Please Standby….

So, imagine this.

FOX SPORTS COMMENTATOR #1:  ……Brady drops back. He escapes a sack and is running right. He has a receiver down field. He launches a long pass that could win the game….it’s going to be close….

FOX SPORTS COMMENTATOR #2:  Stay with us, and we’ll be back to share what happens right after a short break.

ASSOCIATED PRESS SPORTS HEADLINE:  Brady’s pass in the last 3 seconds wins the game!

FOX SPORTS COMMENTATOR #1:  We want to pick up with an analysis of just how this critical game has gone up to the last 3 seconds.  And, we will share the Associated Press report on the game’s outcome, when we come back from this commercial break….

OK, so this is something that would never happen, right? Who would tolerate a sports reporting network holding off showing the final pass of the game to hold its audience through commercial breaks and to extend its ratings?

Well, FOX SPORTS would never do this, but what about FOX NEWS?

Last week, Dave Wheelan at the Spy spoke with Al From and me in our weekly commentary segment about the impact on the Dominion suit against FOX NEWS for defaming the company and saying on air things the anchors and commentators knew not to be true based on recovered emails from the post 2020 election time-period.

My quip at the outset suggested that there might be two key questions about the FOX NEWS revelations:  1) was anyone surprised; and, 2) did anyone really care? 

While it was bad enough that Rupert Murdoch acknowledged that the news organization he owns had misled viewers, it seemed this story was destined to get worse. This past weekend, it did get worse when Peter Baker in the NEW YORK TIMES gained access to a Zoom conference held after the 2020 election with the FOX NEWS CEO and the leading anchors and commentators. 

The Zoom meeting was recorded and thus provides a revealing look into the words and thinking of FOX NEWS leaders.  And, the focus was how it was wrong in the 2020 election to call Arizona for then candidate Joe Biden first, even though it was the correct call from FOX’s own election desk that had invested millions of dollars to get election calls correct.

And, the reason for the angst by the “faces of FOX NEWS” was that three things had happened:  1) the election desk got the Arizona call right; 2) FOX was first to make the public announcement; 3) the FOX personalities were surprised and not given time to slow down the release of this news to keep their audience locked into the coverage and happy with FOX reporting.

What?

Are not the key metrics of getting it “right” and getting it “first” important for all news organizations?

It turns out, not at FOX NEWS.  There, getting it right and getting it first brought outrage from partisans who favored a different outcome.  Discussion focused on backing off the Arizona election call, which the election desk refused to do. It focused on the cost of ending the suspense early and how it would have been better to wait until other news organizations made the call.

Time was (admittedly long ago, I guess) when covering presidential elections carried great responsibility.  Networks brought their best to election nights, taking care to report on the play by play that occurs across the nation on a national election day. Reporting on exit polls to share what is on the minds of voters was backed by million-dollar investments in research.  And, actually calling election outcomes was not left to the “talent” sitting in the anchor booth, it was the work of trained statisticians and researchers to get it right and get it early.

If you doubt how much has changed, the sad outcome at FOX NEWS was that the leaders of the FOX NEWS election desk that had been calling election results correctly for over a decade were removed from those jobs and from the network in a strange case where getting it right was getting it wrong from a career standpoint!

While I remain doubtful that too many people care, we should!

The broadcast organization is not branded “FOX CHAT.” It calls itself a news organization. However, the Zoom meeting, the emails and Rupert Murdoch’s own under oath testimony suggest that the coin of the realm is, well, just that: coin!  They want ratings. They want people watching. They want to see the company’s stock price rise – a comment from a Tucker Carlson email.

Polling shows the growing mistrust of news organizations. This is something about which we should be concerned. Journalists work to sort through all the claims and competing points of view to share a balanced story for most of us who cannot or will not take the time to do the research on an issue ourselves. So, when people cannot trust journalists, how do we stay informed?

The Dominion vs. FOX NEWS story is bound to grow larger (unless you watch FOX NEWS). Hopefully, there will be lessons for other news organizations and we, the consumer of news reporting, will be more discerning. Perhaps in time news organizations will bring the same rigor to telling us important election stories as their sister sports organizations bring to showing us great sporting events.  I guess we can hope!

