Bartlet4America News Archive

'The West Wing's' character issue

Odd twists for old standbys

by David BianculliNew York Daily News

On "The West Wing" this season, all roads lead not to Rome, but to the White House.
Getting there has been more than half the fun - but I'm unconvinced, watching this year's episodes on NBC, that the destination will be as worthwhile as the journey.

As the show, which presents its newest episode tonight at 9, charts the events that will lead to a successor to Martin Sheen's President Bartlet, the plots have been truer to the process than to the characters.

It's been intriguing watching the various presidential wanna-bes, including Arnold Vinick (Alan Alda) and Matt Santos (Jimmy Smits), both new this season, jockey for position in the Iowa caucus and press the flesh for the New Hampshire primary. Location scenes have captured the frostiness of both the environment and the populace, and the crowded political field makes for lots of drama.

In addition to Republican front runner Vinick and Democratic dark horse Santos, there are two familiar faces who worked directly under Bartlet: Gary Cole's Vice President Bob Russell and his disgraced predecessor John Hoynes, played by Tim Matheson.

In last week's episode, Bradley Whitfield's Josh Lyman, who left the White House after persuading Santos to run, pulled every trick in the book to open a New Hampshire debate between Hoynes and Russell into one for all seven Democratic candidates.

In the end, though, Santos who, rejecting all those tricks and speaking directly to viewers in one live commercial minute of TV time, turned the tide and saved his candidacy.

It was a good dramatic moment, however improbable.

The idea that "The West Wing" has become, for the moment, not the story of one side fighting for right, but of several sides fighting for position, has made it less predictable but not always more satisfying. Russell is a political lightweight, yet he has not only Joshua Malina's Will Bailey in his corner, but also Janel Maloney's beloved Donna Moss. Shouldn't Donna see what Josh sees, even if she's no longer working for Josh?

Story lines this season have shaken up the staff as well as divided it. John Spencer's Leo McGarry had a heart attack and resigned. Allison Janney's C.J. Cregg took his job, and now scolds the President about taking too harsh a tone with her.

For two seasons now, President Bartlet seems to have gotten dumber, while all those around him have increased their IQs and attitudes. Watch the show's first two seasons, still the undisputed high points under series creator Aaron Sorkin's rule, to compare and contrast.

Promos for tonight's show have Josh and Toby getting so angry at one another, they get into a physical fight. That isn't the Josh and Toby I know, no matter how heated the argument - but more and more, this isn't the "West Wing" I know, either. A meteor heading toward Earth as a presidential crisis? Please. That's the dumbest thing associated with this show since Rob Lowe's decision to leave it.

There have been some good things this season, in addition to the primary (literally) story line. The worsening of Bartlet's multiple sclerosis has been an unusual subplot; Mary-Louise Parker's return last week as Amy Gardner was both welcome and charming, and Alda and Smits have added a lot of dramatic fire.

It's easy to predict that when the dust clears, it'll be Alda's Vinick and Smits' Santos in a race for the White House - and not much harder to predict that, at the end, Alda and the Republicans will win.

But by then, how many of the long-term "West Wing" characters will even remotely resemble the ones we met when the series began?

Originally published on February 23, 2005

The West Wing is among WGA winners

http://www.rte.ie/arts/2005/0221/writersguildtv.html

Political drama 'The West Wing' was among the winners in the television categories at the Writers Guild of America Awards in the US on Saturday.

'The West Wing' episode 'The Supremes', written by Debora Cahn, took the award for Best Episodic Drama.

The award for Best Episodic Comedy was shared between the 'Arrested Development' episode 'Peer Pressure', written by Jim Vallely and Mitch Hurwitz, and the 'Malcolm in the Middle' episode 'Ida's Boyfriend', written by Neil Thompson.

'The Simpsons' episode 'Catch 'Em If You Can', written by Ian Maxtone-Graham, was the winner in the animation category.

Playwright Tony Kushner took the award for Best Longform Adapted Screenplay for adapting his Pulitzer Prize-winning play 'Angels in America' into a miniseries.

'West Wing' star to play Amber Frey

Chicago Sun-Times

February 19, 2005

Janel Moloney of "The West Wing" will star in a CBS movie about Amber Frey, the former mistress of murderer Scott Peterson.

The film is based on her recent book Witness: The Amber Frey Story.

Moloney, a two-time Emmy nominee for her work as White House aide Donna Moss on "The West Wing," will begin shooting the film next month in Vancouver. No air date has been set.

Frey, a massage therapist and single mother from Fresno, Calif., was the star prosecution witness in the case against Peterson, who was convicted of killing his wife, Laci, and her unborn fetus.

Jurors in Redwood City, Calif., sent Peterson to Death Row in December.

Frey has said she was unaware Peterson was married during their affair, which overlapped with Laci Peterson's disappearance.

