Reichert's Inconvenient Truth: He's Just a Small Fish Now

The New Tribune had an article in yesterday's paper about Washington lawmakers as they get ready for the upcoming Congress that gets underway this week in D.C.

The article covers the nine congressmen and women and two senators, and the new roles each will have, as well as their goals and pet projects. Norm Dicks and Patty Murray will lead important appropriations subcommittees. Adam Smith is in line to lead an Armed Services subcommittee on terrorism and unconventional threats. Jim McDermott will likely head a House Ways and Means subcommittee. Maria Cantwell is in line to lead a subcommittee on fisheries and the Coast Guard.

These are the benefits of being in the majority party.

Closer to home, i.e. my district, you will recall that 51% of the voters decided to send Republican Dave Reichert back to D.C. (maybe they didn't want to see him around these parts too much, where he might try to continue to play Sheriff, or rat on more school bus drivers for flipping people the bird.)

Anyway, as a reward for our choosing a Republican, we will see our congressman reduced to a bit player in D.C. as Reichert gives up a subcommittee assignment. What is interesting is that apparently of the three assignments he has to choose from, the Homeland Security Committee, Transportation Committee, and Science Committee, he will choose to give up the Science Committee assignment.

Hardly a surprise given his difficulty understanding the scientific process, as it was amply clear during his re-election campaign when faced with a smarter, better informed opponent in his challenger Darcy Burner.

Another irony is in what he is quoted as saying:

"The whole question of working in the minority is one I haven’t experienced," said Reichert.

Really? Are you saying you're actually inexperienced in your new role? This from a guy who touted his vast 33 years of public service experience as a cop. Or is he actually recognizing that that experience had little relevance to the role of a politician?

The article goes on to indicate:

[Reichert] wants to reach out to Democrats like Dicks and Smith to work on issues involving emergency preparedness, police funding, gangs, meth and the environment, including global warming.

During his campaign, Reichert was widely criticized by environmentalists, his opponent and even former Vice President Al Gore for expressing skepticism that global warming is caused by human activity. Now he says he wants to meet with Gore, one of the leading experts on climate change and a close friend of Dicks.

"I will talk to Gore about global warming if Representative Dicks can set it up," Reichert said.

I'm so glad he wants to work with Norm Dicks as it has been Norm Dicks, not Reichert, who has taken a leadership role regarding the recent costly rain and storm damage to Mt. Rainier National Park, despite the fact the mountain lies in Reichert's district. Maybe Reichert simply doesn't know that.

As for waiting for Dicks to hook him up with Al Gore, I have two suggestions: just get in direct contact with Gore as he probably remembers Reichert's foolish remarks from October and would be happy to chat, and while you are waiting, go see Gore's movie, An Inconvenient Truth, or rent the DVD.

One final nugget from the article is that Reichert will push to make recent tax cuts permanent, believing the government needs to be "fiscally conservative." Someone please explain to me how giving the wealthiest Americans huge tax cuts serves that purpose, while ensuring the government programs in need are still adequately funded. There's fiscally conservative, and there's fiscally irresponsible. The Republicans and Bush have been nothing but the latter. Don't keep making the same mistake Mr. Reichert.