Craig Fuller served four years in the White House as assistant to President Reagan for Cabinet Affairs, followed by four years as chief of staff to Vice President George H.W. Bush. Having been engaged in five presidential campaigns and run public affairs firms and associations in Washington, D.C., he now resides on the Eastern Shore.

 

Closing days of nationwide elections always fascinate me. This year, the intensity of calling citizens to the voting booth seems greater.

It’s the division, I think. The idea of bringing people together in a common cause seems workable only on a bifurcated basis. Republicans hold one set of views and Democrats another on Biden’s performance, abortion, education, the environment, crime and a whole range of other issues. At least, this seems to be the case.

Over the weekend, I heard President Obama ask a crowd in Pittsburgh, “….who will fight for you.” It’s a good question to ask, but the answer varies considerably between members of the two major parties and independents.

No more clear evidence of this presented itself to me than in a recent national survey measuring the approval rating of President Biden. In this poll, the overall approval number was 43%. However, looking inside that number tells the story. 83% of Democrats approved of Biden’s performance. 35% of Independents approved, but think that the economy and crime are the most important issues mirroring Republican sentiments. And, only 9% of Republicans approved of Biden’s performance.

So, the President who announced after his election he would bring us together, seems to have traveled a path that has us further apart than ever.

It is very difficult to see how this week’s election will alter the current reality very much. In fact, a White House lead by one party with the Congress lead by the other party seems a formula for only greater division.

Indeed, in the House, the likely-to-be-next Speaker, Kevin McCarthy, is laying plans for investigations and legislation to rollback what President Biden has tried to do. Few Republican legislative initiatives running counter to the views of leading Democrats will survive the veto pen in the Oval Office; but, few initiatives from the Administration are likely to be accepted by the new Congress.

So, is there a better path forward?

Spoiler alert: Al From and I spoke about this in our From & Fuller predictions in The Spy commentary last week.

From my perspective, we need leaders to emerge and vitriol to be submerged.

One way to get there would be for President Biden, following the final results of the 2022 election, to determine whether or not he can successfully govern in the final two years of his term if he faces Republican majorities in the House or the Senate or both while simultaneously launching a national re-election campaign for the presidency.

I, for one, think it cannot be done. If, however, President Biden would withdraw from campaigning he would no longer be the largest target of Republican leaders. And, new leaders would need to step forward among Democrats who would be less likely to challenge a sitting President of their own party.

A set of new faces among Democrats would surely increase the number of Republican leaders stepping up challenging a return to the past (something that many of us would truly like to move away from).

Lastly, the number of voters who express dissatisfaction with both major parties may well be larger than in decades, maybe ever. There are quiet discussions about finding leaders of both parties to lead a national ticket; or, perhaps a leader who is less partisan.

There are paths forward if individuals step up. What will not soon get us to a better place is doing the same things over and over again, hoping for a different set of results (thank you Einstein).

I do remain optimistic that leaders are out there and they can rally people around them. Indeed, Maryland has stood for that. The outgoing governor, Larry Hogan, remains a popular Republican across the state. And, the likely incoming governor, Wes Moore, a Democrat, enjoys strong bipartisan support. I suspect both will play their own important roles in finding a better way forward.

One can only hope!

Since August 8th, when FBI agents entered former President Trump’s Florida residence in search of government documents that he had failed to return, much has been said about finding TOP SECRET documents among materials he and his lawyers had represented were not at the residence.

This is very serious on multiple levels….here’s why.

My point of view comes from handling, reading and protecting TOP SECRET documents for the eight years I served in the White House. Many of these documents carried the SCI label meaning they were deemed Sensitive Compartmented Information and thus were extremely sensitive to our nation’s national security. And, for the four years I was the chief of staff to Vice President Bush, I received and reviewed one of the most highly protected documents, the President’s Daily Briefing (PDB). It was provided by a CIA briefer six times a week to the Vice President and me and we returned every copy to them before they left the room.

The importance of the discoveries in Florida has nothing to do, in my mind, with politics. Had these documents, or even a fraction of them, been found at a staff member’s home, the individual would have been investigated, fired and most likely prosecuted.

