Frustration with the current state of American politics is palpable from coast to coast and across the partisan spectrum. If you’ve had a conversation recently with someone who was really enjoying the state of our dialogue and governance, there are slew of pollsters and universities who would really love to meet them. The middle ground of American politics has vanished, entrenching Republicans and Democrats with the strongest held views within their parties at the expense of anyone not committed to the model of victory by total annihilation. There are no signs of balance returning anytime soon. What is comforting, however, is that this condition is not unknown to the biggest movers and shakers in American society: the CEOs.
Howard Schultz is stepping down as executive chairman of Starbucks after nearly 20 years of combined time as CEO of the once-fledgling Seattle coffee company turned international behemoth. In a recent interview in the New York Times, Schultz was confronted with a familiar question about his political ambitions. When asked if he was was considering a run for the presidency his answer was telling, saying, “I intend to think about a range of options, and that could include public service. But I’m a long way from making any decisions about the future.”
This came with a caveat: “I want to be truthful with you without creating more speculative headlines. For some time now, I have been deeply concerned about our country — the growing division at home and our standing in the world.” But that’s not all Schultz has sounded off about. Last week on CNBC, he knocked the Democrats for going too far to the left, promoting single-payer healthcare and the idea of government-backed full employment. Schultz said, “It concerns me that so many voices within the Democratic Party are going so far to the left. I say to myself, ‘How are we going to pay for these things?’”
Another giant of business has expressed similar interest, though it appears to have been temporarily curbed. Bob Iger, the CEO of Disney, was being actively pushed by Oprah Winfrey and close associates to run, and he didn’t lack for desire. The momentum was halted by Disney’s acquisition of 21st Century Fox, refocusing Iger on the business. Before the big deal he had said to Variety, “I am horrified at the state of politics in America today, and I will throw stones in multiple directions. Dialogue has given way to disdain. I, maybe a bit naively, believed that there was a need for someone in high elected office to be more open-minded and willing to not only govern from the middle but to try to shame everyone else into going to the middle.”
Maybe Iger is right, or maybe the polarizing 2016 election just has him as discouraged as the rest of us.
Could our nation’s most prominent business leaders be the new American middle? Something beyond being ideologically flexible and more in the direction of culturally unifying. While President Trump being in the White House might seem like proof that business icons don’t tame politics, take into account just how divergent the businesses of Trump, Iger, and Schultz are in practice.
Both Schultz and Iger helm brands that reach into every corner of America, in some way, shape, or form. Back in 2012, Business Insider noted that “The Closest Starbucks Is Never More Than 170 Miles Away” and there is still a salient point here: Starbucks employs upwards of 200,000 Americans and can sell to its customers from any walk of life, despite short-lived and overblown controversies about holiday cups, community conversations, and diversity training. Disney is represented in some way on every cable package in America and their brands, encompassing Disney Parks and even “Star Wars,” are nothing short of iconic.
Like Starbucks, Disney is no stranger to controversy, whether it be the recent firing of Roseanne Barr, union disputes, or longstanding conservative moaning about progressive themes around gender and sexuality appearing in Disney properties. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., went after Disney and Iger for its wages and what he calls “greed” and “ruthless capitalism.” All of this aside, Disney stands above the rest in the public eye as a bastion of family-friendly entertainment and enjoys a special bond with multiple generations of Americans. Like with Schultz, some loud voices would decry their legacies at the companies for promoting either left-leaning cultural values or not buckling to progressive outrage over labor and wage practices — but this is inevitable.
What matters, however, is that figures like Schultz and Iger speak a language of compromise. Plus, by extension of their management of brands that every American interacts with, they could communicate renewed centrist politics with respect for voters’ differences.
Neither Iger or Schultz have perfect records at running their respective companies — look no further than the rehiring of the polarizing and bombastic Keith Olbermann at ESPN or perhaps the naivety of how Starbucks walked into its first holiday cup controversy is 2015. Outliers aside, the political profile of “socially liberal but fiscally conservative” remains a popular identifier in independent-minded circles. Each of these men can speak to those attitudes and, perhaps more importantly, understand the power of the free market. They could each champion the merits of an American conscious capitalism, while speaking to those left behind.
America is in a state of political crisis and is ceding ground to illiberal forces on both sides of the aisle. We can only hope that CEOs like Schultz and Iger will consider public service in the pursuit of a new American middle.
Stephen Kent (@Stephen_Kent89) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog. He is the spokesperson for Young Voices and host of “Beltway Banthas,” a “Star Wars” and politics podcast in D.C.
