'Tutam' and 'Wantam' politicians expose dearth of moral leadership

‘Tutam’ and ‘Wantam’ factions of the political circus are two sides of the same coin. They are predators desperate for the same kill.

The choruses ignore issues that should define elections in a functional democracy. It is easier to decipher the thinking of politicians when one is not emotionally invested in any particular faction. From such a vantage point, a recurring feature of Kenya’s political landscape becomes apparent: Many political actors appear guided less by long-term national transformation and more by immediate political survival. For them Election 2027 is a do-or-die rendezvous with destiny.

James Freeman Clarke (1810–1888), an American Unitarian minister and author, says, “A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wishes to steer, while the politician is satisfied with drift.”

The dearth of long-term moral leadership and the dominance of short-term political gain should worry right-thinking citizens. The distinction between ‘one-term’ and ‘two-term’ politicians often exposes how narrow interests shape political diatribes.

For a first-term president or governor, whose two-term limits are constitutionally defined, the overriding concern is re-election. But whether serving as aN MP, governor, senator, or even president, the next election, now 14 months away, looms large. This creates strong incentives to prioritise visible, quick-impact projects, with ‘facilitation’ accounts, over structural reforms whose benefits may take years to materialise.

Roads are hurriedly launched, overpriced pit latrines are launched, markets commissioned, and development funds distributed with an eye on the ballot rather than on sustainable economic returns. The political calculation is straightforward: Manipulable voters must see tangible evidence of activity before the campaign season peaks. The money value of such political projects are hyped to load campaign accounts.

A politician serving a final term faces a different but equally short-term set of incentives. With re-election no longer possible, attention often shifts toward securing influence beyond their electoral welcome. Political alliances become increasingly important as outgoing leaders seek to shape the next administration or protect their interests after leaving elective offices. In some cases, public policy becomes intertwined with efforts to maintain political relevance rather than address pressing national challenges.

This short-term orientation is reinforced by Kenya's highly competitive but insecure political environment. Elections are expensive, campaigns are continuous, and political loyalties are fluid. Leaders spend considerable time cultivating support bases, managing coalitions, and countering rivals. The result is a system where political energy is frequently directed toward electoral positioning rather than long-term planning.

Economic policy is vulnerable to these self-serving pressures. Reforms that require short-term sacrifices for long-term gains are often politically risky. Governments may hesitate to reduce subsidies, reform taxation, or rationalise public spending if such measures threaten public approval. Instead, leaders may favour policies that generate immediate popularity, even when they create fiscal burdens that future administrations must confront.

The political class also operates within a culture that rewards visibility. Ribbon-cutting ceremonies, even for toilets, attract more attention than institutional reforms. Announcing new projects often generates greater political capital than maintaining existing infrastructure. Consequently, politicians may prioritise initiatives that offer immediate publicity while neglecting less glamorous but equally important tasks such as funding quality education, strengthening public institutions, improving governance systems, or enhancing regulatory effectiveness.

Short-term thinking shows in the frequent realignment of political alliances. Ideological consistency often takes a back seat to electoral convenience. Politicians who are fierce opponents today may become allies tomorrow if circumstances change. This is a familiar line for partisan ‘experts’ in government.