it occurred to me, “Doesn’t this highlight the problem we have in Washington?”  Our government has a dual responsibility to its citizens.  It clearly performs a protection role.  Our military is an obvious example of that function, but we also have social programs that are designed to help people when they have figuratively fallen and skinned their knees.  Unemployment insurance and Medicaid are examples of taking care of people who need the help and these are popular programs, especially if it is YOUR knee that is skinned. 

Then there are programs that act a lot like Christmas or birthday presents.  Our government offers grants and tax incentives to millions of people across the country to help make their particular dream projects come true.  You can bet that these programs are very popular, especially if it is your project that gets realized.

But our government also has a disciplinary responsibility.  If a person violates the law they need to be punished as a penalty and a deterrent for future violations.  This is not as popular as gift giving for sure.  How do you feel after you’ve received a traffic ticket?

Washington also has the responsibility, as parents do, to say “no” at times in order to act responsibly or to teach a lesson.  While we all may want to give everyone everything they want, and to eliminate poverty and suffering everywhere, we must realize two things.  First, that is impossible, and second, even trying may be fiscally irresponsible.

We (the government) have made promises that are impossible to keep.  These promises were well intentioned, but we know now that keeping them will endanger the very freedom and liberty that our country was founded on.  We must say “no”, but that creates a dilemma for both politicians and citizens.

Do we have politicians who are honest enough and courageous enough to eliminate or reform programs that we just can’t afford?  Can they withhold excessive support that will teach their constituents valuable lessons about work ethic, honesty and living with the consequences of their choices?

  Finally, can we as citizens muster the wisdom and character to elect a government that can protect us when we need it but also discipline us when we require it.  Can we channel John Kennedy’s spirit when he said, “Ask NOT what your country can do for you.”  Can we admit that we shouldn’t expect our government to rescue us from the consequences of our own poor choices? In other words, are we smart enough to vote for the potential of a spanking when we need it?