The Theatre of Western Springs
The Theatre of Western Springs
TWSCTWS
Mainstage 4| April 20-30, 2006
 

by Loring Mandel
Directed by Jack Phillips

Click Here to listen to
director Jack Phillips' comments on
Advise and Consent

April 20-30
|
Fridays & Saturdays at 8pm |
Sundays at 2:30 pm | also Sunday April 23 at 7:30
& Saturday April 29 at 2:30pm


Synopsis:
The president's candidate for
Secretary of State, prior
to his approval, must first
go through a Senate
investigation to determine if
he's qualified. Leading
the Senate committee is an
idealistic Senator, who soon
finds himself unprepared
for the political dirt that's
revealed, including the
candidate's past affiliations
with a Communist organization.
When he testifies about
his political leanings, he
proves his innocence.
Later, however, the
idealistic Senator learns
that the candidate lied
under oath and even asks
the president to withdraw
him from consideration,
especially after the young
senator begins receiving
blackmail threats about a
skeleton in his own closet.

 . . . . . . .  About  . . . . . .

   . . . .  Notes  . . .
Production credits

Photos on   Page 2

Dramaturg's Diary

Director's Corner

Setting: In and around Washington, D.C., sometime in the future


Photos by Peter Bosy
Click for a larger veiw

Cast (in order of appearance)
Newsman One (Cooper),                      Dave Santchi
Senator Orrin Knox, Illinois,                   
Bill Hammack 
Newsperson Three (Reigel),                Tori House**
Newsman Two (Marty),                           Tom Schutt

Senator Brigham M. Anderson, Utah,   Rob Nardini
Mabel Anderson, Brig’s wife,               Laura Leonardo-Ownby
Senator Seabright B. Cooley, South Carolina, Cal Turner

Senatorial Aide                                          Spencer Dees ** 
Harley Hudson, V. P. of the United  States,     Larry Horn
Senator Robert Durham Munson, Michigan,
Majority Leader of the Senate
                             Dick Jacoby
Senator Toni August , Minnesota,
Chairman Foreign Relations Committee
    Sue Kuehnhold *
William A. Hunting ton, Nominee for Secretary of State                                                                                               Mike DeKovic
Presidential Aide                                             Mark Barefield**
Claire Munson, Bob’s wife                            Lori B. Proska
Senator Fran Van Ackerman, Wyoming, Kathleen Kusper

Members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee
Senator Carroll Richardson, Arkansas,        Alfred Dreifke
Senator John DeWilton, Vermont,
                 Michael Williams
Senator Jane Winthrop, Massachusetts,         Carol Clarke
Herbert Gelman                                                     Jim Kopp*
The President of the United States                   Dennis Hudson
Liz Hotchkis, Senator Anderson’s Secretary, Sue Wisthuff*
Rally Speaker                                                      Karen Arnold
Senator Wilson Calloway, California,             Rick Pavia
Senator Stanley Danta, Connecticut,              Robert Erck*
*new to our stage
** denotes CTWS student           


Dramaturg's Diary
By Dave Bremer

Article II, Section 2, Paragraph 2, of the United States Constitution

 [The President] shall have power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law:  but the Congress may by law vest the Appointment of such inferior officers as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments.

Since its foundation, the Senate has closely guarded its power to review and either approve or reject presidential appointees to Executive or Judicial branch posts. Here are some items from the Senate’s history of using this power and prerogative.

In its history, the Senate has confirmed 114 Supreme Court nominations and over 500 Cabinet nominations. Approximately 4,000 civilian and 65,000 military nominations are submitted to the Senate during each two-year session of Congress; only a very small portion (but sometimes a highly visible one) fails to receive action.

Historically, Supreme Court nominations have attracted the most scrutiny by the Senate, the media, and scholars. Since 1789, the Senate has rejected fewer then 2% of all Cabinet nominees.  In that same time, nearly 25% of all Supreme Court nominees have been rejected, failed to be confirmed, or been withdrawn from nomination.

For most of its history, the Senate at large dealt with most nominations.  Since the mid-20th Century, it has become routine to refer nominations to Senate Committee.

The greatest number of Senate rejections occurred in the post-Civil War period.  It was time of intense political views concerning reconstruction and sharply divided along political party lines.

