Counting Votes, Buying Prayers
Plot Beats
The narrative micro-steps within this event
Josh and Will discuss the frantic search for Senator Grace Hardin, highlighting the administration's desperate efforts to secure her vote.
Will and Josh engage in a quick political debate about public opinion and party differences, underscoring the ideological divides affecting the vote.
Who Was There
Characters present in this moment
Anxious and panicked on the surface, driven by controlled anger and fear of institutional failure beneath.
Josh sits on the Roosevelt Room conference table, scanning and reading a vote-tally chart aloud, listing places they've already searched for Grace Hardin while urging colleagues and trying to marshal last-minute leads as the deadline looms.
- • Locate Senator Grace Hardin before the vote to secure her vote
- • Keep the vote count alive and identify any realistic paths to secure a yea
- • Maintain team momentum and resource allocation under the ticking clock
- • Every reachable senator is potentially persuadable if contacted in time
- • The administration's agenda and credibility are on the line and must be defended
- • Practical action trumps rhetorical purity when a legislative deadline threatens collapse
Not present; the mention triggers gravity beneath the comedic beat.
A Secret Service Agent is invoked in dialogue as the butt of a cynical joke about an agent being shot at a fruit stand; the agent does not appear but the reference darkens the room's humor and signals security risks underlying public encounters.
- • (Implied) Maintain the President's and staff's security during public interactions
- • (Implied) Exist as a structural reminder of operational risk
- • Public events are risky and sometimes dangerous
- • Security incidents shape how staff and press interpret political gestures
Appalled and incredulous that political bargaining has descended to this level, while pragmatic about the stakes.
Toby is summoned by Josh, then moves into his office to receive Senator Hoebuck and Dr. Chen; he reacts with disbelief and skepticism as Hoebuck outlines a $115,000 ask to fund remote prayer research in return for a vote.
- • Prevent the White House from compromising credibility with a dubious earmark
- • Assess and, if necessary, neutralize Hoebuck's demand without losing the vote
- • Protect the President's rhetorical standing and policy integrity
- • Scientific credibility and the appearance of reasoned policy matter politically
- • Not all political demands are legitimate bargaining chips; some must be resisted
- • The White House should avoid transactional deals that undercut principles if possible
Not present; referenced as a political shorthand to explain expected obstruction.
Senator Cantina is invoked by Will as an example of a predictable no-vote (no on U.N. dues, no on Kosovo peacekeeping), framing the difficulties Josh faces in whipping votes; Cantina himself does not appear in the scene.
- • (Implied) Maintain a consistent voting record opposing foreign spending
- • (Implied) Signal ideological fidelity to constituents
- • Certain senators are immovable and will use delay tactics
- • Voting history can predict future behavior
Controlled and matter-of-fact; he treats the demand as routine commerce rather than an ethical provocation.
Senator James 'Jimmy' Hoebuck enters Toby's office bluntly, presents a single-condition bargain: $115,000 in NIH money for a broader study of intercessory prayer in return for his vote on the foreign aid bill, delivering the request matter-of-factly and without rhetorical flourish.
- • Secure a concrete appropriation for research he believes politically valuable
- • Leverage his pivotal Senate vote for a targeted institutional gain
- • Test the administration's willingness to trade policy for political support
- • Political capital should be converted into concrete resources for causes I support
- • Requests framed as scientific or moral claims can legitimate otherwise pet projects
- • The administration will prefer legislative success to rigid adherence to abstract purity
Professional and restrained; she presents data without evangelism, aware of the political context but focused on results.
Dr. Gwendolyn Chen stands with Hoebuck and summarizes a double-blind, placebo-controlled study claiming an 11% reduction in cardiac events among prayed-for patients, lending clinical language and empirical framing to Hoebuck's $115,000 ask.
- • Obtain NIH funding for a larger, more definitive study
- • Translate preliminary findings into mainstream scientific validation
- • Protect the integrity of her research by securing non-sectarian sponsorship
- • Preliminary clinical results merit further, properly funded study
- • Scientific framing can shield sensitive subjects from sectarian critique
- • Federal funding is a legitimate route to scale credible research
Objects Involved
Significant items in this scene
The Roosevelt Room conference table physically anchors the scene: Josh sits on it, the chart rests upon it, and colleagues orbit it—making it a staging area for frantic planning and improvised command as the deadline approaches.
The hand-marked Senators' vote tally chart functions as the scene's operational heart: Josh studies it aloud to determine who is missing, which votes are in jeopardy, and where staff should dispatch their efforts as the clock counts down.
Hoebuck's $115,000 NIH Prayer Study Funding Request is the explicit bargaining chip he offers for his vote; it transforms a scientific-sounding proposal into a transactional lever inside the Roosevelt Room/Toby office negotiation.
Dr. Chen's double-blind prayer study report is used to justify Hoebuck's request: she cites an 11% reduction in cardiac events among prayed-for patients, granting empirical texture to what would otherwise be a faith-based ask.
Organizations Involved
Institutional presence and influence
The Med-American Heart Institute is another institution Hoebuck references as contributing to a cluster of studies that he claims justify a broader NIH-funded trial.
The New England Journal of Medicine operates as the credibility benchmark Toby invokes, its absence from the prayer-study literature used to undercut the study's authority and frame skepticism.
The NIH is the potential funder Hoebuck asks to bankroll a larger study; it functions as the fiscal gatekeeper whose purse strings would convert the senator's demand from anecdote to formal research.
The U.S. Senate is the decision-making body whose vote the staff are racing to secure; individual senators' absences and bargaining power are what make this scene politically consequential.
The White House is the institutional actor whose agenda is imperiled by the missing vote; its staff are scrambling to convert political capital into votes while protecting administration credibility in the bargaining process.
Duke Medical Center is the scientific provenance of Dr. Chen's double-blind study; its non-sectarian status is invoked to legitimize the research as credible and nonreligious, providing cover for a politically palatable funding request.
Pacific College of Medicine is cited by Hoebuck to demonstrate a body of supporting studies; named as part of a cluster of institutions that allegedly back the prayer-study claims.
Narrative Connections
How this event relates to others in the story
"Josh's frustration over public opinion against foreign aid mirrors Will's critique of voters' unrealistic expectations, highlighting the theme of public perception vs. policy reality."
"Josh's frustration over public opinion against foreign aid mirrors Will's critique of voters' unrealistic expectations, highlighting the theme of public perception vs. policy reality."
"Josh's frustration over public opinion against foreign aid mirrors Will's critique of voters' unrealistic expectations, highlighting the theme of public perception vs. policy reality."
Key Dialogue
"JOSH: "We're at the airport, we're at Dirksen, we're at her house, we're at her gym, we're at her Senate office, we're at her second office, we're at her lawyer's office, we're at her husband's office.""
"WILL: "The American people have spoken. They have chosen to return to Washington a President of one party and a Congress of another." JOSH: "You say that like constitutional scholars made a conscious choice, weighing checks and balances.""
"JIMMY: "$115,000 in exchange for a $17 billion foreign aid bill. That's all." TOBY: "This isn't happening.""