Why?

Because the mishandling of classified information puts lives at risk and degrades our ability to gather intelligence. And, that means our nation’s leading decision makers from the Congress, through key agencies and up to the President and his staff will not get vital insights needed to make informed foreign policy and national security decisions.

As a nation, we invest billions of dollars a year and engage thousands of people, some whose lives are at risk every day, to ensure our decision makers have the best intelligence in the world about what is happening and likely to happen around the world. This protects us from terrorists. This allows us to reduce the threat of terrorism here and abroad because terrorists know we are highly likely to find, capture or kill those who plan and execute murderous acts.

The information analyzed and turned into intelligence comes from extraordinary technology and from extraordinary people.

One recent example, when the US made clear to Ukraine that Russia’s Putin was going to invade, it wasn’t guessing. It had knowledge from multiple sources and while leaders in Europe doubted Putin would go as far as an invasion, America’s leaders knew otherwise.

Among the people I met while in government, the intelligence analysts were among the brightest, most dedicated and most impressive of individuals. They provided classified briefings before every trip we took (and, I traveled with the Vice President to more than 60 countries in four years). All these analysts want to do is get it right for our nation’s leaders. And, they work to convey the information in ways that it will best be understood often tailoring presentations to fit the individual decision maker’s preference for reviewing the intelligence.

The reason we have a classification system is to protect what we know and how we know it. Once this is penetrated by any of the many actors across the globe who seek to know what we know and how we know it, the intelligence goes away.  And, because we depend upon people across the globe to share information with us, often at great personal risk, if those people have cause to doubt our ability to protect the information, the intelligence goes away.

For all these reasons, I and so many others who have handled and be “read in” to some of the nation’s most highly classified programs are horrified at the descriptions coming out about the documents found at a former official’s home. Aside from false statements about turning over all the documents (a violation of the law in itself), the low level of security and even no security around TOP SECRET documents causes irreparable harm. And, this is true even if nothing in the treasure trove of documents was shared with any individual because it creates a question about whether the US can be trusted. But, for me, it is hard to imagine information has not been shared. Why else would so much have been taken and retained, even when lawyers insisted everything was returned.

Perhaps the most stunning revelations came just a few days ago as details of what was found and where it was found were released by the court. While incredible in scope, the list of what was taken from the former President’s office is jaw dropping. I’ll grant it is probably a large office, but look at the list below and ask what in the world was someone thinking when they retained and refused to acknowledge they kept close at hand in their personal office the following:

2 documents marked confidential

7 documents marked top secret

15 documents marked secret

43 empty folders marked for classified document

28 empty folders marked “return to staff secretary/military aide”

Along with other government documents, magazines and newspapers

Of course, when added to thousands of other documents found in storage and other areas of the residence, the case just gets worse.

Because of the real threat to our national security, there are strict laws and punishments related to the mishandling of just one of the documents like those labeled above. And, for every “empty” folder, there were classified documents associated. Where are those? Were they recovered? We may never know.

I shared in a discussion taking place this past last month when asked why the FBI raided the former President’s home, that the FBI doesn’t really get to decide which federal law violations it investigates. The same rule applies to individuals. No one gets to decide which laws to obey and which they can violate; and if they elect to do so they assume a risk of prosecution for the violations.

Getting a full accounting of what damage has been done is vitally important. Sending a clear signal to those in government and those who help us around the world that we take this seriously is vitally important. At this stage, I, for one, do not see how we do all of that without prosecuting those who took, retained and misrepresented to federal officials that they returned what they had taken. Protect our nations! Put the cuffs on someone!

Craig Fuller served four years in the White House as assistant to President Reagan for Cabinet Affairs, followed by four years as chief of staff to Vice President George H.W. Bush. Having been engaged in five presidential campaigns and run public affairs firms and associations in Washington, D.C., he now resides on the Eastern Shore.

From the NY TIMES NYT Review of Documents taken August 8th

More on Sensitive Compartmented Information

 

 

It struck me recently that I didn’t really have a strong view one way or the other about whether Elon Musk should acquire Twitter. Mostly because I didn’t really know what Twitter had become. But, one thing I do know is that Twitter really is not anything like what I envision when I see the term, “town square.”

