How to elect a good president in 20 easy steps

Carlos Alberto Montaner

In a few weeks, Panamanians must choose from among four candidates who say and promise similar things. There is not a single foolish or extremist person among them. None is wicked. The four stand at the ideological center of society. The four possess virtues and defects, but none is easily disqualifiable. How to choose the best among them?

Panama's Freedom Foundation recently invited me to appear at the National Library to reflect on this thorny issue: ''How to elect a good president.'' My recommendations could not be partisan but general.

My mission consisted of proposing a universal and simple method to enable the voter to create a virtual portrait of the best possible leader and freely vote for him. A method that would be useful to Panamanians or any citizen of a democratic state summoned to the voting booth.

I found it to be an interesting challenge. I wrote a long, well-reasoned speech and added a list of 20 categories one should examine when evaluating the candidates. The list contains moral and practical elements that are more or less quantifiable. How is it used? Each candidate is assigned a rating between zero and five points for each of the 20 categories. Zero is the worst rating, five the best.

At the end, the points obtained by each candidate are added up. The perfect candidate -- who probably does not exist -- would get 100 points. The worst conceivable candidate would get no points. Maybe some would deserve that rating. There is no certainty that this procedure will enable the voter to choose the best candidate, but undoubtedly it brings some method to the manner in which he analyzes and elects public servants.

Categories:

1. Leadership and vision. The candidate brings out the admiration of people, especially the young, and has a clear vision or idea of the main problems faced by society and how to solve them.

2. Managerial skills. He knows how to plan an action and how to execute it.

3. Tolerance. He can live respectfully with circumstances or people he doesn't like.

4. Prudence. He can choose between good and evil -- as the Romans defined prudence -- or, as often happens, between the best of several good options and, if all other options are unsatisfactory, the least bad option.

5. Compassion. He is compelled to help the destitute because of human solidarity, expecting nothing in return.

6. Temperance. He knows how to gauge risks and reject actions that are unnecessarily dangerous.

7. Firmness. He is capable of rejecting an illegal or indecorous request made by powerful or influential people or his own supporters.

8. Civic cordiality. He cultivates a respectful relationship with his political adversary and never descends to making insults or personal attacks.

9. Honesty. He flatly rejects corruption, whatever its source, and is able to prosecute it to the full extent of the law, especially if it is found within the members of his own group or government.

10. Integrity. He shows consistency in what he believes, what he says and what he does. In private, he behaves the way he expects others to behave in public.

11. Common sense. He is capable of finding practical and simple solutions to the problems that inevitably arise.

12. Authority. He inspires in his subordinates a mixture of respect and admiration that transforms into a voluntary compliance with his orders or suggestions.

13. Humility. He is capable of saying ''I don't know'' when he doesn't know, or ''I was wrong'' when he errs. He does not hesitate to apologize when he acts improperly. He acknowledges the talent of friends and adversaries and does not take too seriously the flattery of manipulators.

14. Self-assurance. He has a strong personality that, once all options have been weighed, enables him to make important decisions without hesitation.

15. Professional solidity and cultured upbringing. He has the cultural and professional background to understand the many tasks of government and is capable of examining the nation's problems side by side with the specialists.

16. Experience. Throughout his public and private life, he has demonstrated a talent for carrying out his tasks successfully, even if at times he has failed in some endeavors.

17. Communication skills. He can ''connect'' with society and convey, persuasively and rationally, what he is doing, why he is doing it and what the consequences will be.

18. Quality, clarity, and seriousness of the government plan he proposes. He has formulated a government agenda where the priorities of society are clear and well thought out, with an explanation of their viability, cost and target date.

19. Quality of collaborators. He wisely has surrounded himself with valuable aides who are capable of pressing forward the tasks of government.