The Start of Something Big? : Naming of Skinner might temper partisanship

Americans in general probably couldn’t care less about who occupies the position of White House chief of staff. Why should they? Most people have plenty to worry about and figure that the President of the United States ought to be able to find someone to handle his staff affairs without making a mess of the job. But if John H. Sununu, who resigned last week, was not exactly a household name, at least in most households, he was an extraordinarily high-profile chief of staff who kept getting into a heap of trouble.

His replacement--former Transportation Secretary Samuel K. Skinner--is said to be, in effect, a kinder, gentler kind of chief of staff. One who will work with Congress rather than insult it. One who will look to compromise disputes rather than polarize them. One who might even improve the morale of White House staff members, who now number in the thousands.

All of that’s fine, but to the average American it’s not important. If the economy were not in its current state of disarray, it’s possible that the irascible Sununu might still be in office. The important question at the White House isn’t “Who’s chief of staff?” but “What’s the policy?” It’s a sign of Bush’s problem that perhaps more people knew who Sununu was than know what Bush’s domestic policy program is.

The hope, of course, is that a new, moderate style at the White House staff level will lead to real work getting done. Real work means working with Congress to pass domestic legislation that will make a difference.

It’s too much to hope, with the 1992 presidential election year coming, that Democrats and Republicans will bury their partisan differences and march together for the good of the country. Bipartisanship, a feature of postwar U.S. foreign policy, typically stops at the water’s edge.

But perhaps it will not be thought too utopian to recommend that the federal government get down to business.

Everyone is worried about the economy. Washington, its coast-to-coast political credibility heading further southward every day, cannot afford to be viewed by the country as playing political games in the middle of a recession.

Perhaps Skinner can reintroduce a businesslike tone to the White House approach to domestic issues. Perhaps he can persuade the President that he risks his presidency by permitting his often decent political instincts to be chloroformed by the implacable right wing of his party. Perhaps he can move the Bush Administration out of its Dr. No veto mode and into the realm of the domestically pragmatic.

Bush should have learned by now that the best way to be popular is to be presidential, not partisan.