Political Experience--Does Experience Matter When Electing a President?

David Zannucci - Experience is a quality that has been discussed at great length during this presidential campaign. But what sort of experience does someone need to have to be President? All the Constitution says is that you must have been born in the United States and have reached the age of thirty-five. Simple enough. But the American people seem to think if you haven’t spent your life as a governor or senator, then you can’t handle the job. What nonsense.
What does work in the Senate have to do with leading the country? Does arguing the merits of meaningless bills with 99 other people in a room in Washington DC really make you qualified to lead the country? What about governor? Does a term as governor of Arkansas or Texas really prepare someone for the complexities of the White House? I think not.
As another contributor to this blog pointed out, the President often relies on advisors. And not just for international relations and the military, but for the economy, the tax code, the judiciary and many other duties. Often the best leaders know how to pick advisors, who to listen to, how to delegate authority, etc. In fact, it often seems that the most important quality as President is being able to let go of certain issues and let others do their jobs.
Jefferson Davis and Jimmy Carter are both considered brilliant men, and from what experience we say we need in a President, both should have made great leaders. Instead, they were ‘control freaks’ (to use the scientific term) and spent so much of their time handling duties that could have been easily handled by subordinates that not much got done. Neither is considered a great leader today.
On the other hand, Chester A. Arthur is considered one of our best Gilded Age presidents. And what experience did he have prior to becoming president? He had been the collector for the port of New York and spent about 5 months as Vice-President. Woodrow Wilson was the president of Princeton College and spent two years as governor of New Jersey. Zachary Taylor, William Henry Harrison and Dwight Eisenhower had never been elected to office in their life. None of that sounds promising.
Many have berated Barrack Obama for his experience, or lack thereof, but let’s compare him to another famous politician from Illinois, Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln spent eight years in the Illinois legislature and two in the U.S. Congress. Obama spent at least eight years in the Illinois legislature and now has been in the U.S. Senate for four years. I am not saying Obama would be as good a President as Lincoln, but he does have more experience.
Some of our most experienced Presidents have been men such as Martin Van Buren, Herbert Hoover and Richard Nixon. Almost sounds like a list of our worst Presidents. Some of our least experienced Presidents have been men like George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and Woodrow Wilson. I think you see my point.
As far as I’m concerned, the more experience you have, the less qualified you are to be President. I believe the best we can hope for is an intelligent individual with common sense and the ability to lead. Someone who will appoint good advisors and know when to listen to them. Someone with the courage to do what is right because it is right, not to do what is popular.
At its heart, politics is the art of speech making. If someone can inspire the masses with words, then they are on track to be a good leader. Being a Senator or a Governor means nothing.