Key period for 'Wing,' 'Watch'

The Hollywood Reporter

It's a prime-time paradox: Success in the series arena means staying ever vigilant in "balancing the repetition of what the audience tells you they like with the danger that that becomes repetitious and they don't feel like they have to watch it every week," according to John Wells, a man who knows about which he speaks.

Wells is running the uber-showrunners' gauntlet this season. Two established NBC dramas -- "The West Wing," airing at 9 tonight, and "Third Watch," airing at 10 p.m. Friday -- are coming to pivotal pickup junctures. "ER" (9:59 p.m. Thursdays on NBC) needs tender loving care in its 11th season. And a fledgling newcomer, "Jonny Zero" (9 p.m Fridays on Fox) fighting for a back-nine (for a complete season of episodes). Plus, there are the demands of shepherding a hot pilot ("The Evidence") at ABC and all the activity in the feature division at Warner Bros.-based John Wells Prods.

Wells displayed his characteristic indefatigability during an interview last week in his offices on the Warner lot. He reflected on one of the most high-class problems a producer can have: the challenge of keeping a successful show going strong as it gets on in years.

The hardest calls producers and writers have to make is when to close the book on a given character or story line, Wells says. It's tough enough to be a harsh self-critic and decide when the storytelling possibilities have run dry for a given character, but then there's also the personal component, he says.

"These are really difficult conversations to have because you're usually talking about people that you work with that you care a great deal about and who you respect tremendously," Wells says. "Audiences are telling you that they continue to like a character, and yet you're starting to feel creatively that you're writing the same scenes for that character."

Wells undoubtedly faces a few of those tough conversations later this year as "The West Wing" grapples with regime change in the Oval Office, which can't help but affect the supporting players of the Bartlet administration.

Wells was unexpectedly drawn into day-to-day showrunning duty on "The West Wing" last season when its original visionaries -- creator/executive producer Aaron Sorkin and director/executive producer Thomas Schlamme -- decided to bow out after four Emmy-winning seasons.

Lions in winter

The West Wing looks to the future with cast additions and a brewing political showdown

By Andrew Ryan
The Globe and Mail

The winds of change are blowing through The West Wing.

The sixth season of the acclaimed White House drama has seen quantum shifts among the pivotal characters, not the least of which is the pending departure of fictional U.S. president Josiah Bartlet (Martin Sheen) and his replacement's arrival. The easy route would have been to maintain the status quotient for another year, but that's now how things work in the American political machine.

"The biggest mistake would have been to keep things static, with the current administration frozen midway through a term," says executive producer John Wells. "But the system is about change; even when it's the same people in office, things are always changing. That's politics."

The fresh approach has rejuvenated The West Wing, which has weathered its share of storms these past few years. Series creator Aaron Sorkin left in a huff two years ago; the season before, pivotal cast member Rob Lowe did likewise. Last season was a mixed bag of disconnected storylines and an overpowering emphasis on Bartlet's ongoing battle with multiple sclerosis. But The West Wing has since gotten smartly back on track. "We got back to the business of running the government," Sheen says simply.

The time frame for The West Wing's sixth season is set in the closing months of Bartlet's second term of office. So far, Bartlet has assembled an impressive team that appears to have accomplished the impossible by brokering a Middle East peace plan. Jobs have been shifted around: White House chief of staff Leo McGarry (John Spencer) suffered a heart attack, forcing him to abandon his post; his position was assumed by press secretary C.J. Cregg (Allison Janney); communications director Toby Ziegler (Richard Schiff) has been wedged, begrudgingly, into the press secretary role. "The reason why these characters are being put into new roles," says Wells, "will become much clearer as this season goes on."

Looking to the future, deputy chief of staff Josh Lyman (Bradley Whitford) has already started planning the campaign of Bartlet's inevitable successor: Matthew Santos (Jimmy Smits), a three-term Democratic congressman with lofty ideals. Santos' candidacy coincides with the arrival of his inevitable Republican opponent, Arnold Vinick. As portrayed by Alan Alda, Vinick is a political warhorse with undeniable blue-collar appeal. A showdown is imminent.

"Both men have their strengths and weaknesses," says Wells. "The goal is that by next fall there will be a real question in viewer's minds as to who would make the better president."

The crafty setup will close off the current campaign of The West Wing and lead into next season with a much-anticipated presidential election. The current administration is going to change, although Sheen rightly points out that ex-presidents never really go away. Bartlet will return next season. "He's not going to go out quietly," promises Sheen. "He's going to rage against the darkness of the light."

Real-life prof inspired 'West Wing' character

By Catherine Billey
The New York Times

February 12, 2005

Lawrence Lessig, a Stanford University professor who is a leading American intellectual property scholar known as "the Elvis of cyber law," has now achieved a measure of fame among fans of television's "The West Wing."

