MISSOURI WATCH: POLITICIANS R US

The day following the tax evasion and perjury indictments of state Sen. J.B. "Jet" Banks, a longtime, powerful political figure in St.. Louis, one of his fellow politicians phoned to express his pleasure. "It's about time," he said solemnly, although his exuberance was barely contained as he detailed some of his choice personal experiences with the veteran politician who wins the Most-Colorful-Character in the state Senate hands-down.

What was unusual about the call was that it came from a member of the senator's own political party. This salivating would hardly have been unusual had it come from a Republican, but it came from someone who, over the years, had worked with Banks and had found it a less than joyful experience.

When the conversation was over, I considered for a long time the unusual nature of the call, concluding that it was one more example of how similar politicians and the public really are. It is not unusual for business or social friends to take delight in the problems of their fellow professionals, fellow workers and even family members. Why should politicians be considered differently than anyone else?

The answer, of course, is that politicians are just like everyone else, except for our perception of them, which appears permanently stuck in the negative mode and where it is likely to remain for many years to come. Which, it should be noted, works to the detriment of society in general.

We have long treated our political representatives as somehow being different than all the rest of us. Maybe it started back in the days of Washington, when a large number of colonists wanted to install him not as an elected president but as an American monarch with power to enact and administer laws of the land. Washington, one of the most intellectually underrated of our founding fathers, wisely refused the royal purple, insisting the new nation must embrace the principles of John Locke, as then espoused by young Tom Jefferson.

We treated Washington differently because he was different, and since his first administration, we have accorded the same treatment to his successors. Somewhere along the line, perhaps during the democratization of America during the Andrew Jackson years, we began according special status to politicians which, as history makes very clear, was usually undeserving.

Our view of political leaders as being on the closest step to God began to shift sometime just prior to the Civil War, when at least the southern half of the country began changing its allegiance from Washington's White House to the seat of power of the Confederate States of America. Without realizing it, this shift produced the inevitability of the most disastrous war in our nation's history.

It also froze our conception that politicians with different views than our own were somehow dangerous and should be treated, if not as traitors, than as nefarious villains who were to be viewed as enemies of our great American democracy. Scandals such as Tea Pot Dome, the stock market swindling era, the banking manipulations and the ever-popular monopoly schemes didn't enhance the public's view of politicians either.

Eventually we common folk began viewing our leaders, particularly those in the realm of politics, as enemies who were, even at the moment of contemplation, plotting to do us in, steal our riches and deprive us of our liberty, if not life.

The public's paranoia was hardly limited to federal offices, extending to state capitals, even city halls, and made all the more despicable by such made-in-America power centers as Tammany Hall, the Flynn Gang and the Pendergast Domain, with such latter day innovations as the Daley Machine reinforcing our historical perspective.

Although the image was never intended, political leaders like Tom Pendergast and Richard Daley eventually gained such power that they inevitably felt themselves above all limits, conveying an arrogance that was as far removed from Washington's humility as possible. Pendergast not only felt secure from retribution from Kansas City but the entire state of Missouri, and oddly enough this self-absorbed status helped bring about his ultimate, and fortunate, demise.

Richard Nixon used the power of office to broach civil laws, while Bill Clinton used it to broach the limits of civil morality. Both paid a high price for their transgressions, but few view the costs in either case as excessive.

The prevailing view of today's political leaders is, at best, schizophrenic. Citizens search for political leaders, but once they are installed we search for reasons to bring about their downfall, just as many silently rejoice at a hometown banker's bankruptcy or a successful businessman's embarrassment over being discovered at a motel with an insalubrious female.

We accuse our politicians of indifference to our problems while avoiding a pesky neighbor who always seems to be needing help. We accuse them of being uncaring about our woes while we ignore the "too many" solicitations we get to aid the truly unfortunate. We accuse them of being too busy to look into our complaints about government excesses even as we offer the same excuse when it comes time to discuss local school problems or getting involved in hometown issues.

Citizens accuse public officials of ignoring their constituents while we ignore our responsibilities to vote on election day or work for worthwhile programs in our communities. If your taxes were based on your degree of civic involvement, think how much greater your participation would quickly become.

I suspect the reason we love to hate politicians is because on a grander scale they so closely resemble us. By the way, the overjoyed caller about Jet Banks' problems was a former indictee.

~Jack Stapleton of Kennett is the editor Missouri News and Editorial Service.