New Jersey Jewish News
Commentary 02.16.06

The White House is vulnerable on the deficit, domestic surveillance, and the war in Iraq.

Dr. Gilbert N. Kahn is a professor of political
science at Kean University in Union

There are two cardinal rules about political campaigns in America. First, the party of a sitting president — especially in his second term — is more vulnerable than the opposition as it faces midterm elections. Second, as the campaign season kicks into high gear, American politics will degenerate into silliness.

Both parties are positioning themselves for a series of tough contests throughout the country. The Democrats need to win six seats in the Senate and 16 seats in the House to take control of one or more chambers in 2007. This may seem like a fairly formidable task given the recent high incumbency success rate, but the times appear to be highly volatile. And yet while President George W. Bush and the Republicans are digging themselves into a deeper and deeper political hole, it is not yet clear that the Democrats will truly be able to exploit it.

With the president’s approval ratings hovering around 40 percent, the Republicans in Congress are beginning to complain out loud. It is they who will have to stand for reelection.

In foreign policy, Bush seems to continue to be having a difficult time solidifying his message. Every time he seems to be launching on a winning tack it either blows up in his face or simply fizzles out. The war in Iraq is not going as well as he had hoped, and the U.S. casualty rate continues at a fairly constant rate. The fight against terror is still the president’s most popular trump card, but his sudden announcement last week about how the United States narrowly avoided a terrorist attack in California in 2002 showed how low he is willing to stoop to exploit the fear of Al Qaida.

On the domestic front, Bush’s agenda continues to gain no traction. His Social Security reform plan last year never made it beyond his nationwide speaking tour, and his response to the largest federal deficit in the history of the republic is winning few fans. While certainly the war in Iraq and the Hurricane Katrina disaster contributed to the deficit, Bush’s continued push for tax cuts has not demonstrated to large segments of the public a true sense of presidential belt-tightening.

Thanks to the congressional inquiry into the White House’s mishandling of Hurricane Katrina relief, the administration’s defense of its actions also began to unravel last week. The congressional testimony of former Federal Emergency Management Agency head Michael Brown unnerved not only Democrats but also Republican lawmakers who are in delicate reelection campaigns. The failing report card follows directly on the heels of the president’s obvious decision not even to mention the national suffering endured from Katrina in his State of the Union address.

Republican discord has only increased with the White House’s continuing effort to justify its domestic surveillance program. The administration’s rationale for this program — offered last week by Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez — only elicited even from the Republican side of the aisle a charge of executive usurpation of power. When four Republican senators on the Judiciary Committee and a House Intelligence subcommittee chair raise serious questions about the program, there are clearly dark clouds for the GOP.

These congressional lawmakers resent the disregard that Bush has shown to federal law even during wartime. The president’s rationale of “inherent power” and the congressional authorization of the use of force appears to be full of holes and insulting to Congress’ legislative power. In addition, many Republicans understand that they will not be in control of the White House forever and fear that this precedent may ultimately be exerted when they will be the powerless political force.

Finally, looming ahead for the Republican lawmakers is the embarrassing exposure that could be forthcoming in testimony by Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff. That some Republican leaders and even White House staffers will be tarnished by Abramoff’s revelations is growing more and more likely. While there will be efforts to pass lobbying reform legislation during this session, it may be too late.

Lest one assume, therefore, that the Democrats have a lock on regaining control of at least one chamber, it is clear that the Democrats have not yet found a single party voice or spokesperson, nor have they solidified their forces to exploit Republicans’ liabilities. Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry is not carrying a strong voice. Nevada Sen. Harry Reid is a good majority leader but not a powerful spokesperson. New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton evokes as many negatives as positives even within her own party, and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California is virtually unknown off of Capitol Hill and outside her home state.

The late House Speaker Tip O’Neill famously said, “All politics is local.” And no doubt much of the debate in this off-year election will focus on local concerns. But the national policy questions cited above — plus such matters as the future direction of the Supreme Court, health care, and national security — will undoubtedly have resonance throughout the country. If the Democrats are not prepared, organized, and directed, they could well once again snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory next November.

Comments | Print | Subscribe