In Wednesday night's episode, "The Wake Up Call," Christopher Lloyd ("Back to the Future") made a guest appearance as Professor Lessig, a Harvard University legal expert enlisted to explain particulars of the Constitution to members of a delegation from Belarus.

The delegation was starting work on writing a new, democratic constitution.

The character is based on screenwriter Josh Singer's real-life mentor, Lessig, with whom he studied contract law at Harvard in 1997.

"It was one of my first courses, and he was unbelievable," Singer said. "He was a rock star."

In preparing for the episode, Singer also remembered that Lessig had been asked, in his capacity as co-director of the Center for the Study of Constitutionalism in Eastern Europe, to help work on the Georgian constitution.

"I called him up and asked him to tell me more about what had happened," Singer said. "On the set, we replicated what they had done."

No word yet on the real-life professor's feeling about the episode, although Singer said that after reading the script and giving his formal approval, his mentor "seemed to be pretty thrilled."

Santa Paula seeks role on 'West Wing' show

By John Scheibe
Ventura County Star

It all started when Santa Paula's mayor heard a character on NBC's "The West Wing" announce he was from a citrus-producing region of California.

Mayor Mary Ann Krause fired off a letter to actor Alan Alda, who plays presidential candidate and Republican Sen. Arnold Vinick on the weekly show, and "West Wing" executive producer, John Wells, offering Santa Paula as the senator's hometown.

Santa Paula is, after all, known as the "Citrus Capital of the World."

Krause and other city leaders say Santa Paula would garner some much-needed attention if they could get the small city mentioned on the popular prime-time show.

Who knows? "West Wing" might even choose to roll into town and film a scene or two if Alda's Sen. Vinick opened a campaign headquarters in Santa Paula.

"We need to do what we can to raise Santa Paula's profile," Krause said Monday.

To play up Santa Paula's citrus heritage, Krause sent Alda and others on the show a box of oranges, T-shirts and other local paraphernalia.

"West Wing" producers have yet to formally commit to making Santa Paula the senator's hometown.

Writer Lauren Schmidt told the mayor Alda's character was still being developed.

"However, we will definitely keep Santa Paula in mind if we ever take a journey back to Vinick's home for campaign events," Schmidt said in a letter to Krause.

The show's cameras have already followed Vinick to Ventura County, where he announced his candidacy for president last year.

The only problem is Vinick made the announcement in front of Fillmore City Hall.

Don Gunderson, a former Fillmore city councilman, said he would prefer it if "West Wing" used his town when bringing Vinick home.

Fillmore doesn't get the respect it deserves in the county as it is, Gunderson said.

"We're the Rodney Dangerfield of the county," he said.

But if "West Wing" chooses to pass up Fillmore in favor of another place as Vinick's hometown, then it might as well be Santa Paula, Gunderson said.

Richard Cook, a Santa Paula city councilman and retired police officer, said Santa Paula also is trying to shed its stepchild image.

He said people always look down on Santa Paula as being crime-ridden and not having good housing.

"We're not; we have a lot to offer," Cook said, noting Santa Paula's old colonial homes, its great parks, weather and location.

Luring "The West Wing" to Santa Paula would make it a lot easier for the city to show all it has to offer.

"It would bring us recognition that is way overdue," Cook said.

"West Wing" gets a makeover

In a run-up to a presidential election on 'The West Wing,' TV's revered administration tries to regain its momentum
BY NOEL HOLSTON
Newsday

Fellow American television watchers, we have an election on our hands - and a rejuvenated prime-time landmark. "The West Wing" is on the campaign trail and, in large part because of that, on the comeback trail as well.

Recent episodes involving the jockeying among several candidates - most magnetically Democratic Rep. Matt Santos (Jimmy Smits) and Republican Sen. Arnold Vinick (Alan Alda) - to succeed President Jed Bartlet (Martin Sheen) have boasted the political intricacy, invigorating pace and snap-crackle dialogue that were hallmarks of the NBC series before the Sept.11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington left it looking disoriented and desperate.

As created in 1999 and largely written by Aaron Sorkin, "The West Wing" thrived in its infancy on its idealistic contrast to the scandal-plagued final months of Bill Clinton's presidency and then to the ugly, disputed election of George W.Bush, whose inarticulateness was magnified by the TV commander in chief's voluble intellect. But once the terrorists struck and Bush began to project unexpected gravity and resolve, almost everything Sorkin attempted seemed hollow, whether it was the preachy geopolitical lesson he dashed off in the aftermath of 9/11 or numerous installments thereafter that plunged "West Wing" characters into contrived crises that seemed melodramatic compared to the nightly news.