Traveling in Italy, one has the chance to view town squares – called piazzas – that matter to a community. They are places where people visit regularly to see friends over a meal, perhaps even a bit of Italian wine. Trust is built among people who find themselves discussing issues that matter in their lives. Those of us who come as tourists are tolerated as consumers of food and beverages; and, in some cases, we probably provide a form of entertainment to the locals who willingly strike up a conversation.

Historians suggest this centuries-old approach to exchanging views and enjoying the company of others found its way early into America when William Penn commissioned Thomas Holme in  1682 to design the city of Philadelphia. The rectangular grid pattern contained four small public squares, a concept designed by Penn and Holme to ensure citizens would have open places to walk, gather and engage with one another.

What caught my attention most in the current discussion about Elon Musk’s appetite for acquiring Twitter was his description of what he thinks it is:  “Twitter is the digital town square, where matters vital to the future of humanity are debated” says Mr. Musk.

Sorry, I just don’t think the designers of Italian cities or the team of Penn and Holme could embrace such a notion if they came back to see what Twitter is today. You just do not come to know and trust people with short bursts of phrases. You do not build personal relationships; in fact, Twitter seems one of the most impersonal of social media.

So, that brings me to the question of what is Twitter?

It was only 16 years ago, on March 21, 2006 that Twitter founder Jack Dorsey sent his first tweet. Today, Twitter claims around 400 million users around the globe. We in the United States continue to be the country with the largest group of users. But, of the 206 million global users who reportedly engage with Twitter daily, only 25% of those are in the US.

Another metric for Twitter relates to “monetizable daily active users.” These are users who login in a manner where Twitter can send them ads; or, in other words Twitter knows who they are. There are 187 million of these folks on the planet with 37 million here in the US, or just over 10% of the nation’s population.

 If a thoughtful individual were to sit with someone and visit about their lives and, as Elon Musk says, debate “the future of humanity,” would not that individual want to know how much they had in common with those engaged in the debate? I answer yes to this question!

Here are a few interesting and recent compilations about who is engaged with Twitter…

 With regard to gender, 68% are thought to be men…leaving less than 1/3^rd women.

In terms of age, 59.2% using Twitter are reported to be between 25 and 49 years old.  Twitter users over 50 years old account for just over 17% of users.

When asked to check off reasons for using Twitter, the most often checked reasons were to get the news (48%) and entertainment (48%). From these two top reasons, it dropped to 34% who use Twitter to stay in touch with friends and family.

As an aside, these numbers validate the concern a lot of us have about the propensity for younger people to get their news on Twitter and other social media platforms…but, that is another story.

However, if going to Twitter for the news is one of the highest priorities users have, you would expect news organizations to have secured a great number of followers. On the list of the highest Twitter users ranked by number of followers, CNN has 61 million. That earns them a 15^th place.

Here is what those who study these things recently found when it comes to worldwide followers (numbers in millions):

Barack Obama	129.9
Justin Bieber	113.9
Katy Perry	108.7
Rihanna	102.8
Christian Ronaldo	93.5
Taylor Swift	88.6
Ariana Grande	84
Lady Gaga	83.6
Ellen DeGeneres	77.9
YouTube	73.1
Narendra Modi	70.6
Kim Kardashian West	70
Selena Gomez	65
Justin Timberlake	63.4
CNN Breaking News	61.2
Twitter	59.5
Elon Musk	59.3
Britney Spears	55.5
Bill Gates	55.3
Demi Lovato	54.6

All I can suggest is that if Twitter really is the place “…where matters vital to the future of humanity are debated,” I am just not sure Twitter brings to the table the key players in the debate who I would wish to see selected for the task.

I still am a bit ambivalent about Musk’s acquisition of a company that has built a global platform for exchanging ideas. It has been a public company now with shareholders willing to sell. It is not a public utility.  Acknowledging that the numbers are large when you look at millions of people engaged on a national and global basis through Twitter, still other social media platforms have greater engagement.

What now seems most troubling is the intent of the new owner and how he hopes to raise the bar on Twitter, regardless of its limitations, connecting millions of willing information consumers who have relinquished many of the elements that have traditionally been part of trusted face to face conversation about news, weather and sports, not to mention the future of humanity.

