In a remarkable act of self-awareness, courage and public accountability, rising Democratic star Jason Kander, 37, has published a letter revealing his personal struggle with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder [PTSD]. In his letter, he describes his previously undisclosed 11-year history of depression, stress and anxiety resulting, at least partially, from a tour of duty in Afghanistan as a U.S. Army intelligence officer.

As he privately fought his mental-health demons, Kander had a very public life: He served Missouri as Secretary of State, and then ran—unsuccessfully—for U.S. Senate against Missouri’s entrenched incumbent, Roy Blunt. After losing that bruising election, Kander picked himself up, dusted himself off and founded Let America Vote. Earlier this year, he threw himself back into the electoral ring with a bid to become Mayor of Kansas City, Mo.

Now that he has revealed his struggle with PTSD, and has acknowledged that he has delayed seeking psychological help until now, the bullet points in his resume take on new meaning—particularly his Army service: He volunteered—probably out of patriotic motivation [possibly as a result of the jingoistic propaganda pushed in this country ever since 9/11, and maybe even being suckered into the notion that that, in military-worshipping America, serving in the Army would be good for a political career.] Then, in his campaign for U.S. Senate, he famously ran an ad that built on his military training: In the ad, he demonstrates his ability to assemble an Army assault rifle while blindfolded. The ad went viral, and helped propel Kander to a near-miss against Blunt. Just as a reminder, here’s the ad. [Now that he has revealed his PTSD, you have to wonder what he was feeling as he filmed this.]

After he lost to Blunt, Kander began presenting himself as a political pundit—and a witty one, at that. He began appearing as a commentator on CNN, MSNBC and other national outlets, as well as creating a Twitter feed laced with pithy, quotable comments. In light of his recent open letter, you have to wonder how difficult it was for him to maintain the public persona of an upbeat, on-the-rise politico. Judging from comments on his letter, from people who know him personally, I am sure that Kander’s effort to establish Let America Vote was sincere in its purpose [he had been, after all, Missouri’s Secretary of State—responsible for overseeing elections and voting—before running for Senate, so he has the credentials.] But now we know that everything he did was shaded by his internal struggle to keep it all together. It makes you feel really bad for him.

His decision to run for Mayor of Kansas City was seen by many as an effort to stay in the game while making an honest effort in public service, and possibly position himself for another run for higher office. But looking at this resume point now—along with his run for Senate—you have to wonder how much damage campaigning has inflicted on Kander, or has compounded his problems. In his run for Senate, Kander had to raise tens of millions of dollars. I am sure that he sincerely believed that he could do a good job as Senator and that he wanted to bring his more progressive ideas to office as a way of serving Missouri constituents. But to get there, he was under daily pressure to suck up to potential donors, appear upbeat, cowtow to the national Democratic fundraising and political apparatus, and cold-call thousands of people to beg for money. Even the most glued-together human being would be strained by the absurd demands of campaigning in 21st Century America. Imagine how it must have felt for Kander.

I don’t know Kander personally, but I am rooting for him. His openness about his personal struggle is a rarity among politicians. It’s risky to be open like that. Another Missouri politician—Senator Thomas Eagleton—got dumped as George McGovern’s vice-presidential running mate in 1972 when it was revealed that he had been treated for depression. I admire Kander’s courage, and I wish him the best in his journey back to wellness.

I fear that he will be mocked, that his political career will be irreparably damaged, and that a worthy, well-intentioned man will never get the chance to do the good that he is clearly capable of.

I hope, though, that Kander’s story will help us understand the perils of worshipping the military, glorifying “heroism” on the battlefield, recruiting young men and women by touting patriotism and jingoism, and by promising adventure and glory. We need to stop valuing military service over all other forms of service—such as teaching, nursing, and even parenting.

Kander’s story is a perfect example of how our political system and our fascination with power, weaponry and war have come together to create an environment where PTSD and other mental-health disorders are becoming features of our culture, rather than bugs.

Here is the full text of Kander’s remarkable letter:

The post Jason Kander’s PTSD, and what it says about America appeared first on Occasional Planet.

In a shocking policy statement released last week, Democrat Jason Kander—who is running for US Senate to unseat Republican incumbent Roy Blunt—announced that he supports a Balanced Budget amendment to the US Constitution.

That is a very odd policy position for a Democrat. Usually, this balanced-budget stuff is the bailiwick of Republicans, who claim that it’s a more responsible way to run government. Democrats usually oppose this kind of policy. Here are some of the reasons behind their opposition, from a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution:

• Budget deficits are sometimes beneficial, not just in times of war but also during economic slowdowns.

• A balanced-budget amendment brings the threat of political extortion by a congressional minority. Requiring a super-majority to run a deficit “is a veritable summons to political extortion by an intransigent minority” and could trigger a constitutional crisis.

• It is unwise to lock into the Constitution an economic variable of limiting government spending to 18 or 20 percent of economic output, since that level may need to change based on facts and circumstances.

And conventional [Democratic] wisdom says that the whole notion of a balanced budget is just a code-word, cover-story for making sure that, when the budget has to be balanced, cuts will come from social programs and the safety net, not from military spending, or from tax advantages for the wealthiest.

So, what is Kander thinking here?

Maybe he thinks that supporting the balanced budget concept will co-opt Blunt, who has co-sponsored such a measure many times during his tenure in Washington DC. In this line of thinking, Kander’s support for the amendment “takes the issue off the table” in the campaign. He has said that a national constitutional amendment would merely take its cue from similar balanced-budget measures in many states.  [Yeah, but what if balanced state budgets are a bad idea, too? Not a very good example. The federal government should be smarter than the states.]

Or maybe he thought that his supporters wouldn’t notice. It’s sort of an obscure issue, after all, and probably not top-of-mind for most people. But if that’s the case, why send out a tweet about it? Why make it an issue at all?  Why not do what most real Democrats do, and oppose it.

Sorry, Jason. I liked you as Missouri Secretary of State. And I was just about to sign up to volunteer for your campaign, on the recommendation of a friend whose opinion I value. But now that you’ve announced this policy, I’m less likely to help you out. This is exactly the kind of stinkin’ thinkin’ that other Missouri Democrats have engaged in as a ploy to appeal to Republican voters. Prime example: Robin Carnahan, another former MO Secretary of State tilted rightward in a previous election, sullying her previously stellar reputation, alienating many supporters, and failing to swing any Republican voters her way, and, of course, ultimately losing the election.]

When will these cowardly Democrats learn? In Missouri, you’re not going to grab any Republican voters by pretending to support conservative ideas. If they want a Republican, they’re going to vote for one. You’re not fooling them.  You can’t out-Republican Missouri Republicans. But what you are doing is alienating Democrats.

What we need are not Republican-light Democrats. We need progressive Democrats—Democrats who are not afraid to work for liberal policies. When Democrats pull this fake conservative bullshit, what they take off the table is the progressive message.  And that is really sad, because a lot of people may call themselves conservative, but expect to receive the services brought to them by progressive ideas [Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, TANF, fully funded police and fire services, infrastructure—to name just a few.] They just don’t realize it. They should be reminded. That’s a really important job for Democrats. And that’s why I have zero patience for Democrats who support terrible, right-wing policies like a balanced- budget amendment.

I await an explanation from Kander.

The post A MO Democratic candidate calls for a Balanced Budget amendment. Wait, what? appeared first on Occasional Planet.