“Well, what the hell’s the presidency for?”

            That’s Lyndon Johnson, responding to an adviser’s counsel that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was a lost cause. 

            Bill Clinton highlighted that quote in his review of the new Johnson biography. 

            The stakes aren’t as high, but I think the same principle applies when casting a tough vote in Annapolis. 

             I’ve said before that if your constituents disagree with a vote you made but believe that you cast it after much thought, they will cut you some slack.  If they know that you work hard at the job, they’re more likely to respond this way. 

             The importance of the issue should also be part of that calculation.

             Significant constituencies may disagree with  my positions on stem cell research, exempting teachers at the KIPP charter school from a provision in the teachers’ union contract, or marriage equality. 

             Nonetheless, my reputation and my efforts to explain my vote – in print, online, and, most importantly, in person, should shape my constituents’ reaction. 

             After all, what am I there for if I don’t work hard and vote the right way on the most important and difficult issues?