Recently, I participated in a panel on good government held by the League of Women Voters. What was most intriguing was when the conversation turned to how society as a whole is more interested in celebrity or personality than in the issues at hand. Relate the concept to government and it’s like saying the only reason for governmental dysfunction is because bad and corrupt people have taken over. If this were true, then the throw-the-bums-out mentality would solve the problem and create good government that works for everyone.

I am afraid that this way of thinking fundamentally misses the real problems facing us.

To be sure, there are plenty of examples of public officials who work for themselves and not the public. But that’s not what we should be focused on. The discussion should be about putting together a political system that works. Unfortunately, society’s preoccupation with politicians’ individual peccadilloes stops that from happening.

Here’s another fact: There will never be a perfect political system. Never. Fighting for one means we sacrifice a good, workable system on the altar of the unattainably perfect.

An example I use with my economics students may shed some light here. I call this the M&M problem. One individual gets a bag of M&Ms and must strike a deal with another player, or no one gets any candy. The Pareto optimal economic solution states that a trade is optimal if one person is better off without making anyone else worse off. In this case, let’s say the person with the M&Ms offers one M&M to the other player and keeps the rest. In theory, the second player should accept the single M&M because getting one piece is better than getting nothing. Yet most of the time, the player without the M&Ms will settle for nothing less than a 50-50 split. My point here is how that game is set up matters. Note that if the game changes even slightly (for example, if the bag of M&Ms switches between players), the optimal economic solution is a 50-50 split. I will let you think about why this is true.

In New York, many blame Albany’s troubles on the ethical issues that dog a number of our state senators, when the real problem is that the Senate is split down the middle politically. If either the Democrats or the Republicans held a clear majority, I’d bet we would have a timely budget, ethical issues or not. But by worrying about ethical lapses, we are distracted from important budget issues, like what appropriate funding for SUNY should be.

If we are to succeed in fixing our political system, or fixing SUNY, our discussion needs to focus on the system’s rules, not on the people in the system. The M&Ms scenario shows that if we end up with rules people believe are unfair, they will tend to bring everyone down. We are seeing this in our current election cycle, where many low-income voters have argued in favor of cutting the size of government—and therefore are advocating against the very programs that aid them. We need only recall the “don’t let the government get involved with my Medicare” statement to see how confused the process can become.

Like the M&M problem, more is going on here than simply reforming government to make it more efficient. Remember, fairness and how the rules are set up are what matters. Instead of arguing about the fairness of the rules that dictate governmental process, candidates chose to attack each other. So no matter who is elected, the status quo will reign and the problems will remain.

I would argue that in this election, the throw-the-bums out mentality is actually part of the problem because it gives the bums too much credit for creating the political and financial crises New York finds itself in. It is also a cynical reaction to the hard work that needs to be done—namely, striving to put together the best government process we can achieve, imperfections and all.

Here’s what we can do. We can start by talking to our students about how government works and what we should ask our government to do. This is one sure way we can fight and defeat those who are using cynicism to define the rules in their favor instead of using them in the best interest of New Yorkers and the American people.

Hey, does anyone want an M&M?