Craig Fuller served four years in the White House as assistant to President Reagan for Cabinet Affairs, followed by four years as chief of staff to Vice President George H.W. Bush. Having been engaged in five presidential campaigns and run public affairs firms and associations in Washington, D.C., he now resides on the Eastern Shore.

Turns out, January brought a health care challenge….let me start with the conclusion: I feel and am just fine!

After an enjoyable trip in early January through Austin for a meeting with my Redbird Flight Simulations colleagues and a visit to the California wine country, I returned home to Easton. The day after returning, a Thursday, a bad head cold was enough to take suggest a Rapid COVID test would be in order.

It was positive. So was the PCR test the next day recommended by my physician.

I realize for way too many people the experience is not as favorable as mine. However, my head cold symptoms disappeared as fast as they came upon me over the course of the weekend.

No one I know of and was in contact with tested positive. Where did I get this? I really don’t know. And, while it’s easy to say commercial flying or a big airport were likely locations for exposure, my symptoms came only a day after I returned.

What I found most interesting in going through this was discovering the very professional approach my physician and his staff took as they efficiently addressed the situation. They explained they have a protocol and that likely my symptoms would be not much more than a bad head cold BECAUSE I had both vaccinations and a booster.

While talking informally with a doctor outside my house one day, he asked how I was doing and I explained I was in day 5 and really had no symptoms. His response: “…that’s pretty typical.”

I thought a lot about that. For two years, we’ve been collectively traumatized about the risk of contracting COVID. Now, for those of us who are vaccinated it is “typical” to experience no more than cold symptoms if the virus finds us.

As I said at the beginning, many people including those who have been vaccinated, have had more challenging experiences than I. But, to face this pandemic with the medical science now available makes the experience far more survivable with only modest effects.

The truth is, “typical” is a whole lot better than “traumatic.”

If this sounds like a message to make sure you’ve been vaccinated, it is!

Be well!

Craig Fuller served four years in the White House as assistant to President Reagan for Cabinet Affairs, followed by four years as chief of staff to Vice President George H.W. Bush. Having been engaged in five presidential campaigns and run public affairs firms and associations in Washington, D.C., he now resides on the Eastern Shore.

Suddenly, things are different.

It’s not just that life is being lived for many without the mask. People are increasingly enjoying social engagements in face to face settings again. And, this is happening with considerably less risk, at least for many of us.

In a quest for normalcy, we need to remember that many still are without the protection provided by being fully vaccinated. Whether for lack of opportunity or by personal choice, more than half of the U.S. population is not fully vaccinated.

The protection of a vaccination varies by state. In Massachusetts over half are fully vaccinated, but in other states, 60% are not.

More discouraging, recent data shows that worldwide, only about 6% are fully vaccinated.

And, there are new variants of the COVID-19 virus appearing in Great Britain where they are now considering tightening restrictions.

So, this is not over.

While there is very good news about the wide availability regarding the supply of vaccine, it is discouraging that the demand for vaccinations has fallen.

I know people are exercising their rights when they elect not to be fully vaccinated. However, I think it is wrong to just shrug our shoulders and say, well it’s their choice.

Consider the diseases for which vaccinations are recommended today by the Centers for Disease Control:

Chickenpox (Varicella)
Diphtheria
Flu (Influenza)
Hepatitis A
Hepatitis B
Hib (Haemophilus influenzae type b)
HPV (Human Papillomavirus)
Measles
Meningococcal
Mumps
Pneumococcal
Polio (Poliomyelitis)
Rotavirus
Rubella (German Measles)
Shingles (Herpes Zoster)
Tetanus (Lockjaw)
Whooping Cough (Pertussis )

Would we shrug and suggest it’s just too bad if some elect not to get vaccinated to avoid these ailments?

Imagine if we were to read that over half the population was not vaccinated against Polio.

I for one look forward to enjoying a summer different and more social than the one past. But, I also will seek to find the best ways to encourage friends to look favorably at a vaccine for COVID-19 since it has not gone away and poses well known risks.

