Almost everyone, at one time or another, complains about our elected officials and the state of our nation/state/town. Very few of us have the guts to step out and put our names on the ballot in order to make some changes. Robb Ryerse had the guts. In Running for Our Lives: A Story of Faith, Politics, and the Common Good, Ryerse tells his own unlikely story of his campaign for the U.S. Congress.
As a kid, Ryerse was a political junkie with dreams of someday running for office. Then God called him into full-time ministry, so he pursued theological studies and became a pastor. After several years as a pastor in a fundamentalist denomination, his theological convictions shifted and he planted a more liberal church, where he remains as pastor. In Running for Our Lives: A Story of Faith, Politics, and the Common Good, Ryerse tells the story of his return to the dream of political engagement, as he ran for U.S. Congress in 2018.
Readers can't help but applaud Ryerse's energy and desire to make a difference in national politics. One of his biggest frustrations throughout the campaign is the prominence of large corporate and PAC contributions. He writes that "elections shouldn't be determined by who can raise the most money from corporate PACs and special-interest groups. They should be about who has the best ideas to represent the people of the district." I totally agree with that sentiment, but neither should he overlook that fact that PACs and special-interest groups sometimes share interests with the people! Case in point: the NRA represents the interests of millions of gun owners, who gladly elect representatives who resist excessive limitations on the rights of law-abiding gun owners.
It was interesting to read about Ryerse's adventures as a candidate with little budget going up against an entrenched, well-funded incumbent. He set out to buck the idea that only the wealthy can run for office. As a middle-class bi-vocational pastor, he didn't have much personal wealth to back his campaign, but he managed to make it work. More citizens should follow his example and bring energy and passion to congress.
The frustrating thing about Ryerse's book and candidacy is the fact that he is very liberal on most positions, but chose to run as a Republican, then tries to play the victim because he couldn't get much traction in his conservative district. He has some historical claim that his positions are more like the Republican Party of a few generations ago, but the fact that he takes the opposite position from today's Republican Party on issues like abortion, economic policy, immigration, guns, etc. should have given him a clue that he might not be the toast of every Republican gathering. Running as a Republican in a Republican district while opposing virtually every plank of the party platform, in hopes of gathering enough liberals, Democrats, Greens, and independents to unseat the incumbent Republican representative seems deeply cynical and deceptively immoral.
Ryerse makes it clear that he is opposed to every bit of Trump's administration and policies. Starting from weeping on the night Trump was elected, to his campaigning for a bunch of Democrats in the 2018 election, he can't find a single good thing about Trump. He quotes one of his comrades: "White evangelicals have been complicit with the Trump administration. . . . We're calling Christians to repent and vote differently" which to him and Ryerse means flipping the House to the Democrats. This sentiment is deeply offensive to Christians everywhere who chose to vote for Trump out of a belief that Trump's policies better represent their convictions on issues like abortion and religious liberty.
Ryerse thinks "people ought to vote based on the common good." Oh, the common good like low unemployment, strong job growth, a stronger military (accompanied by declining overseas engagement), secure borders, and a more conservative judiciary? I know on some issues one can disagree about what is the "good" and that some people are more globalist than nationalist, but it would seem that on an objective level, even the most liberal among us can agree that it's a good thing that employment is at an all-time high, which translates into a higher level of dignity and prosperity than any government program can produce.
In short, good on Ryerse to get involved and put himself in the arena of public debate and action. On the other hand, his cheerleading of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and his absolute contempt for Trump--and, not to mention, Trump voters--erase any semblance that he has a postpartisan or non-partisan message. And, by the way, while he rails against those who "sell their soul to a corrupt and corrupting system," he'll have an easier time finding such corruption among those with a D after their name.
Thanks to NetGalley and the publisher for the complimentary electronic review copy!
No comments:
Post a Comment