Bush's Fraying Presidency
Washington Post
By David S. Broder
Sunday, October 9, 2005; Page B07
Three front-page stories on a single day last week testified to the
unraveling of the Bush presidency.
The lead story in The Post on Thursday reported that "the Senate defied the
White House yesterday and voted to set new limits on interrogating detainees in
Iraq and elsewhere," with 46 Republicans joining the Democrats to pass
restrictions on prisoner abuse so unacceptable to President Bush that he has
threatened his first veto.
A second story on the same page recounted that "the conservative uprising
against President Bush escalated yesterday as Republican activists angry over
his nomination of White House counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court
confronted the president's envoys during a pair of tense closed-door
meetings."
Participants described it as the biggest split with the GOP base in his five
years in office.
And elsewhere on the page was the news that the Central Intelligence
Agency's director had rejected a recommendation from its inspector general that
he convene a formal "accountability board" to judge the possible culpability of
senior officials in the failures that preceded the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist
attacks. The action triggered a statement of concern from the Republican
chairman of the Senate intelligence committee and criticism from families of
Sept. 11 victims.
These developments came against a background of rising conservative
criticism in Congress of runaway spending, of continuing investigations of the
administration's faltering response to Hurricane Katrina and of criminal
indictments and grand jury probes that have forced out the chief White House
procurement officer and the House Republican majority leader and that may
implicate other top officials of both branches.
Coming when Bush is recording his lowest-ever job-approval scores, this has
led as sober an analyst as John Kenneth White of Catholic University to
describe this as "a presidency on life support." Noting the precipitous decline
in Bush's ratings from moderates and independents, White argues that continuing
problems -- notably the war in Iraq, the high cost of gasoline and home heating
fuels, and an unending stream of deficits -- are likely to plague Bush
indefinitely
A valuable historical perspective on all this came from Stephen Skowronek of
Yale University in a talk to the American Political Science Association just
before Labor Day. At the time, it seemed a bold -- even questionable -- thesis.
Now it looks prescient.
Skowronek, a presidential scholar, defined Bush as "an orthodox innovator,"
meaning someone who inherits a governing doctrine from others -- in his case,
Ronald Reagan -- but applies it in different circumstances and with different
techniques.
Other presidents of the same ilk, he said, include James Polk, Theodore
Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson. Johnson, for example, took a number of ideas that
had been on the shelf since New Deal days and tried to apply them to a hugely
different time, succeeding spectacularly with a Medicare plan rooted in Social
Security but failing disastrously when he applied the analogy of Hitler to Ho
Chi Minh.
Skowronek said that historically what leads to ultimate failure for orthodox
innovator presidents is "sectarian infighting." They fail, he said, not because
the political opposition becomes so strong but because their own supporters
fall out among themselves -- some insisting on the original orthodoxy of the
inherited philosophy, others demanding more change to adapt to the new
conditions.
When Skowronek spoke, barely a month ago, I was skeptical. But now such
strains are plainly visible inside Bush's coalition. Some fiscal conservatives
are demanding a return to smaller government and balanced budgets while others
in the coalition -- neoconservative hawks and worried Southern elected
officials -- back Bush in pledging "whatever it takes" to win in Iraq and
repair the Gulf Coast.
Similarly, among social conservatives, some are no longer satisfied with
Bush's personal assurances that his tight-lipped Supreme Court choices will
actually roll back the school prayer, affirmative action and abortion rulings
now in effect, while others applaud Bush for taking what they regard as the
course of prudent ambivalence.
Skowronek said the long rivalry between Bush and Sen. John McCain --
something that flared again in last week's fight over the treatment of
detainees -- was reminiscent of the battles between Polk and Martin Van Buren,
and between LBJ and Robert Kennedy -- fights that split their parties wide
open.
But he also noted that the unprecedented organizational strength and
top-down control of the Republican Party forged in the Bush years served for a
long time to keep these internal pressures from erupting.
Whether that discipline will continue to hold through Bush's lame-duck years
is another -- and very different -- question. It must be keeping Karl Rove
awake at night.
davidbroder@washpost.com
|