Hi Ralph,
A few days ago, I ran into somebody else, apart from you and me, who remembered The Water Lords. I loved working on that project, a “company town” profile of Savannah, but it ended in a surreal way. By the time the book came out, my wife and I were part of a labor gang in a jungle outpost in Ghana. She’d also been on the Savannah project, before we got married. On a trip to Accra for malaria pills and supplies, we picked up a moldy, sea-mailed “author’s copy” of the book at the central post office. It seemed like some space capsule from a different universe. Of course, my previous Nader-project experience should have prepared me for the bizarre. On my first stint, I’d shared a dorm room with Ed Cox, a nice guy who mysteriously vanished most evenings. It turned out that he’d been going to the White House to court Tricia Nixon. I learned of this only when the newspapers announced their engagement. I’ve wondered for years: Had you known all along?
Back to the present. I score your first dispatch as conceding one point while leading me to concede another. The concession on your side involves agreeing to play “what if” with Green Party votes. Sure, the absence of a Green candidate helped the Democrat in Washington state, which in turn led to Jeffords and Daschle. That is, when forced to choose between a Democrat and a Republican, the Nader voters mainly went D. And if we extend that same logic to, say, the presidential race in Florida. …
The point I concede involves the role of tort suits in ending the priests’ and bishops’ coverup. The excesses of a litigious society are obvious to all. But a case like this is a powerful reminder of the imbalances of power that courts are meant to correct. I was tempted to say that it was a real-world counterpart to Erin Brokovich or A Civil Action until I remembered that those were actual cases, too. You could probably argue—and should, when people attack you for being litigation-crazy—that the pedophilia case would never have been broken without the threat of suit. It would simply have been too hard for newspapers to get real evidence and too risky for them to challenge the church without it.
On the subject of newspapers: No one has an excuse ever to feel bored, considering what’s in the papers these days. The premier-designate of China visits the Pentagon, barely a year after the Pentagon was planning on China as its likely next big enemy. Interesting indications in the Washington Post and the New York Times about changes in the prevailing view of “government.” A development in cell phone ergonomics that is quite addictive once you’ve seen it. A new kind of naval ship, part of the biggest boom in defense spending in a generation. The decades-in-the-making challenge to the power of the Army Corps of Engineers. The latest drama involving Monica Seles, an underappreciated athletic-character story. And we’re not even counting the “Science” section or the French figure skating judge!
But the news I’m actually going to read tonight is TheNew Yorker—which I’ll track down at the newsstand since my copy didn’t come. My friend and former Atlantic colleague Nick Lemann has a profile of John Edwards that I want to read. Advance warning: I’ll use this tomorrow to ask you how you’d put together a campaign against the Bush administration, if you really wanted to get 270 electoral votes. If you already have the answer—speaking for the Green party or the Democrats—feel free to tell us now.
More tomorrow, best wishes,
Jim F.
