|
 or
all the Democrat braying over the "betrayal of bipartisanship,"
from President Bush, the truth is that the
parallels between the early legislative moves of the Bush administration
and those of Bill Clinton are rather striking.
First, one of Bush's first executive orders was in the area of abortion,
reversing a Clinton executive order that reversed a Bush I executive
order. Got that? The upshot of it is that federal funds will not
go to organizations promoting "family planning" overseas.
But, what's angered Democrats the most is the GOP's passing of the
tax bill and overturning of the outgoing Clinton administration's
ergonomics regulations.
This is a classic case of squealing because one's own ox is getting
gored. The Bush strategy is actually in many ways a mirror image
of Clinton's in spring of 1993. The only thing different is that
Bush is moving to cut taxes instead of raising them and he has been
wise in not permitting unnecessary ideological battles get in the
way of his big-ticket items.
Remember Clinton's "economic stimulus" package? How about the BTU
tax? That was Bubba's idea to place a per-use fee on the amount
of energy content Americans used. The pushing of that and other
taxes was one of the reasons that Sen. Richard Shelby (R., Alab.)
became disenchanted with the Democrats pretty early after Clinton
came into office. Following a White House meeting, he stormed out
and declared, "The taxman cometh." Clinton and the Democrats were
not amused. Neither was Shelby. He switched parties right after
the '94 Republican rout.
Anyway, both the stimulus package and the BTU died, but Clinton
was able to push through what became the largest tax increase in
history in the spring of 1993. He did not solicit Republican votes
— and he didn't get any. He got his budget passed by one slender
vote in both houses (including a Gore tie-breaker in the Senate).
Now, the fact is that there were risks on both sides to this strategy.
Republicans were able to use that tax-raising vote in 1994 and it
helped them win the Congress. On the other hand, a recession did
not develop as Republicans had
| “Elections
allow elected leaders to reward friends and punish enemies.
That's life.” |
|
warned
and Clinton and Gore were able to point to the fact that not one
Republican had voted for the budget that "got the country moving
again after that awful Bush recession." That was the gist of the
spin, anyway. In the context of the longest expansion in American
history, the Democrat view held up (or was not seriously questioned
by the media, in any event). As the saying goes, to the victor goes
the spoils.
Clinton's other early legislative triumph — based on his priorities
— was passing the Family & Medical Leave Act. This was a major
reward to both labor and women's groups (appropriate since most
women tend to experience labor at some point in their lives). Thus,
it is somewhat curious to now hear Democrats rage and roar that
Bush is being unfair about "ramming" through the tax bill and the
ergonomics repeal.
Arguably, while ergonomics repeal is far greater net plus for the
economy, the vote itself was as important to the GOP's business
base as was the Family and Medical Leave to the Democrats' base
eight years ago. Elections allow elected leaders to reward friends
and punish enemies. That's life.
Bill Clinton lost control of his agenda in 1993, not because he
wasn't of a partisan move on the economic part of his agenda —
voters will allow a fair bit of latitude in that area. However,
it was because of social policy — gays in the military —
and an egregious expansion of the role of government — threatening
the takeover of one-seventh of the economy with HillaryCare —
that Clinton lost his congressional majority.
George W. Bush has little to fear in that regard. Yes, his majority
is far narrower than Clinton's, but he is not going out of his way
to even appear to attack the "moderate" center. His primary focus
has been on economic issues — ergonomics repeal fits into that
category. The abortion executive order is a wash — and one
that doesn't affect Americans at home. He hasn't made any move yet
to repeal "don't ask, don't tell" and return to the explicit no-gays-allowed
policy that existed before Clinton entered office. Purists might
quibble with that decision, but the truth is that this strategy
allows Bush to make the economy and taxes the main battle. The public
will allow partisanship in the pursuit of a broad-based agenda.
It will not tolerate narrow, selfish ideological pursuits.
Democrats may wail and moan to their hearts content about how partisan
Bush is, but as long as it looks like he is doing his job first
and foremost, rather than pursuing a narrow ideology, he will thrive.
|