Two years later, faced with fan defections, Warner Bros. Television and NBC pushed Sorkin and his closest collaborator, producer-director Thomas Schlamme, out the door. John Wells, a "West Wing" co-executive producer previously more involved with another NBC hit, "ER," was given full command. The 2003-04 season, the series' fifth, was marked by the absence of snappy, zigzag dialogue, which was Sorkin's trademark; an increase in melodramatic plots (contamination scare shuts down the White House!) and hostilities among the long-term characters that seemed to arise out of nowhere. Once-adoring critics, already disenchanted, sniped that "The West Wing" had become a crisis-driven show like "ER," with filibusters replacing defibrillators.

Convincing a cautious cast

At a midseason interview session in January 2004, members of the acting ensemble acknowledged they'd had reservations about the regime change but insisted they were pleasantly surprised.

"Being on a one-hour drama is like being in an acting cult, and it's like [Branch Davidian leader] David Koresh left," said Bradley Whitford, who plays deputy chief of staff Josh Lyman. "And I think all of us really wondered, 'Does the idea hold?' And I think that I do speak for the cast that there was a tremendous sense of relief very early on this season that the idea does hold, the characters hold."

Richard Schiff, sounding as blunt as his character, communications director Toby Ziegler, went further. He suggested that the clock had expired on the series' early "romantic lyricism" and that Sorkin himself, by ending season four with the cliffhanger kidnapping of the president's daughter, Chloe, had set the stage for a needed transition to a more naturalistic, reality-driven show.

"We're now into the inner workings of a White House that was pulled apart at the seams and is struggling to hold itself together," he said.

To many outside observers, however, Wells' stabs at naturalism - and Sorkin's, for that matter - often only underscored what a tricky business it is trying to mirror real-world coups and crises. "The West Wing" didn't become an Emmy-winning hit because it was "ripped from the headlines" like "Law & Order," but because it offered idealists a glimpse of something better. What has finally pulled the show back together is a renewed emphasis on politics and ethics. Well, that plus zippier writing and some inspired cast reinforcements - not just Smits and Alda, but actors such as Patricia Richardson ("Home Improvement") and Stephen Root ("NewsRadio"), cast as key Vinnick aides.

All these ingredients were gloriously present in a recent episode, "King Corn," which Wells wrote. It tracked parallel campaign mornings in Iowa of three candidates: Santos, Vinnick and Bob Russell (Gary Cole), Bartlet's vice president. It was as smart and quick and savvy as "The West Wing" has ever been - which means as good as anything on television, broadcast or cable. And it's pushed "The West Wing" toward what would be, if NBC renews it, the most ambitious, realistic restructuring of a TV hit since "M*A*S*H" rotated Army doctors in and out of Korea: new president, new staff, perhaps even a new party in power.

Plans for new prez, new season

"We're planning on returning next year, primarily being present up until the inauguration of the new president, whoever that might be, and then afterwards a glimpse into what sort of post-White House life that Bartlet might get involved in," Sheen told reporters at a Q&A last month with key "West Wing" figures. He said his preference is "a Jimmy Carter-type of ex-presidency...but we don't know how much of it is going to be attached to the show."

At this writing, NBC has not given a green light to a seventh season. The ratings aren't what they once were. The marvelous "King Corn" episode ran fourth in its time slot, beaten even by the debut of Paris Hilton's "Simple Life 3: Interns."

However, Jeff Zucker, president of the NBC Universal Television Group, pointed out that the series' diminished Nielsens are mitigated by its still having the most upscale, and thus valuable, audience in all of TV. He said NBC is negotiating with Wells, and the network wants the show to return and will renew it if a new license fee - what the network pays the producer - can be worked out. Pruning the cast of long-timers whose salaries have grown with the seasons is another incentive, beyond the creative, to change administrations.

Wells noted that the show is reflecting the historical reality that White House staffs come and go, even when an incumbent is re-elected. He pointed to a recent episode, titled "365 Days," which was "all about that notion of the amount of time that we have left" in the Bartlet administration.

According to Wells' general outline, the remainder of the current season will alternate among episodes set in the Barlet White House, episodes on the campaign trail and episodes that are blends of the two. A Republican convention will take place in episode 21, a Democratic conclave in episode 22, the season finale. The first half of next season will deal with a presidential race. The new "West Wing" president will be sworn in in early January, roughly coinciding with the date when real inaugurations occur.

Wells professed not to know yet who the show's next president will be. "I'm not trying to be coy," he said. "What happens is that we actually watch what's happening between the cast members, the issues that are being presented, what's happening in the country, and try to follow what makes the most story sense."

To a degree, the actors playing the candidates are truly "running" for the office. "What we're looking for always is the alchemy between the actors," Wells said. "It's referred to in writers' rooms as 'writer Darwinism,' where you're interested in the people who give you something interesting and who can play all the different kinds of things and who interact in a way that's fascinating. It's usually [that] you always guess wrong as a writer. You almost always think you know where it's going to go, and it never, ever goes where you think it's going togo."

