Democrats Plan to Fight Bush by Forcing Vetoes

Congressional Democrats, frustrated at being unable to focus attention on domestic concerns as President Bush strides the world stage, have a new strategy: winning by losing.

When Congress returns from its summer recess today, Democratic leaders will begin pushing a series of bills--on issues ranging from abortion rights and student loans to income tax cuts and unemployment benefits--that Bush is expected to veto.

The Democrats concede that they will lose most if not all attempts to override the vetoes that they provoke. Congress has yet to overturn any of Bush’s 22 vetoes.

But the Democratic leaders hope that the expected veto fights will win votes in next year’s elections by highlighting Democratic differences with Bush and his Republican allies.

“I can see Democrats passing bills that the President might feel compelled to veto,” Senate Budget Committee Chairman Jim Sasser (D-Tenn.) said. “If that sharpens the distinction between the two parties, I don’t think Democrats will be unhappy with it.”

Rep. Robert T. Matsui (D-Sacramento), who sits on two House panels involved in the emerging veto strategy, is promoting it aggressively in his new role as treasurer of the Democratic National Committee.

“We have to stop worrying about passing bills that the President will sign,” he said. “We need to focus more on presenting a vision of the Democratic Party.”

An aide to House Democratic leaders put it even more pungently: “One thing Democrats have to learn and relearn is that winning is not everything. The important thing is to state clearly what we stand for. We have to lay the groundwork for the 1992 campaign.”

The first shot will be fired today in the Senate, which will take up a money bill that would allow abortion counseling at federally funded family planning clinics. The measure, strongly opposed by Bush, would lift an Administration ban against such counseling.

The House will consider a second piece of veto bait next week. It is a bill that would provide $5.2 billion for additional aid to jobless workers who have exhausted their benefits.

Bush signed but refused to implement a similar measure last month, saying that it cost too much and that the recession was coming to an end. The new bill is constructed so that he will have to sign it and trigger the spending or he will have to veto it.

Democrats are also working on a proposal that would lower taxes for middle-income Americans while raising taxes on the rich, as well as a plan that would grant student loans without regard to income. The President, in contrast, has consistently opposed such tax increases and would cut off student loan availability at income levels above $30,000.

Republican leaders warned that the Democrats’ veto strategy could backfire.

“These are volatile issues and could create quite a quagmire,” said Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-Redlands), the third-ranking House GOP leader. “They (the Democrats) face a popular President and, in many cases, a new set of voters in reapportioned districts. They’d better be careful about the way they dance.”

According to an aide, Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.) believes that the veto strategy “reflects the realities of 1992.”

“The Democrats are without a strong candidate,” Walt Riker said, “and they are looking for some way to shape the debate. It may make some good headlines, but the bottom line is getting bills signed into law. That is going to take teamwork.”

The Democrats’ plan to profit politically by lobbing hot potatoes at Bush could be risky and difficult for a party that has been in disarray for much of the 102nd Congress.

One problem is that drawing contrasts can be tricky on issues in which some Republicans are lined up with Democrats--for example, on protecting a woman’s right to an abortion.

Also, on key proposals like tax cuts for the middle class and health care for 33 million uninsured Americans, Democrats are deeply split on whether and how to do it. Reaching a position that most in the party can support will not be easy.

The Democrats’ biggest problem may be that they will be picking fights with a President whose approval ratings soared during the Persian Gulf crisis and stayed high during the recent upheavals in the Soviet Union. Bush could be the one who profits the most from showdowns.

However, Rep. David E. Bonior (D-Mich.), the newly elected House Democratic whip, sees little risk.

“The American people want us to do these things. Even at the height of the Soviet crisis and peace initiative in the Middle East, which was well-handled, (Bush’s) approval rating dropped because he’s ignoring the folks at home. I see just up-sides to this, substantively and politically.”

Bush’s approval rating in Los Angeles Times polls did fall from 85% in January to 73% on Aug. 20 (and to 67% in an ABC poll on Aug. 28). But even that lowest approval rating is considered high by many observers.

Some Democratic leaders who have been reluctant to confront Bush in the past--including House Speaker Thomas S. Foley (D-Wash.) and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Lloyd Bentsen (D-Tex.)--have signed on to the veto strategy.

Foley aide Jeffrey Biggs said Monday that “there are some issues coming up that will obviously be major tests where the Democrats will seek to provoke a veto. We’re not going to do this on a routine basis. But there will be an effort to find issues that indicate a clear demarcation between George Bush and the Democrats.”

Rep. Leon E. Panetta (D-Carmel Valley), chairman of the House Budget Committee and another legislator who generally seeks bipartisan cooperation, is also sounding more militant now.

“All of us (Democrats) have to understand that the President’s strong points are on (foreign policy) issues,” he said. “What we have to do in Congress is focus on human needs and on economic and social issues. What we cannot do is let Bush constantly set the agenda based on foreign issues.

“We’re going to have to engage in a veto confrontation with the President.”