As sports grow in popularity, government involvement usually increases. Many sports require sponsorship, organization, and facilities - all of which depend on resources that few individuals possess on their own. Sport facilities may be so expensive that regional and national government's are the only entities with the power and resources to build and maintain them (Coakley, 2009). With government helping sport, and sport promoting government, like athletes for Obama, it makes a good segway for those athletes at the end of their careers to jump into government, right?
I don't believe athletes are a good fit for government for a few reasons:
1. Half of the athletes that want to run for office got into their colleges for athletic ability not their SAT scores.
2. The popularity they have gained from sport is the only popularity that have going for them, not what they believe in their political views.
3. Their spot that they get is more based on their sport reputation, rather then their political representation.
While some argue that athletes like Deng have the ability to do good work in this field, others label the practice as "exchanging gold medals for official titles (Baijie, 2010). There have only been a few athletes who have been successful going from sport to government: Bill Bradley (New York Knicks, U.S. Senator), Jesse Ventura (WWF, Minnesota Governor), Robert B. Mathias (Two-time Olympic gold medalist, U.S. Congressman) ("Career athletes," 2010). Other athletes have tried but have not been elected, such as Lynn Swann.
After a professional career, athletes either face a lot of down time or a lot of rehab. With that down time and their already given popularity they feel they can just jump into government and serve there, because they like everyone else want change and feel they can do it. What makes them any different from another person that has an idea? The same thing that makes them different when it comes to crimes and felonies, they are an athlete, so does that mean they are suitable for a government position, if its just a popularity contest, then yes, absolutely. People want to a leader that is going to do more then just win the popularity vote, especially now, where times are tough and money is tight, people want results. An entire nation on their back is a little more then just a city or state, they now have to pick up the slack for everyone.
Athletes aren't what we need in office, we need people who have devoted half of their lives just spending time studying and finding ways to better life, and better the decisions people will have to make. Athletes entertain, they do not delegate decision that could put millions of people out of jobs, or spend billions on a war in the Middle East. Athletes need to entertain and political advisers need to stick to politics. The two work well when they support one another but don't do one another.
Baijie, A. (2010, September 20). Former athletes face stark choices. Global times, 1(35), Retrieved from http://china.globaltimes.cn/editor-picks/2010-09/575254.html
Career athletes. (2010). Retrieved from http://www.careerathletes.com/whyathletes4.php
Coakley, J. (2009). Sports in society. New York, New York: McGraw Hill Companies Inc.
No comments:
Post a Comment