Next year, the GOP?

If that means installing a Republican administration in a show that many consider fundamentally Democratic, so be it, Wells insisted. "Over the last few years, it has not been so much about Republican or Democrat as it has been about who you actually want to vote for," he said. "To put it into simple terms: the person that you're going to feel more comfortable with if you had him over for dinner in your own home."

Wells also said he and the writers "want to keep in the audience's mind this question of not only who you think would make the best president, but who are the people around that person who would make for the best administration. We're also trying to get kind of behind it and see all the questions that you have to answer for yourself as a candidate. Who are you going to be? What are you willing to sacrifice? What of your integrity? What do you have to do to be politically expedient? The political professionals telling you, 'It doesn't really matter what you say. You're just trying to get the votes and make a difference when you get elected,' is the recurring theme."

Wells is stopping short of making "The West Wing" election interactive ... la "American Idol." Production time lags make that impossible. What viewers can do, however, is cast ballots of a sort with their remotes to push the reinvigorated show's Nielsen numbers up and ensure NBC's renewing it.

With that in mind, vote "West Wing." And, as they say in Chicago, vote often.

Saunders: 'West Wing' votes for Prez

by Dusty Saunders
Rocky Mountain News

Alan Alda or Jimmy Smits - who would get your vote for president?

You won't have a chance to cast your ballot on The West Wing. The presidency will be decided by Executive Producer John Wells and his stable of writers - even though some critics have advocated having an interactive vote for fans of the NBC series, which has developed a new dramatic energy to go along with its additional cast members.

Alda, now a regular, is playing Arnold Vinick, a liberal California Republican senator (keep in mind, The West Wing is fiction). Smits portrays Matt Santos, a Democratic congressman from San Antonio.

The multi Emmy-winning series will end its sixth season in late spring with two episodes devoted to the Republican and Democratic national conventions, which will nominate Vinick and Santos.

Cast member Gary Cole as vice president Robert (Bingo Bob) Russell, a former Colorado congressman, is still around as a potential candidate. But in the world of political make-believe, do you really think Wells and his script crew would "nominate" Cole over Smits?

Plans call for the presidential campaign to begin in September, followed by the election (November sweeps quickly come to mind), with inauguration ceremonies and other activities taking place in early 2006.

Since the two-term presidency of Josiah Bartlet (Martin Sheen) has had an obvious liberal bent during the series' six-year run, odds overwhelmingly favor Smits.

And wouldn't an Alda win force major cast changes? The long-time characters portrayed by Allison Janney, John Spencer, Bradley Whitford and Richard Schiff presumably wouldn't be around in a Republican White House.

Still, Wells insists no decision has been made about the presidential winner. He told critics recently the series is scripted "as an unfolding series of events."

"We didn't exactly know where the show was going until we were fortunate enough to get Jimmy and Alan to agree to do the series. Now we're discovering about the characters as we go forward to the final episodes of the season."

Wells, a graduate of Cherry Creek High School, added that an Alda victory wouldn't necessarily mean current cast members will be written out of the series.

While Wells and his crew are mapping fall election plans, NBC has yet to approve the campaign trail, because the network has not officially renewed the series.

"There's no doubt in my mind we'll be back next season," Wells says. "We're in the process of negotiations right now."

Like all Hollywood-style wheeling-and-dealing scenarios, money is the stumbling block. NBC has to negotiate an expensive licensing fee with John Wells Productions and Warner Bros. Television, which, in turn, have to work out contracts and salary demands of the series' huge, ever-expanding cast.

In addition to adding Alda and Smits, The West Wing has several new recurring characters, including Patricia Richardson (Home Improvement) and Steven Root (NewsRadio) as Alda's staff members, and Teri Polo as Smits' wife.

While The West Wing no longer provides the top 10 audience ratings figures it once boasted, viewership remains solid - and of even more importance, upscale. The series continues to draw elite advertisers who want to reach educated, wealthy viewers. So look for a renewal announcement before month's end.

Regarding audience figures, Wells debunks the widely-held theory that most of the series' viewers are overwhelmingly Democratic who agree with the story line's politics.

"That's a misconception," Wells says. And I can prove it by our mailbag and e-mail response every week. People watch because they're interested in the issues. The West Wing is a show that appeals to people who can't get this kind of conversation anyplace else in network TV drama.

Wells claims The West Wing gets mail from numerous Republican politicians - most of whom argue their points of view. One "fan," according to Wells, Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), argues against the series' stance on environmental issues.

With most of the discussion surrounding Alda and Smits, there's a tendency to ignore the current White House resident, who's fighting multiple sclerosis. Signed through the current season, Sheen indicates he'll be back for the seventh.

