Who is the mother of all hypocrites in Washington, a town renowned for its two-faced, double-dealing characters. Among them, who is the most unctuous?

The potential candidates are legion and the debate endless, but today my vote goes for our Senate majority leader, Harry Reid.

First, because of Harry’s leadership position, he has an increased responsibility to protect the spirit of the Senate. The Senate, the upper house, was designed to be the thoughtful chamber. It was to be the haven for sincere debate.

It was intended to be a place above the emotions of “the people’s house” (the House of Representatives), where reason would rule over passion. Unfortunately, Harry has continuously violated these principles for his own short-term gain.

First, Mr. Reid has closed down real debate by a practice called “fi lling thetree.” This technique is little known in our everyday world and would actually be considered childish or even rude outside of “Harry’s World.” “Filling the tree” is the process by which a piece of legislation in the Senate has all of its opportunities for amendments filled by the majority leader, barring input from all others.

This technique may be legal, but it certainly violates the spirit of the Senate’s vigorous and rigorous debate nature.

Rarely used until recently, for obvious reasons, Harry Reid has turned it into an art form to limit debateand to eliminate input from the minority party. This was not the intent of the founders and is not good for America.

When it comes to the debt ceiling, Mr. Reid has had a similar schizophrenic episode. Back in 2006, Harry’s exact words were, “Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally.” He added, “Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices onto the backs of our children and grandchildren.” I totally agree with that statement. He also suggested our debt resulted from a lack of leadership as he then opposed increasing America’s debt limit.

Yet, when Republicans took the same position recently, Harry and the Democratic Party compared them to terrorists. They suggested not extending the debt ceiling would be “catastrophic” and cause cataclysmic financial fallout on a global scale. Well, which is it, Harry? I was probablywith you back in 2006.

But his most recent hypocrisy may be his most disappointing as he invokedthe nuclear option in the Senate. Since the beginning of our Republic, the Senate has required some kind of super majority to end debate on any bill and then move that bill to a vote.

This is called “cloture.” Today, that super majority is 60 votes. The purpose of this requirement is to elevate the visibility of the issue, to inspire compromise and to protect the influence of the minority party - all good things.

But Harry is smarter than all of the founders and decided to change the rules of the Senate to allow cloture for judicial appointees only (for now) without a super majority but with a simple majority vote (51 votes in the Senate). Wecan debate separately if these judges are needed or if they are qualifi ed. The bigger concern now is “rule change” and “rule change creep.” What is the next little political bauble for which Harry will change the rules to acquire?

I won’t even attempt to argue against Harry’s “nuclear” approach to solving his problems. I will let Harry’s own words denounce his strategy. Back in 2005, when Republicans contemplated the same move, Sen. Reid declared that, “The threat to change the senate rules is a raw abuse of power and will destroy the very checks and balances our founding fathers put in place to prevent absolute power by any branch of government.” Well said, Harry!

There are many other reasons to want to replace Harry Reid as Senate leader, like his inability to pass a budget or his fl ip-fl op as he exempted himself and his staff from Obamacare.

His hypocrisy, however, stands out. And, why should Arkansans care?

First, we all want our voices heard in Washington through the people we send there. In 2010, 58 percent of Arkansans voted for John Boozman, who now battles for Arkansas within the minority party of the Senate. Do we want a man like Harry Reid gagging him for purely partisan reasons?

Of course not, and I would say that no matter who was in the minority.

The second reason we should care is because we can make a diff erence. The best way to insure this hypocrite is removed from the majority party leader position is to help make him the minority party leader.

Harry’s hypocrisy adds new import to Arkansas’ Tom Cotton vs. Mark Pryor Senate race this fall.

KEVIN CANFIELD, A SPRINGDALE RESIDENT, IS A PROCTER & GAMBLE RETIREE AND AUTHOR OF “MASTERING SALES.”

Opinion, Pages 12 on 02/02/2014