An interview with MATC’s Dr. Maurice Sheppard
Elections and leadership
Elections and leadership
and their candidates continued to run for office, they are no longer acting like leaders,” Sheppard observed. “Now they are just acting like politicians. And
politicians are there just to get the vote. So over time, they tend to lose their spine like a jelly fish. Increasingly, they tend to do just what the people say they
want. Even in the case where true leadership is necessary to make that hard choice such as raise your taxes, the democratic process and political parties tend
to produce political leaders who are no longer leaders. They do whatever it takes to win an election rather than doing what is necessary for the democracy.”
Sheppard is also looking to see what James MacGregor Burns termed a transactional leader or a transformational leader. “Transactional leaders say ‘Vote
for me and I will do this for you,’” Sheppard said. “The relationship between a transactional leader and their followers is quid pro quo. The transformational
leader is one who has a much deeper connection with followers and citizens. The transformational leader will say ‘Here is what we need to do. Let’s work on it
together. Let’s move forward.’ I think Franklin Roosevelt was a great example of that.”
According to Sheppard, one of the reasons the Republican Party has been losing elections is that the Bush administration was focused on winning
elections and not on leading. “I think the Republican Party paid a price in this last election,” Sheppard observed. “It seems I hear reports every day that the
Republican Party is a leaderless party. Weber would say they sold their soul to win elections. I think in the case of President Bush, he had the pedigree before
he became President. His father was President. He was governor of a large state. But when he failed to provide positive, democratic leadership, his party never
stood up to him and said ‘Mr. President, we need you to reevaluate what you are going here.’ Instead, they were focused on winning another election. They
wanted to keep their base together. And they are paying the price now. I think the inspiring thing with this last election is I heard people talking about they were
going to get their country back.”
“The Rove strategy went against the usual view of electoral politics,” Sheppard continued. “Parties try to move toward the middle on a bell curve. So your
policies shouldn’t be focused at the tail and just keeping your base. Instead it should move toward the middle and then you have more citizens and policy
positions that appeal to many more citizens and not just on the far right or the far left. You started hearing some of this chirping coming from the Republican
Party now that it was the Bush-Rove strategy of trying to win elections with 50 percent plus one vote that is now dooming the Republican Party. People tend to
be rational. Most Americans tend to be in the middle.”
Sheppard feels that Bush had the opportunity — an abundance of opportunities — to become a transformational leader. But instead, he made choices that
led him — and the country — down a different path. “Burns talks about transformational leaders, to some degree, to be classified as a transformational leader on
a national level, you have to luck out,” Sheppard said. “You have to be in a situation that calls for that type of leadership to really take advantage of it. I don’t
know if President Clinton ever had that moment where he could really shine. Then again, you could say he was just a very good manager and never ended up
in that situation. But for President Bush, I think he had two opportunities. One was following the attacks on 9/11. He had an opportunity there. The American
people, the entire world was ready to sacrifice to do whatever we needed to do. He didn’t take that opportunity to be a transformational leader. We could have
had an entirely different energy policy. Following 9/11, President Bush could have said that things had changed and we needed to become more energy
independent rather than dependent. He failed to do that. Also in terms of some of his other foreign policies, he had the opportunity to be transformational.
America could have been the shining city on the hill. Also in terms of Katrina, he had a real opportunity to show that when he was running for office, he said he
would be a compassionate conservative. If ever there was an opportunity to be a compassionate conservative, he had it there with Katrina.”
Obama may already be presented with the conditions to become a transformational leader, according to Sheppard. “In some ways, he already is a
transformational leader because of the type of campaign that he ran and was willing to go into North Carolina and win,” Sheppard said. “He won Indiana. I think
in 2004, the Kerry campaign didn’t challenge in a number of southern states. They just gave them up without a fight. So Obama has an opportunity. He has the
ability, charisma, fresh young face and Kennedyesque. He has the wife and two kids. And now they want a dog. There are some existing pre-conditions now that
will be left over from the Bush Administration.”