"Bartlet will have a lot to say about the nominee and then go out and work for the candidate and the Democratic agenda. Bartlet will not go out quietly," Sheen says.

West Wing's Ethanol Problem

By David Morris
AlterNet

In a recent episode of The West Wing, dark horse Democratic presidential candidate Matt Santos (played by Jimmy Smits) condemned ethanol on the grounds that, "Storage is a nightmare."

The West Wing is a smart television program, written by smart people with access to an enormous amount of expertise. Part of the show's appeal is its willingness to present both sides, even with highly controversial issues like the morality and efficacy of the death penalty or political assassinations. When it comes to ethanol, however, The West Wing's writers apparently believe there is only one side and it is exceedingly negative.

This was demonstrated a number of times in the show's early years, when Aaron Sorkin was in charge. In the first season, Vice President John Hoynes (Tim Matheson) was asked to break a tie vote in the Senate in favor of extending the ethanol tax incentive. He balked, since he had vigorously opposed that incentive when he was in the Senate. At the show's conclusion, President Bartlet (Martin Sheen) gives Hoynes permission to kill the incentive, and confesses, "You and I agree on ethanol, but you were the only one to say it."

The Jan. 26 episode, "King Corn" raised ethanol trashing to an entirely new level. In this episode, one of the presidential candidates, liberals as well as conservatives, and Democrats as well as Republicans, strongly object to ethanol, although in the end all but one ends up "pandering" to Iowa's caucus voters by endorsing the fuel.

A Short History of Ethanol

Ethanol is liquor. It begins with the fermentation of sugars into a weak alcohol, a process carried out by anyone who makes wine or beer. Distillation then eliminates the water. The result is 100 percent (200 proof) alcohol. Some call it White Lightning. You could drink it, although it'd knock you on your behind.

That is why Matt Santos' comment about ethanol being a storage "nightmare" was so wacky. Gasoline is a chemical stew of over 150 highly toxic chemicals. Gasoline storage systems have to protect us from gasoline. We don't need to be protected from vodka.

Ironically, the benign nature of ethanol has stunted its industrial and fuel use for almost 150 years. In 1860, ethanol was one of the nation's best-selling chemicals, used as an illuminant and solvent. When the Civil War broke out, President Abraham Lincoln imposed a $2.08 per gallon Spirits Tax to finance the war effort. Ethanol was subject to the tax. Kerosene, the first commercial petroleum product and far inferior to ethanol as an illuminant, was poisonous and thus subject to a tax of only 10 cents a gallon.

Industrial and fuel ethanol disappeared for 45 years.

In 1906, Teddy Roosevelt, seeking a competitor to Big Oil, convinced Congress to lift the Spirits Tax. The ethanol industry was back in business. By the end of World War I it was producing some 50 million gallons a year. Then the ax of Prohibition fell. Prohibition didn't actually ban industrial alcohol, but gaining a production permit was difficult because the feds feared the output would be diverted to the far more profitable illegal liquor market.

Although Prohibition ended in 1933, a legacy of that era remains. Today, just as in 1925, ethanol must be doctored with a small quantity of gasoline before leaving the biorefinery to prevent its being diverted to the liquor market. Which is why you shouldn't drink the ethanol that goes into your car.

Tone Deafness

In "King Corn," Matt Santos' liberal wife expresses her outrage at ethanol. "A billion dollars a year to make a gasoline additive," she grumbles. "A billion that could be spent on providing prenatal care, head start education, child health care."

Any politician's wife knows that federal incentives are not fungible. Eliminating an incentive for nuclear power doesn't mean that money suddenly becomes available for child care. More importantly – and here again we have an instance of The West Wing's tone deaf script – Matt Santos hails from Texas, as does former VP John Hoynes, his opponent in the primary.

As you might have guessed, the level of incentives for ethanol, an infant industry with enormous growth opportunities, doesn't come close to those paid to oil, a mature industry whose fuel source is running out. An analysis done for the Institute for Local Self-Reliance found that the oil industry receives as much as $11 billion a year just in tax incentives. We should add to this the costs of protecting our access to foreign oil, an expense the Pentagon itself estimated to be about $50 billion a year (the estimate was done before the current Iraq war). Then add the environmental and public health costs, which by all accounts are even higher than the military costs.

One wouldn't expect an actual politician from Texas to make these points. But we should expect The West Wing's writers to allow its viewers to hear them.

Several episodes have offered the unrebutted proposition that it takes more oil to make ethanol than is displaced by ethanol. The show's writers could easily have learned that there have been about 20 peer-reviewed studies of that issue. All of them agree that in 1980 the proposition was true. And all agree that since then both the ethanol refinery and the farmer have become much more energy efficient. Some 90 percent of all current studies conclude that ethanol is currently a net energy producer. And as corn stalks begin to displace natural gas as the refinery's primary energy source, the net energy ratio will become exceedingly attractive.