Like the decision makers who chose to act either without knowing the facts or with a disregard for the facts, we all can know the truth around COVID-19 and the vaccines that are fighting it. We all need to make wise, fact-based decisions.

This summer, live life a lot…but, get the shot!

Craig Fuller served four years in the White House as assistant to President Reagan for Cabinet Affairs, followed by four years as chief of staff to Vice President George H.W. Bush. Having been engaged in five presidential campaigns and run public affairs firms and associations in Washington, D.C., he now resides on the Eastern Shore.

Here’s more from a recent NYT report

Today’s media reports that Congresswoman Liz Cheney was ousted from her leadership post by fellow House Republicans. I suspect this is anything but career-ending. In truth, her colleagues probably provided a proverbial booster rocket to her remarkable career.

Many also reported that this was about two different views of how the Republican Party should engage former president Trump. It is really about two very different views of one’s role as a leader in Congress stemming from two very different paths.

Congressman Kevin McCarthy from Bakersfield, California and Congresswoman Liz Cheney from Casper, Wyoming are about the same age. One has a well-developed world view while the other’s life experience has been centered on the U.S. Capital. One has few personal options, although he is clearly seeking to rise to the Speaker’s chair one day. The other is suddenly free to pursue many different options, certainly including but not limited to even higher office.

Consider these paths.

Kevin McCarthy was born in 1965 in Bakersfield, California. Twenty-two years later, he found himself on the staff of then Congressman Bill Thomas, running the Congressman’s district office in Bakersfield. He ran for office first in 2000, winning a seat as a trustee of the Kern County College District. From there, it was onto an immediate campaign, winning a seat in the California Assembly, representing the citizens of Bakersfield in 2002. That soon lead to a successful campaign sending McCarthy to House of Representatives in 2006.

Liz Cheney, born in 1966, began life in Madison, Wisconsin. She attended grade school in Casper, Wyoming while her father campaigned for Congress. She attended high school in McLean, Virginia. She went to Colorado College graduating in 1988 having completed a thesis on the “Evolution of Presidential War Powers.” She was involved with the US Agency for International Development from 1989-93. Then, in 1996 graduated from Chicago Law School; after which, she entered the White & Case law firm to practice international law.  She went on to become a Special Assistant to Deputy Secretary of State for Assistance to the Former Soviet Union. During her career, she served as a USAID officer in embassies located in Budapest and Warsaw. In 2002, she was appointed Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs. She entered a US Senate race in Wyoming in 2014 but withdrew. Then, came back to win a seat in the House of Representatives in 2016 with 60% of the general election vote. In 2020, she won her primary contest for her House seat with 73% of the vote and 69% of the general election vote.

One of my long-held concerns about congressional staffers seeking the office of a retiring Member of Congress for whom they served is that they lack much of a world view. While knowing several to be good people, still their life experience revolves around the political maneuvering in the nation’s Capital and so judgements on policy and principal tend to be more self-directed.

Today, as the Kevin McCarthy has managed to push Liz Cheney from the leadership position she held, he must believe he has addressed a problem about which he had grown weary. Namely, Liz Cheney refused to let the truth about the recent election be denied. And, if you listen to her short but thoughtful address on the floor of the House, you hear how her world view, shaped by personal involvement in countries around the world seeking freedom contributed to her thinking. To view her remarks, click this link.  For Kevin McCarthy, forcing her out of this #3 leadership position represents a huge penalty, because his life experience is a long climb up a political ladder since being a young district staffer for a Congressman in Bakersfield. 

The reality is quite different. Liz Cheney is now, in fact, free to do and say pretty much what she wishes to do and say. Her career which has been known to many in Washington, is now something that has her on a national stage. If her past engagement suggests anything, it is that she will rise from this experience to even greater leadership positions. Maybe this means a greater role in government. Maybe she will find a role in a nonprofit organization with an important global mission. Maybe she will discover opportunities in the legal field or business. Certainly, what she will not do is waiver from her principled views and the courage behind her effective expression of those views.

Craig Fuller served four years in the White House as assistant to President Reagan for Cabinet Affairs, followed by four years as chief of staff to Vice President George H.W. Bush. Having been engaged in five presidential campaigns and run public affairs firms and associations in Washington, D.C., he now resides on the Eastern Shore.