During President Grant’s administration, the Senate rejected 9 out of 58 contested Executive and Judicial nominations.  In President Hayes’ administration, 51 out of 91 contested nominees were rejected.

During most of U.S. history, the President exercised a custom established by George Washington called “Senatorial Courtesy.”  This custom involves the President deferring to the preferences of Senators belonging to the home state of a prospective presidential nominee.

Following Rutherford B. Hayes’ administration, James Garfield tried to accommodate all major political factions in his dealings with the Senate.  However, he decided to challenge “Senatorial Courtesy” in a dispute that arose over appointments to federal posts in New York.  These involved appointments to collector positions in the Customs House of the Port of New York.  This was one of the most desirable positions for presidential appointment at that time, and one of the most lucrative in regard to political boodle — if placed in the wrong hands.  Opposing his nominations were New York Senators Roscoe Conkling and John Platt.  Both were Republican “stalwarts” and heavily involved in the New York state political machine, anchored in Tammany Hall.  Conkling was also one of the most powerful Senators in Washington by grace of his committee chairmanships.

President Garfield raised the level of debate by declaring the real issue at stake was whether the President was to be “the Registering Clerk to the Senate,” or the Chief Executive of the Nation.  Garfield refused to withdraw his nomination.  Conkling and Platt vigorously opposed him.  When Garfield ultimately refused to withdraw his nominations, Conkling and Platt resigned from the Senate.  The Senators from New York planned to gain a moral victory by winning reelection and thus trumping the President.  Without Conkling’s influence, the Senate approved of the nominations.  Conkling and Platt ran for reelection—and both lost.  In 1883, James Garfield was assassinated by a demented office seeker.  This hastened the passage of the 1883 Civil Service Act.  This law removed many jobs from appointee status by taking them out of patronage control.  This reduced opportunities for friction between Congress and the President.

In the 20th Century, on only 3 occasions, 1925, 1959 and 1989, did the Senate reject proposed Cabinet officers.  Other major nominees were specifically rejected less then 30 times during the same time period.

In 1947, the Senate passed to control by Republicans.  The relations with President Truman were so cordial that this Senate did not reject any of his appointees.  However, so convinced were they of Truman’s defeat in 1948, that the Senate failed to act on 11, 122 nominations to positions in government, with the intent that President Dewey would fill them when he got elected.

Oddly enough, with the Senate back in Democratic power, and Truman reelected, Truman’s biggest clash would come in a bitter nomination battle within the Democratic Party over the nominee for head of Federal Power Commission.  The Democratic Senate voted 15 to 53 and rejected his nominee.

In recent years, John Tower (R-Texas) had served 24 years in the Senate when he retired in 1985.  During those years, he had alienated his Senate colleagues with his abrasive manner.  In January of 1989 President George H. Bush nominated Tower as Secretary of Defense.  During an investigation by the Senate Armed Services Committee, his opponents built a case against his character rather than his competence.  Confronted with evidence of gross personal misconduct on the part of Tower, the Senate engaged in a blistering and bitter debate before killing his nomination by a vote of 47 to 53, which ran mostly along party lines.  Tower became the first nominee ever to be rejected for a position on a new President’s Cabinet.  He also is the first former Senator to be turned down by his former colleagues for a Cabinet post.  The irony was that the Senate Armed Services Committee was a committee Tower chaired less than five years before his rejection.