Underdog Makes Good

Ethanol has the sort of underdog-makes-good story that should appeal to scriptwriters in Hollywood and New York.

Consider that in 1978, even with its tax incentive safely in hand, ethanol faced daunting challenges. To be successful, producers had to convince a bitterly opposed oil industry to sell ethanol at its gas stations. It had to convince a reluctant auto industry to allow ethanol in its gas tanks.

Until the late 1980s, most ethanol was sold in gas stations owned by farmer cooperatives, not by oil companies. And people, especially in the upper Midwest, willingly used ethanol blends even when their car manuals strongly discouraged their use.

Critics point to the significant presence of agribusiness giant Archer Daniel Midland (ADM) in the ethanol industry. There is no question that without the political clout of ADM the ethanol industry would not exist. But ADM no longer controls the industry. In 1990, ADM produced 75 percent of the nation's ethanol. Today, that proportion has fallen to about 35 percent. The fastest growing segment of the industry consists of farmer- and locally-owned ethanol facilities. Farmer-owned biorefineries, collectively, now produce more than ADM does.

Oil incentives are usually permanent. Ethanol's incentives are temporary. Which has led the industry to have to fight every few years for its survival. The last time was in 1997 when conservative Republican William Archer of Texas, chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee, vowed to kill the incentive. It was an epic battle, lasting over two years. Finally, in 1998, the ethanol incentive was extended until 2007.

Archer used many of the arguments raised on The West Wing. But his primary goal wasn't to reduce government waste. In his tenure no oil or gas incentive was reduced. He was trying to protect his state's 14 MTBE refineries. MTBE is a gasoline additive made from natural gas and an oil refinery byproduct. In the oxygenate and octane-enhancing market, it was ethanol's competitor.

MTBE received no tax incentives. It was the gasoline additive of choice by much of the country outside the upper Midwest. But it did indeed have a public cost; it pollutes groundwater and lakes. That discovery led some 15 states to phase out MTBE, but the damage has been done. Clean-up costs may run to $30 billion, a sum four times greater than all the incentives spent on ethanol from 1980 to 2004.

On West Wing Alan Alda plays Sen. Arnold Vinick, a Republican from California who will undoubtedly become his party's presidential nominee. Sen. Vinick was the only ethanol opponent in the show to tell the Iowans what he believed.

No Fuel Is Perfect

Is ethanol a perfect fuel? Of course not. There are no perfect fuels. Do agricultural states strongly support incentives for biofuels? You bet they do, in the same way that California lobbies for aerospace spending and Connecticut for shipbuilding.

A more interesting question is, do farmers benefit from biofuels incentives? Only marginally. Of the 52 cents per gallon incentive for ethanol, the corn farmer receives about a nickel. But if farmers own the ethanol plants; that is, if they own a share of the manufacturing facility that converts their raw material into a finished product, they can receive dividends of 20-30 cents per gallon.

Biorefineries can be much smaller and far safer than oil refineries. They can rely on a wide variety of feedstocks available in virtually all parts of the nation. This allows us to envision a different future for agriculture, one in which farmers here and abroad do not compete with other farmers but with the fossil fuel industry. It's a future in which farmers are no longer condemned to sell their raw material at an ever-decreasing price, but can earn their income from multiple sources.

Clearly, there is another side to the ethanol story. Perhaps it will get equal time on future episodes of The West Wing.

West Wing knows beans about Iowa

By Mark Ridolfi
Quad-City Times

My bubble burst last week.

Until then, I watched West Wing reverently, if not regularly. Those crisp exchanges among deeply drawn characters seemed to capsulize real-life politics in dramatic doses. More than once I wished Jed Bartlett was among the caucus contenders who filled our state a year or so ago.

The war room banter rang true. The Oval Office confrontations went down just as I imagined. Brainy White House staffers worked as they walked, trading barbed quips. I frequently had to rewind just to keep up.

Last week, West Wing took on the Iowa caucuses and got just about everything flat-out wrong. The look. The feel. The weather. The people. None of it.

Big-name, likable actors spoke their crisp lines with the same conviction I’d come to expect. If I didn’t know better, I’d have believed them this time too.

Except that I’ve been to those Iowa Holiday Inn banquet room campaign events that West Wing tried to approximate. Nobody uses Teleprompters to deliver policy addresses at the local motel. They grab hands, lock eyes and don’t let go. I’ve met hundreds of local candidates who swarm amidst the presidential contenders. None of them looked like the dentally impaired hayseeds cast in the West Wing version.

The name of the episode was “King Corn” and it portrayed the caucuses as a litmus test on ethanol and the candidates as shameless panderers before farm groups.

Ethanol didn’t drive this, or any of the other caucus campaigns I’ve covered.