Could a mid-air collision involving two commercial aircraft provide insights into what really needs to happen to improve the performance of law enforcement officers throughout the country?

I think so. In fact, I’m pretty sure if we fail to embrace a successful model, efforts to reduce difficult choices and bad decisions by police officers in the name of “reform” will accomplish little and the stories of the past few months will be repeated. Those who seek to improve police decision making could learn a great deal from what followed a tragic plane crash 65 years ago.

That crash led to the creation of what became the Federal Aviation Administration as well as the National Transportation Safety Board. Today, we should consider a Federal Law Enforcement Administration and a National Law Enforcement Incident Evaluation Board.

Let’s start with the story taken from an excellent article in Time magazine that appeared last September (to read the article click here).

In the late morning hours of June 30, 1956, a TWA aircraft and a United aircraft collided over the Grand Canyon while flying at 21,000 feet. Seriously damaged, both aircraft crashed with all 128 people aboard the two planes perishing. It took days to recover the remains and produced horrific news stories for weeks.

Shocking as this crash of modern commercial aircraft was at the time, the aviation safety record then was far from what it is today. While we experienced a recent decade free of a single commercial airline crash in the US, in the seven years between 1948 and 1955 there were 30 mid-air collisions involving commercial aircraft.

In many ways, the 1956 collision above the Grand Canyon changed everything. Congress passed legislation in 1957 leading to the creation of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the National Transportation Safety Board. Interestingly, Dwight Eisenhower was President. Sam Rayburn was the Speaker of the House of Representatives. And, Lyndon Johnson was the Majority Leader of the US Senate. Working together, these leaders created two new organizations and, with a very committed group of stakeholders, changed the way accidents were tracked, information was shared, pilots were trained, and aircraft manufacturing was conducted.

These agencies had worked for a decade before I began flying aircraft in 1967, and a safety culture was well in place and growing stronger throughout aviation. Central to this culture is the investigation of every accident to determine not only the cause, but to better understand how a similar situation could be prevented. Determined to improve – and needing to improve to attract people to commercial flight – all stakeholders had a role in the process from improving training to making airports and aircraft safer to operate.

No single action by Congress or mandate by leaders in The White House could have made flying safer. It took a strong commitment at the Federal and local levels to change the way the entire air transportation system functioned where safety requirements protected those who chose to fly. Today, the commitment remains and 7,500 commercial aircraft, over 20,000 business aircraft and another 150,000 general aviation aircraft operate at over 5,000 public use airports while maintaining the best safety records in decades.

So, just how should this inform discussions about policing?

Growing up in the Los Angeles area, I saw on every LAPD police car the phrase, “To Protect and Serve.” There is an interesting story about the creation of this motto that dates to a contest held at the Los Angeles Police Academy in 1955. The winning entry became a mantra for the Police Academy and eventually became the motto appearing on the LAPD seal placed on every vehicle.

Protecting the safety and property of the people served by a police department is certainly as worthy as improving safe flight operations. Indeed, failing to make good decisions in either category puts people at serious risk. However, while a national commitment to air safety brought remarkable improvement and a safer air transportation system, it is difficult to find a parallel commitment in law enforcement. In fact, the training and practices in law enforcement rest with nearly 18,000 individual agencies overseeing some 697,000 fulltime law enforcement officers.

Now, we are at a place where nothing less than a full realignment of how we certify, train and share incident information aimed at continuous improvement can build back the respect and trust in law enforcement that communities so desperately need. And, by the way, working to rebuild trust is as critical for the police as for the citizens they are there to protect.

I should say that I come to this conclusion as one who has great respect for law enforcement and many friends who are in or have worked in the law enforcement field. The individuals I’ve come to know while in government or in my community are some of the best people around. But, consider this, if only 1% are not making proper decisions, that amounts to nearly 7,000 people. Imagine, if just 1% of around 50,000 flight operations a day involved an aircraft that failed to land safely. That would amount to a tragic 500 flights day.

Just where do we start?

As we sought the safest air transportation system in the world, so too, we must seek the most effective law enforcement operations in world by meeting the highest standards of protecting and serving the people within every jurisdiction.