Production Credits

Director Jack Phillips
Technical Director Troy Lee Brasuell, Jr.
Stage Manager George Dempesy
Assistant Stage Managers Darla Goudeau, Kelli M. Kubicki
Costume Co-Designers Mary Dempsey, Pat Giesler
Costume Crew Lori D’Asta, Adele Davis, Terry Harrold, Martha Niles, Carolyn Redding, Mary Smith, Jane Stacy, Dorothy Tressler, Charron Traut
Dramaturg Dave Bremer
Hospitality Chair Carol Clarke
Hospitality Crew and Bakers Dorothy Attermeyer, Rosemary Beale, Jan Benedict, Vicki Blair, Carole Borg, Susan Cardamone, Ruth Cekal, Mary Clarke, Julie Crnovich, Angelee Favoino, Mark Favoino, Tom Frohnapfel, Bonnie Hilton, Karen Holbert, Carol Hudson, Karla Hudson, Ann Marie Hultgren, Harry Hultgren, Mike Huth, Pat Huth,  Patti Jeka, Donna Kanak, Eleanor Kanak, Rich Kanak, Kathy Kusper, Bill Love, Joyce Love, Jeff Miklos, Arlene Page, Katie Pecis, Leslie Price, Jan Quinn, Pat Rafferty, Joan Roeder, Nancy Schifo, Jane Stacey, Liz Steele, Carol Suda, Catey Sullivan, Michael
Tinaglia, Gini Welch, Lynne Woulfe
Lighting Designer Mary Ellen Schutt
Lighting Crew Chair Art Kelly
Lighting Crew Lee Brasuell, Benton Bullwinkel, Paul Roach, Betsy Stiles
Makeup Designers Jackie Weiher, Marilyn Weiher
Makeup Crew Peg Callaghan, Pat Huth, Julie Knoch, Carmel Opre, Mary Pavia
Properties
Co-Designers
Peggy Carlson, Eileen Crow
Properties Crew Dave Briggs, Holly Cejka, Bill FitzGerald, Karla Hudson, Mike Janke, Rich Kropp, James Pusztay, Kevin Slattery, Margaret Solick
Set Construction Chair Mark Hewitt
Set Construction Crew

Dave Briggs, Holly Cejka, Bill FitzGerald, Karla Hudson, Mike Janke, Rick Kropp, James Pusztay, Kevin Slattery, Margaret Solick

Set Designer

Troy Lee Brasuell, Jr.

Set Painting Chair Sandy Squillo
Set Painting Crew John Allen, Tricia Boren, Tim Feeney, Tom Frohnapfel, Mary Pavia, Susan Remy, Rob Snyder
Sound Designers Stephanie Bullwinkel, Mike Prosise
Box Office Chair Mary Ellen Schutt
Box Office Crew Ed Barrow, Susan Cardamone, Danna Durkin, Tom Frohnapfel, Patricia Jeka, Patti Roeder, Marilyn Wilson
House Manager Chair Bill Wilson
Front Row Center flyer Joe Petrolis
Group Sales Chair Betsy Stiles
Group Sales Crew Carol Clarke
Poster Distribution Kathleen Kusper
Production Coordinator Linda Roberts
Program Advertising Peggy Carlson
Publicity Chair Bonnie Hilton
Program Editors Bill Hammack, Marion J. Reis
Program Production Stephanie Williams
Website Judy DiVita

 


Director's Corner
By Jack Phillips

In the spring of 2005, The New York Times ran an op-ed piece suggesting, “It’s time to revive the play Advice And Consent.” The piece made the play selection committee at the Theatre of Western Springs very happy because we had all ready chosen Advise And Consent as part of our 2005-2006 Season. The reason the play was chosen by the committee and suggested by the Times is that it gives us a behind-the-scenes look at what goes on during a Senate confirmation of a presidential nominee for a Cabinet position. Most of us are fascinated by what happens when a controversial nominee is brought forward. We have been aware as outsiders of a number of contentious nominations. There are two major changes in this production from the production based on the Pulitzer Prize winning novel by Alan Drury.
We have updated the time from 1960 to 1976 in order to include women senators.  I wanted to point out that abuse of power and excessive ambition are not gender specific.
The other change is a change in politics. The play concerns a choice that senators have to make about a moral issue. In 1960, senators often made that choice regardless of political party affiliations.  In the story of the play, senators from both sides make their decisions based on the moral stand each wishes to take. Since 1994, political choices are made more as adherence to a party philosophy.  Choices are made based on whether a decision furthers the long-term party philosophy rather than an individual belief.

We make no judgment in this production. We present the story as written.


Acknowledgements
Produced with special permission from Dramatists Play Service, Inc.
We are grateful to The Fruit Store, Western Springs and Hinsdale, for providing apple cider at cost with free delivery.

 

Thursday Nights
are audience Talkback nights.

Join us immediately following the show
for a discussion with the cast, crew, and
experts in the subject.

Photos      Page 2


 

   

 


Contact Us