One of the biggest pre-conditions that Bush is leaving Obama is the economy. The other is foreign policy. “What do we do there,” Sheppard queried. “Do
we re-establish strong ties not just with European leadership, but also leadership beyond Europe? It’s not going to be a cakewalk. And I am sure like any other
leader, he will stumble at times. But he appears to be moving in the right direction. Only time will tell.”
Sheppard noted that Obama holds up Abraham Lincoln and his leadership style as one that he admires. And it just may be that type of approach —
Lincoln was a transformational leader — that will allow Obama to lead American through the tough times ahead. “Obama is using Lincoln as one model of
leadership and having a more collegial approach, but understanding that at the end of the day, he is the President of the United States and he has to make the
hard decisions,” Sheppard said. “Who you appoint to these key cabinet positions really matters. It matters in the short-term and it matters in the long-term. You
don’t replace these people in the cabinet as if they are replacement parts. They are there for a reason and they really matter and they can make a difference,
hopefully for the better.”
Whether or not Obama becomes a transformative leader makes a difference for all of us. It truly is more than academic. The fate of a country is a stake.
politicians are there just to get the vote. So over time, they tend to lose their spine like a jelly fish. Increasingly, they tend to do just what the people say they
want. Even in the case where true leadership is necessary to make that hard choice such as raise your taxes, the democratic process and political parties tend
to produce political leaders who are no longer leaders. They do whatever it takes to win an election rather than doing what is necessary for the democracy.”
Sheppard is also looking to see what James MacGregor Burns termed a transactional leader or a transformational leader. “Transactional leaders say ‘Vote
for me and I will do this for you,’” Sheppard said. “The relationship between a transactional leader and their followers is quid pro quo. The transformational
leader is one who has a much deeper connection with followers and citizens. The transformational leader will say ‘Here is what we need to do. Let’s work on it
together. Let’s move forward.’ I think Franklin Roosevelt was a great example of that.”
According to Sheppard, one of the reasons the Republican Party has been losing elections is that the Bush administration was focused on winning
elections and not on leading. “I think the Republican Party paid a price in this last election,” Sheppard observed. “It seems I hear reports every day that the
Republican Party is a leaderless party. Weber would say they sold their soul to win elections. I think in the case of President Bush, he had the pedigree before
he became President. His father was President. He was governor of a large state. But when he failed to provide positive, democratic leadership, his party never
stood up to him and said ‘Mr. President, we need you to reevaluate what you are going here.’ Instead, they were focused on winning another election. They
wanted to keep their base together. And they are paying the price now. I think the inspiring thing with this last election is I heard people talking about they were
going to get their country back.”
“The Rove strategy went against the usual view of electoral politics,” Sheppard continued. “Parties try to move toward the middle on a bell curve. So your
policies shouldn’t be focused at the tail and just keeping your base. Instead it should move toward the middle and then you have more citizens and policy
positions that appeal to many more citizens and not just on the far right or the far left. You started hearing some of this chirping coming from the Republican
Party now that it was the Bush-Rove strategy of trying to win elections with 50 percent plus one vote that is now dooming the Republican Party. People tend to
be rational. Most Americans tend to be in the middle.”
Sheppard feels that Bush had the opportunity — an abundance of opportunities — to become a transformational leader. But instead, he made choices that
led him — and the country — down a different path. “Burns talks about transformational leaders, to some degree, to be classified as a transformational leader on
a national level, you have to luck out,” Sheppard said. “You have to be in a situation that calls for that type of leadership to really take advantage of it. I don’t
know if President Clinton ever had that moment where he could really shine. Then again, you could say he was just a very good manager and never ended up
in that situation. But for President Bush, I think he had two opportunities. One was following the attacks on 9/11. He had an opportunity there. The American
people, the entire world was ready to sacrifice to do whatever we needed to do. He didn’t take that opportunity to be a transformational leader. We could have
had an entirely different energy policy. Following 9/11, President Bush could have said that things had changed and we needed to become more energy
independent rather than dependent. He failed to do that. Also in terms of some of his other foreign policies, he had the opportunity to be transformational.