Perhaps the best news is that we do not have to research what works because there are outstanding examples across the land. What does need to happen is that those examples must become standards which are clearly defined in ways that allow law enforcement agencies and individual law enforcement officers to be certified as meeting national requirements.

There will always be the need for training locally with sensitivities to local and community situations. However, just as with flight training that occurs in places around the country, a national set of standards should require every law enforcement training program to meet specific requirements. And, as events occur which identify shortcomings, the training requirements must evolve.

What must happen is that the best practices for protecting and serving need to be the norm. This requires thoroughly understanding those best practices and sharing information throughout the law enforcement community about what those practices are, and finally training to achieve those practices.

I also think that just as we certify over 660,000 active pilots in the US, every law enforcement officer should be certified in a national system. We train, test and check the physical and mental condition of aircraft pilots because failure by a pilot puts lives at risk. Should we have less of a requirement for the men and women in law enforcement? Bad judgements put citizens lives at risk and fellow law enforcement officers at risk as well. We should be testing, certifying and tracking these nearly 700,000 individuals for their benefit and for the benefit of the people they serve.

About tracking. This is at the heart of safe aircraft operations. Aircraft operations are continuously tracked. Any anomaly is reported and investigated. This is not to find fault; it is to learn what exactly happened and then correct an issue not just with one aircraft or one pilot but throughout the entire air transportation system. And, if the anomaly involves pilot training, then the entire training community learns about it.

Again, as with safe and effective air transportation, an examination of anomalies in policing is critically important. The need to thoroughly understand how to make better decisions, properly use equipment and to recognize patterns of behavior are all as critical to effective police work as they are to safety in aviation.

Finally, just like the leaders in 1957 who moved so rapidly to put in place an approach to air safety that changed things for the better, we need that leadership now at the federal and local levels to recognize we are putting far too many people at risk today both in and out of uniform unless we commit to approaching the way we police the nation in a whole new manner. And, why not make that a way that has proven to work and delivered to the United States the safest, most efficient, while also the most complex, air transportation system in the world?

Craig Fuller served four years in the White House as assistant to President Reagan for Cabinet Affairs, followed by four years as chief of staff to Vice President George H.W. Bush. Having been engaged in five presidential campaigns and run public affairs firms and associations in Washington, D.C., he now resides on the Eastern Shore.

Curiosity got the better of me a few years ago as I kept noticing signs for “Chesapeake Country” on roads I traveled in the Easton area. Usually, these signs were affixed to a Scenic Byway sign.

Learning that advisors to the State of Maryland had suggested our region seek a stronger, more unified identity by channeling the famed book CHESAPEAKE by James A. Michener, I decided to travel the Chesapeake Country Scenic Byway. Now, I did not cover the entire 419 land miles that makeup the Byway. I did stop and visit the furthest point north, Chesapeake City; and, I traveled to the southernmost point, Crisfield. And, there were lots of interesting destinations in between.

Many of the storied places along Chesapeake Bay are quiet today, belying their bustling past and commercial centers. Still, they are attractive locations for boating and recreation; and, I found their history as enjoyable to learn as relaxing in their historic sites.

While we’ve enjoyed our Byway for over two decades, it was the Federal government that recognized the northern portion. Turns out the U.S. Department of Transportation ended the national recognition effort some years ago. So, the southern roads had just the state designation. And, while much is described online, not even some of the Visitor Centers I stopped at were all that clear about just what Chesapeake Country was all about.

Well, it is a new day. Not only is the Federal government now in the business again of recognizing special areas and special routes, recently they designated our Chesapeake Country Byway an All-American Road. This is the highest designation a road can receive from the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Highway Administration.

As one who traveled most of the route, I can attest to the special nature of this now All-American Road on the Eastern Shore. If the urge for safe and local travel exists in your household, you might just enjoy charting a course for yourself on the Chesapeake Country Scenic Byway. 

Thanks to the Spy and a series done a few years ago, you can even get a sense of just what awaits you:

Chesapeake City
Crisfield
Easton to Blackwater Refuge
Chestertown to Eastern Neck Refuge
Cambridge to Taylors Island