being frank

I was working on a strategic assessment document when I decided to insert a few observations. I noted the entries under the heading of caveats. Nothing unusual about that. It’s a common word used to indicate a warning or a condition one wishes to clarify. Yet before I knew it, the phrase caveat emptor popped into my head. It didn’t bear any significance to what I was doing at the time, but it got me thinking.

 

The Midterms

Midterms was a word I used to dread when I was in school. It was that time of year when your brain was going to be put to the test to see how much knowledge it had retained. It was a time to evaluate how much you had learned and how much more you needed to absorb before the end of the academic term. It also amounted to a large part of your grade, so that meant it was crunch time and you would be required to pay attention.

In the political arena, Midterms hold their fair share of dread. It’s that halfway point in a president’s term when changes in Congress could alter the administration’s plans for moving its agenda forward. So unless you’ve been traveling with one of the Voyager spacecraft, you’ve been painfully aware of the consequences that every single party has been espousing on every conceivable broadcast medium and online channel concerning their opposition.

But I’m not going to wrestle with that hornet’s nest. I want to get back to caveats.

 

To Be or Not To Be

The Latin phrase caveat emptor is one that has been in use since the 1500s. For the one or two of you who may not know, it translates as “let the buyer beware”; a phrase that, per the dictionary, means:

The buyer alone is responsible for checking the quality and suitability of goods before a purchase is made.

In the political arena, it comes down to something as simple as inserting the word “right” after each instance of the word “Be” in the title of this section. It’s a question you’ll have to answer time and time again as you struggle to choose the correct political candidate whom you feel is right for the job within the hallowed halls of Congress. In the House of Representatives, members only serve a two-year term, whereas folks in the Senate serve a six-year term. This means that, for this election cycle, each of the 435 seats in the House and roughly a third of the Senate chamber (approximately 35 races) will be up for grabs. This gives you, the American voter, an opportunity to fill these spots with either a fresh-faced idealist or a repeat performer (or offender) by the end of the midterms.

 

WIIFM – What’s In It For Me?

So what’s in this painfully loud, distressingly partisan and agonizingly slow-moving political process that is of benefit to you, the prospective voter? If I may, let’s play a quick numbers game; one using Monopoly^© money just for fun:

Current projections place political spending for the 2026 election cycle at roughly $11,600,000,000. This means that the candidates (and their respective political affiliates) will be using some of these funds for their campaigns, rallies, appearances, commercials, etc. When it comes to voter turnout, it’s anyone’s guess at this stage of the game as to how many people will turn out during the 2026 midterms. The last official ballot count, which was done for the 2022 midterms, produced a number that was a bit over 112 million. So for the purposes of our game, we’ll go ahead and use that number. This all means that the political arm of our democratic way of governance will be spending approximately $103 (and change) for each vote. That’s it. Of course, you won’t be getting $103 for your efforts to cast a vote, and we should all be very grateful that such is the case.

But what do you get for the vote you cast?

In a perfect world vis-à-vis our current political climate, you would expect to secure the power of your collective voice in Congress. For that $103 funny-money payment, you would be assured that the population of your state, municipality and neighborhood would receive a fair and just treatment in matters pertaining to your health, welfare and security. Those $103 simoleons combined with those of your fellow state-dwellers would buy you a way to express your love (or disdain) of a given political decision that flies in the face of your beliefs as a citizen and human being. Those $103 greenbacks would all but guarantee that the statement in the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence concerning “the consent of the governed” is the legitimacy of government that your vote is reminding these candidates to uphold.

If you think about it, that’s a nice rate of return for those $103 bucks.

 

Final Thoughts

In a recently posted article, I addressed how our thought process, combined with a malleable reactive mindset, has set us on a path where everything we value in relation to our happiness and success is based on money. Politics has always had its hand in the cookie jar. But over the last one hundred years or so, the jar seems to have become a horse trough, providing room enough to dig in with both hands while still making space for its cronies. C’est la vie, I suppose.

So as you get ready to vote in the midterms, I want you to take to heart what’s at stake. And for fun, keep those $103 buckeroos in mind. Caveat Emptor has never been more consequential. Because as that financial principle states:

The buyer alone is responsible for checking the quality and suitability of goods before a purchase is made.

And if you prefer sticking to your moral imperative as a citizen and a voter, please consider the price you’ll be paying for those who will be appointed to secure a better future for you, your family and your nation. This is the time to decide whether or not they possess a suitable quality of spirit demanded by you for the job. No need to worry about the folks in the legislature; I think that the apparatus of government will ensure that they get their fill.