America could have been the shining city on the hill. Also in terms of Katrina, he had a real opportunity to show that when he was running for office, he said he
would be a compassionate conservative. If ever there was an opportunity to be a compassionate conservative, he had it there with Katrina.”
Obama may already be presented with the conditions to become a transformational leader, according to Sheppard. “In some ways, he already is a
transformational leader because of the type of campaign that he ran and was willing to go into North Carolina and win,” Sheppard said. “He won Indiana. I think
in 2004, the Kerry campaign didn’t challenge in a number of southern states. They just gave them up without a fight. So Obama has an opportunity. He has the
ability, charisma, fresh young face and Kennedyesque. He has the wife and two kids. And now they want a dog. There are some existing pre-conditions now that
will be left over from the Bush Administration.”
One of the biggest pre-conditions that Bush is leaving Obama is the economy. The other is foreign policy. “What do we do there,” Sheppard queried. “Do
we re-establish strong ties not just with European leadership, but also leadership beyond Europe? It’s not going to be a cakewalk. And I am sure like any other
leader, he will stumble at times. But he appears to be moving in the right direction. Only time will tell.”
Sheppard noted that Obama holds up Abraham Lincoln and his leadership style as one that he admires. And it just may be that type of approach —
Lincoln was a transformational leader — that will allow Obama to lead American through the tough times ahead. “Obama is using Lincoln as one model of
leadership and having a more collegial approach, but understanding that at the end of the day, he is the President of the United States and he has to make the
hard decisions,” Sheppard said. “Who you appoint to these key cabinet positions really matters. It matters in the short-term and it matters in the long-term. You
don’t replace these people in the cabinet as if they are replacement parts. They are there for a reason and they really matter and they can make a difference,
hopefully for the better.”
Whether or not Obama becomes a transformative leader makes a difference for all of us. It truly is more than academic. The fate of a country is a stake.
By Jonathan Gramling
Part 2 of 2
Come election time, regardless of whether or not someone is making history, scholars of the
American political process always get excited and always see things that the general public is not
aware. One of those scholars is Dr. Maurice Sheppard, a professor of political science at MATC.
Sheppard is fascinated by the electoral process. He wrote “The Federal Election Commission: An
Analysis of Democracy, Policy, and Administration” several years ago because he is fascinated by
elections, what governs them and what kind of leaders are attracted to the political process.
Now that the November election is over Sheppard is watching how President-Elect Barack Obama
shapes his administration so that he can ascertain what kind of leader Obama will be.
One of the crucial tests will be weather Obama evolves into a true leader or settles in to become
just another politician elected to office. Sheppard cited Max Weber, the German sociologist, in talking
about the perceived deterioration of democracy. “What Weber foresaw, was that the more that parties
Part 2 of 2
Come election time, regardless of whether or not someone is making history, scholars of the
American political process always get excited and always see things that the general public is not
aware. One of those scholars is Dr. Maurice Sheppard, a professor of political science at MATC.
Sheppard is fascinated by the electoral process. He wrote “The Federal Election Commission: An
Analysis of Democracy, Policy, and Administration” several years ago because he is fascinated by
elections, what governs them and what kind of leaders are attracted to the political process.
Now that the November election is over Sheppard is watching how President-Elect Barack Obama
shapes his administration so that he can ascertain what kind of leader Obama will be.
One of the crucial tests will be weather Obama evolves into a true leader or settles in to become
just another politician elected to office. Sheppard cited Max Weber, the German sociologist, in talking
about the perceived deterioration of democracy. “What Weber foresaw, was that the more that parties
Dr. Maurice Sheppard is a professor of political
science at MATC
science at MATC