Oh, there’s skads of pandering. God. Country. Troops. education. Even farms. Candidates unleash heartfelt but unspecific affirmations that draw cheers and show up on nightly news reports. That’s exactly what the caucuses look like from Washington.

But not here. If West Wing wanted some dramatic reality, it could have shown a zillionaire candidate pulling his custom bus into handicapped parking spaces and getting $110 in parking tickets in Cherokee like Steve Forbes did in 1999. They could have shown a candidate engaging in an online chat with students in high schools across the state and gracefully handling a question about White House interns like George W. Bush did in 2000. They could have shown a fiery populist hopping on a rickety folding chair to bark out war opposition like Dennis Kucinich did in Davenport in 2003. They could have had a foiled front-runner devolving into a screaming maniac caucus night.

Scratch that one. No one would buy it.

The caucuses are about how political big-shots hold up when they’re out of Washington and face-to-face with real, live people for whom politics is a civic exercise, not a job. In the Iowa caucus campaign, I’ve seen homeless veterans have the same access to a candidate as a CEO.

It is infinitely fascinating. Makes for good TV, too.

Just not on West Wing.

FROM ATAA: Message Regarding NBC's "The West Wing"

TurkishPress.com

Dear Members of the Turkish American Community:

Two weeks after Fox Television’s first episode of “24” defamed Turkey, Turkish companies, and Turkish Americans as supporters of terrorism, NBC’s “The West Wing” defamed Turkey and the ruling Justice and Development Party as executioners of women who have premarital sex.

The “West Wing” episode, “King Corn”, (NBC, January 26, 9am EST), takes place in the corn-growing state of Iowa and concerns a presidential campaign focused on farm subsidies, ethanol, and NAFTA. During the campaign, there arises an international crisis in which Turkey, having adopted Islamic laws under the leadership of the AKP, has convicted and ordered the execution by beheading of a woman, Karli, for having sex with her fiancée. The stated crime is adultery. The news, displaying a map of Turkey and the Turkish flag, adds that the execution will create difficulties for Turkey’s EU admission. Furthermore, the news states that despite the tragic situation of this Turkish woman, the US Administration places so much importance on Turkey’s alliance that it will continue to support Turkey.

A major theme in “King Corn” concerns how presidential candidates and their campaign managers must weigh between political expediency and moral obligations when campaigning. In order to gain corn farmer votes, one candidate supports a measure in violation of his conscience, as he believes the measure actually helps corporate interests rather than corn farmers. Another candidate obeys his conscience and speaks his mind to the farmers despite the risk of losing their support. The wife of the former, who is upset at the fact that her husband acted against his conscience, campaigns the rights of the “poor Turkish woman” and attempts to get her husband interested in the issue. But her husband is more interested in farmer votes than Turkish human rights.

John Wells Productions is in association with Warner Brother Studios. In “King Corn”, the Executive Producer was John Wells, Director Alex Graves, and Emmy award winning writer and creator Aaron Sorkin. Despite their credentials, it appears that these men either conducted no research or deliberately ignored the facts.

The ATAA Anti-Defamation Committee reported that the statements made in “King Corn” regarding Turkey and AKP are false, as there is no Islamic law, no crime of adultery, no crime of fornication, and no death penalty in Turkey. For over 80 years, the Turkish legal code has been based on European models: Swiss, French, Italian and German. AKP, listening to its few orthodox constituents, considered a law against adultery, and wisely decided against it. AKP never envisioned the death penalty for such a crime.

The Committee reported that the Wells team even got the crime wrong, citing adultery to describe sexual relations between two unmarried individuals. As there is no Turkish law on the matter, the Committee reviewed the closest law that could be found. Under Virginia law, which was repealed only days ago, adultery occurs when a married person has sex with a person to whom he or she is not married. Under the same law, premarital sex constitutes the ancient crime of fornication. If the Wells team wanted to be more persuasive in their misrepresentation, they might have fit the right crime to the facts they imagined.

Furthermore, the Committee reported that Turkey is an anti-death penalty country on paper and in practice. AKP removed the death penalty from the books, and prior ruling parties refused to use it. Indeed, the last execution in Turkey took place over twenty years ago regarding an Armenian ASALA terrorist who stormed Ankara International Airport and massacred 10, wounded 72 and executed an American hostage. During the same period, 948 have been executed in America, four since January 1, 2005 (www.deathpenaltyinfo.org). The method of execution in Turkey was hanging, as in the states of Washington and New Jersey, and never beheading, as in countries of France or Saudi Arabia.

The ATAA is communicating with NBC, Wells Productions, Warner Brothers and the sponsors, with the objective to arrest the defamation and obtain relief.

Sincerely,

Vural Cengiz

President, ATAA

Assembly of Turkish American Associations