What Do We Do Now?

   In the 1972 Michael Ritchie/Jeremy Larner movie "The Candidate," Robert Redford stars as Bill McKay, an idealistic young attorney who  stages an improbable race for the United States Senate in his home state of California.  Running against 4-term incumbent Crocker Jarmon [Don Porter -- who played the bemused dad in "Gidget"], Redford/McKay knows he hasn't a snowball's chance of victory.  As a result, McKay refuses to knuckle under and play campaign politics-as-usual.  As the film progresses, McKay emerges as a potent voice for the voiceless: "We can't play off black against old, young and poor.  This country cannot house its homeless -- feed its foodless." 

      The lion's share  of the film's 109 minutes is given over to watching the candidate's -- and the campaign's -- evolution.  Against all odds, McKay's message begins to strike a resilient chord with the voters.  He starts inching up in the polls, but still refuses to either mute or transform his idealistic, no-nonsense message.   The movie reaches a dramatic denouement in its last minute when McKay's senior campaign staffers barge into his hotel room and inform their guy that they've won.  The film's last shot is worth the price of admission: a wide-eyed, incredulous Redford/McKay stares directly into the camera and asks, "What do we do now?"  Finis.  Roll credits . . .
   
   What makes "The Candidate" such a compelling -- and realistic -- film is precisely this last shot; the all-encompassing question "What do we do now?"  In the real world of campaign politics candidates and staff  experience total immersion of months -- and sometimes years -- of nothing  but fundraising,  stump speeches, sleepless nights, and endless rounds of cold chicken,  overcooked hotdogs and watery drinks in plastic cups.  Running for office becomes one's career, one's passion, one's raison d'etre; what to do once victory is safely in hand? Well that, as we say in Yiddish, is another geschichte . . . another story.
   
   The election of 2006 is [mostly] concluded. The Democratic Party dream of reclaiming both House and Senate has been accomplished.  We are akin to Redford's McKay, sitting dazedly on the hotel bed, trying to assimilate the concept of victory, and asking "What do we do now?"   For the better part of this election cycle, Republicans have been warning America that  Democrats are the "Party of Cut-and-Run;" a motley crew of Godless liberals without a coherent message much less a plan for the future.
   
   House Democrats, under the leadership of incoming Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Hoyer, have announced that the first 100 hours of the new 110th Congress will see a flurry of legislative activity; everything from raising the minimum wage and implementing all of the 9/11 Commission's proposals to fixing the Medicare prescription drug program [by negotiating lower drug prices]. cutting student loan interest rates in half, and promoting stem cell research.  Do any of these proposals stand a chance of passage during the first 100 hours [let along during the 110th Congress]?  And if they do pass the House, will they also pass the Senate?  And if they do pass both houses, what's to say that President Bush won't wield his nearly-unused veto pen?   These are, of course, questions that no one can answer with any degree of certainty.  What can be stated with precision, however, is that the first 100 hours are likely to see both a maelstrom of activity and a tectonic shift in attitude.
 
    Yes I know, 100 hours is hardly more than a tick on the Congressional clock.  Historically, the timer has been set to the Rooseveltian "First 100 days" -- that incredible three-month period in early 1933 when a Democratically-reborn Congress instituted virtually the entire New Deal.  100 days, maybe.  But 100 hours?  What can anyone accomplish in just a mere four days?  Plenty.  Consider that in the next 100 hours:

• The top five oil companies will take in $4.3 billion in profits.
• $1.1 billion will be spent on the war in Iraq.
• The public debt will grow by $4.9 billion.
• The top 10 pharmaceutical companies will gain $2.6 billion in profits.
• The nation's top CEOs will earn an average of $2 million each.

  Then again, during the next 100 hours, a minimum wage worker working an eight-hour, five-day week will earn  $171.67 -- precisely .000085835% of what our CEOs can expect to find in their pay packets.

   So what do we do now?  First and foremost, it seems to me, "we" must begin the slow, arduous process of restoring confidence in the American political process.  This entails opening the doors and windows of Capitol Hill and permitting the cleansing breeze of transparency to waft through it's chambers. This means seeking an end to the divisive "win-at-all-costs" strategy employed by Republicans during the past dozen years. 
 
    Second, Democrats must make sure that the men and women of K Street are no longer a fourth coequal branch of government.  The role played by K Street -- the nation's lobbyists -- in our most recent Congresses has been nothing short of scandalous; can you say Abramoff, Ney or DeLay?  We must ensure that no longer will Congress enact legislation that clearly -- brazenly -- benefits only those already endowed with immeasurable wealth, untrammeled access and unfettered power. 
 
   Third, the new 110th Congress must reevaluate America's position in this world of ours.  For too long, America has been acting like the most spoiled child in the family of nations.   We must redirect our wealth, our energies and our power toward making this world a better place for everyone -- not just for those who already have all they could ever need.  One of the best things Congress can insist upon is that America open its ears and mind to those who deride and disparage us.  To my way of thinking, dialogue beats the daylights out of aggression.
 
    Last, and to the greatest, most politic extent possible, Congress must investigate this administration; not so much its personalities as its policies.   It must seek answers to a long list of questions.  Three of the most important will no doubt be:

• Did this administration mislead both Congress and the American public in order to fight a war that had precious little to do with terrorism?
• Has this administration excised more than 230 years of legal protections in an illegal and immoral manner?
• Has the federal treasury become nothing more than a welfare giveaway for a select group of the nation's wealthiest and most influential corporations and individuals?

   It is safe to say that there will be plenty to keep the 110th Congress busy.
   
   Ever since 1972, political junkies and move fans alike have wondered if there will ever be a sequel to "The Candidate."  What, we want to know, ever became of Bill McKay?  Did he "go Washington," or did he remain just as forceful and idealistic as he was during his improbable campaign?  Did his brand of disarming frankness catch on nationally, or was he a mere one-term fluke?  I would like to think that he maintained his ideals, kept up his energy, and became an influence for good.

     But most of all, I would pray that he inspired every man, woman, and child to ask that most important of all questions: what do we do now?