Bush Outmaneuvers Democrats in Iraq Debate

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Current News - Homefront Preparations : One Thread

Wed Oct 9,12:32 PM ET

By Alan Elsner, National Correspondent

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The expected easy passage of congressional resolutions authorizing military action against Iraq represents a political triumph for President Bush (news - web sites), leaving Democrats in disarray.

"Bush has played this brilliantly. He changed the subject from the economy and domestic issues while recruiting key Democrats to his side. He has controlled the rhetoric, controlled the debate and he will get what he wants," Michael Goldman, a Democratic political consultant in Boston, said.

As the debate has unfolded in both houses of Congress, opposition to the resolutions giving Bush the right to use military force against Iraq if he deems it necessary has seemed to melt away.

While some prominent Democrats like Massachusetts Sen. Edward Kennedy and West Virginia Sen. Robert Byrd, and a few Republicans have spoken against the resolution, others who initially expressed deep reservations have declared they would support it.

Indiana Sen. Richard Lugar, a respected Republican voice on foreign affairs, and Delaware Democratic Sen. Joseph Biden, had intended to put forward a more moderate amendment that would have encouraged the administration to exhaust diplomatic remedies before taking military action in Iraq.

Their resolution emphasized dismantling Iraq's weapons of mass destruction but they decided to withdraw the amendment and to back the president.

For Goldman, the reasons are simple. "Since the Sept. 11 attacks, everybody is terrified of being on the wrong side of the war issue or being perceived as being soft on terrorism, especially a few weeks before the mid-term elections. The safe vote is to support the resolution," he said.

'EVERY MAN FOR HIMSELF'

"For the Democrats, it's become every man and woman for himself or herself. A few brave souls have spoken out but most are covering their behinds," he said.

University of Chicago political scientist Robert Pape said Bush sprung the debate on Congress with little notice, giving opponents no time to marshal information or get organized.

"In August, Bush was down on his ranch in Texas telling people there was no decision on war and denouncing speculation about a war as media frenzy," he said.

Then, at his speech to the United Nations (news - web sites) on Sept. 12, Bush made it clear that the prospect of war was real. Less than a month later, Congress is already close to winding up its debate and moving to a vote.

"This is one of the most important votes that Congress has taken since the Second World War but there have been no hearings, no discussion. It's impossible to expect Congress to seriously oppose the administration in two or three weeks. The Senate leadership has been steamrollered and has basically collapsed," Pape said.

Public opinion polls do not show momentum growing for war. A Gallup poll taken last week found the opposite: 53 percent of respondents were in favor of a U.S. invasion to remove Iraqi President Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) with 40 percent opposed. Two weeks earlier, 57 percent had been in favor with 38 percent against.

James Zogby, a member of the Democratic National Committee (news - web sites) who is also president of the Arab American Institute, said he had warned party leaders in early summer that Bush was likely to take the initiative on Iraq.

"The Democrats are in disarray. Our leaders have given Bush a free ride. They should have challenged him on civil liberties and his overall national security strategy but they allowed the debate to take place on his terms and on his turf, and they lost," he said.

While Richard Gephardt, the Democratic minority leader in the House of Representatives, has backed Bush on Iraq almost from the outset, Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle expressed serious reservations. However, this week he said he would vote for the resolution anyway.

Goldman said it was noteworthy that all the Democratic Party lawmakers thinking of running for the presidency in 2004 were behind the resolution. Only former Vice President Al Gore (news - web sites), who is out of office, has staked out a strong position against an invasion of Iraq.

Dartmouth College political scientist Constantine Spiliotes said the country perceived the Democrats as split on the issue. Their leaders now seemed to want to get the vote over with as quickly as possible so that they could resume campaigning on other issues in the short time left before the mid-terms.

"The president had a real advantage in this debate and he used it to crush the opposition," he said.

Bush also seems to have brightened his party's prospects in the mid-term elections, in which control of both houses of Congress is at stake.

In a Gallup poll in early September, 57 percent of respondents said the economy was most important to their congressional vote while 34 percent said they were focused first and foremost on Iraq. By the end of the month, Iraq had moved to the top of voters' concerns, 49 to 42 percent.

-- Anonymous, October 09, 2002


Moderation questions? read the FAQ