Too many people have forgotten for whom they work

Something happened during my tenure with the communications office in the agency formerly known as the Kentucky Revenue Cabinet that I have carried with me for two decades. Once simple event has proven to be instructive in a variety of situations. It may never be more applicable than it is today.

Shortly after I started working there, Paul Patton was elected governor. One of his initiatives was called EMPOWER Kentucky, which was an effort to streamline and modernize governmental services. In Revenue, that project took the form of an effort to consolidate all tax collection services into one interconnected computer network, and an endeavor to increase revenue collection by closing the gap between what was being paid and what was actually owed.

As is customary with such projects, the state hired outside consultants at inflated prices to work with the various state agencies involved in the process. I can't remember exactly which consultant was working with Revenue -- I tend to think it was Deloitte & Touche, but it may have been the Gartner Group -- but we were overrun with them as EMPOWER Kentucky got started.

Being the chief writer in the public information office, who was responsible for communicating the project to employees and the general public, I attended numerous meetings and briefings about what became known as the Integrated Tax System (ITS). It was during one of those meetings that my memorable moment happened.

One of the consultants was speaking in a small gathering in the cabinet secretary's conference room, and he kept telling us all the things that we in Revenue needed to do for the benefit of the consultants. Finally, someone had had enough. That someone was Margaret Handmaker, the Revenue secretary herself. She looked squarely at the consultant, and uttered these fateful words:

"Are we working for you, or are you working for us?"

Properly chastened, the consultant promptly piped down, and began listening to the ideas the Revenue employees in the room were presenting, rather than pushing his own proposals. The state had hired the consulting firm to do a job for us, but instead, it was treating the state as if we were all there to do what they told us.

The circumstances are a bit different, but the gist remains the same, when today's situation with the government is examined. A lot of people are forgetting for whom they work. Their job is to carry out management's directives, not oppose them from within.

I spent eight years working for a governor I despised, Steve Beshear. I also was no fan of my agency's management. Yet I didn't try to throw wrenches into the works. I expressed my disagreement when appropriate, or when honest feedback was sought, but at the end of the day, I did my job. I didn't substitute my judgment for that of my superiors.

We have a whole lot of people in the federal government who need to be reminded of that. It's no secret that much of the bureaucracy is liberal, and thus isn't inclined to support President Trump and his policies and initiatives. But those bureaucrats aren't entitled to sabotage policies, oppose proposals, fail to comply with directives, or work from within to undermine the administration's goals and objectives. What would public outcry have been if there had been so much resistance to President Obama's agenda from within the federal government?

Government employees are free to express their disapproval with what's being done. I spent eight years in state government doing just that. But in the end, I did my job, whether it was personally palatable to me or not.

Elected officials and politically-appointed managers usually listen to the thoughts and opinions of career employees, and most take those views under serious consideration when making decisions. But once those decisions are made, government workers have one job: Carrying out those directives.

You may hate Donald Trump and what he's trying to accomplish. You may disagree with what he says and what he does. God knows I did with Steve Beshear. And I don't agree with everything Matt Bevin does. But I did, and continue to do, my job. If you work for the federal government, you should too. Your job is not to oppose or resist the Trump administration. Your job is to do what the administration tells you to.

It's no longer possible to politely disagree in America

You can't go very long these days without hearing how polarized the country is.

I will freely admit my role in that. I'm a staunch, unwavering conservative. If I had my way, we'd never elect another liberal politician and we would repeal liberal policies. I'm outspoken in my beliefs, and one of my guilty pleasures is trolling liberals on social media. Truth be told, I probably enjoy that more than I should.

But having said that, I don't mind a good, honest, civil debate on the issues of the day. I think it's important to discuss what's going on. At the end of the day, I still believe my side has the best answers, but it's important to know what the other side thinks, and why.

We're getting to the point where that's not possible. Post a pro-Trump comment, and you're a Russian bot. Speak up in defense of Hillary, or Bernie, and you're a libtard. While some of that is in good fun, sometimes it crosses the line.

Since when did it become acceptable to try to get someone fired because you disagree with them?

Read the comments on social media posts of news stories, and sooner or later you'll see it. "I see you work for so-and-so. What if your boss knew what you think?"

Translated: "Nice job you have there. It's be a shame if something happened to it."

I'm not talking about racism here, nor threats against anyone's safety or welfare. Just the simple expression of an opinion with which someone else disagrees. The anger in our society is so palpable that there are actually people who think someone should lose their job because someone has an opinion that runs counter to their own.

Last time I checked, we all have the freedom to hold different political opinions, and the freedom to express them. And while I realize this is strictly not a First Amendment matter, the core principle of that doctrine is to encourage discussion and dissent. You shouldn't have to pay a price just because you believe in something that someone else doesn't.

I had something like this happen to me recently. Someone unhappy with my opinion on a subject in the news let me know they just might feel led to let my employers know I'd weighed in on something and they disagreed with it. The details are unimportant, but the gist of the matter is that someone was not happy when I noted some hypocrisy being expressed in public by a member of the media.

Why anyone feels that when someone else posts something related to a current event when they're sitting in the comfort of their living room on a Friday evening, it merits such a reaction, is beyond me. But that's where we are now.

Not too long ago, I saw a liberal post what I felt was an outrageous take on some issue. A conservative followed up with, "Maybe I should tell your employer what you posted." I quickly chided them, saying something like, "We're better than they are. That's how they operate. They're entitled to their opinion, too, but we're different than they are. We don't threaten people's jobs just because they disagree with us."

We may never heal the divisions within this country. In fact, if the liberals ever take power again, I hope conservatives will be louder and stronger than ever in their opposition. But we have to be able to agree without being disagreeable. No matter how much I may oppose your viewpoints, I won't try to get you fired for expressing them. You should show the same courtesy.