Thursday, Nov. 13, 2003 | 8:46 a.m.
MR. REID goes to Washington.
Many of us are old enough to remember warmly that Jimmy Stewart classic, "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington." For those who are staring blankly at this page, rent the movie or find it on cable because it is one of those celluloid marvels that will warm your heart, instill a sense of pride within your confused American breast, and make you proud of the people who perform public service for all the right reasons.
Stewart's character went to Washington only to learn that the "good old boys" determined who won and who lost, and they were aligned against him if he didn't toe the mark. Naturally, with the public uppermost on his mind and knowing right from wrong, Mr. Smith faced the classic political dilemma.
Does he do what he has to to survive long enough to accomplish what he went to Washington for, or does he stand up to the monied special interests and cut short what could have been a budding political career?
Stewart chooses to do the right and honorable thing and, facing personal health issues and the ignominy of erstwhile friends and ever-ready enemies, he claims the Senate floor and does not let it go. For hours and days he talks and talks and talks, all the while keeping the powerful forces of nature and economics from the microphone and, with it, the ability to cram bad law down the throats of good people.
Naturally, as with most Hollywood movies in those days, the good guy actually wins. Mr. Smith saves the day, the greedy forces of man's inner nature are defeated and the people -- the folks back home who actually think their interests are being protected -- are the better for the effort.
What isn't said is that Mr. Smith keeps going back to Washington because he is exactly the kind of person the voters want to represent them -- honest, dedicated, unafraid to buck the establishment when he believes he is right, and un- afraid to go against the wishes of the electorate when he knows they are misinformed.
I couldn't help drawing comparisons the other day between Jimmy Stewart's brave and selfless character and Nevada's own senior senator, Harry Reid, as he took to the United States Senate floor earlier this week and kept the microphone for eight and a half hours.
It was a classic filibuster that would have made any Hollywood producer proud and, I suspect, did make Nevadans proud. Not only because Harry stood up for what he believed but, by doing so, stood up for most Americans who are frustrated at the way our political system seems to be slipping away from the control of the people for whom this government is intended to work.
It doesn't much matter whether the apparatus of government is hijacked from the left or the right, the end result is the same. People feel left out, disenfranchised and disconnected from the most vital part of our democracy, the ability to make things happen.
Let me rephrase: it is worse when the hard right gets its way because their plan is to divide America into haves and have-nots, impose upon Americans only a minority's way of thinking, and create a country in which those who are different -- economically, racially, religiously and morally -- are shunned rather than embraced. When the left side of the spectrum gets a shot at governance, the worst that happens is we spend too much money trying to do too many things for too many people.
Both extremes are bad, but the one to the right has far worse consequences.
That brings us to Mr. Reid's filibuster. We should be in the middle of a 30-hour Senate marathon, which was devised by the Republican majority to bring attention to less than a handful of judicial appointments made by President George W. Bush which, so far, have not been approved by the Senate.
It turns out that these few judges have been hand-picked from the extreme right side of the Republican barrel, people well outside the mainstream or any responsible stream of intelligent thought for the United States of 2003, and people whose lifetime appointment to their posts would cause great havoc in our social and justice system for decades to come. Rather than approve these miscasts of judicial temperance, the Senate has decided to just say "no" to any consideration of them.
Even though they represent a miniscule percentage of the judges who have been appointed by the president and approved by the Senate, the administration and the Senate Republicans thought it appropriate to spend 30 hours debating the issue.
That's why Harry took to the floor earlier, to protest such a colossal waste of time. While the Republicans wanted to take 30 hours of precious Senate time to debate the jobs of four people who already have really good and high-paying jobs, they have refused to spend any time debating the plight of 3.5 million Americans who don't have any job at all.
This can't be why the voters sent these folks to Washington, can it? To be more concerned with four right-wing nutcakes and not the least bit concerned about regular folks who have lost their jobs and who don't have much hope of finding new ones?
So Harry grabbed the floor. I am sure that standing for eight and a half hours, without a bathroom break or even a chance to rest his feet or his mouth, was not the best thing Harry could have done for is own health. But what he did was good for the political health of his constituents and Americans generally. If nothing else, everybody listening learned more than they ever wanted to know about Searchlight!
Once again, art imitated life. Both Mr. Smith and Mr. Reid went to Washington. And both of them did what was right. Can't wait for the sequel!
archive
