White House Rudderless, Democrats Say

President Clinton met privately Friday for the first time with the new Republican leaders of Congress, as well as with a delegation of top Democrats, and found that both groups could pose problems for him.

Incoming Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.) and House Speaker-designate Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) sounded a note of cooperation after the meeting. But they left little doubt that they--like many Democrats--expect policy initiatives to be spawned under the Capitol dome, not at the White House.

Gingrich declared that “we had a very positive and very encouraging conversation about the general direction of American policy.” But he added: “We agreed in principle about areas where we disagreed.”

If the Republicans seemed confident, many Democratic lawmakers and aides said in private that they see a White House that appears divided and uncertain in the aftermath of the Nov. 8 elections. The GOP took control of both houses of Congress for the first time in 40 years in midterm balloting.

*

Over the last few days, some Capitol Hill Democrats have indicated that they are increasingly disturbed because they believe that the White House is misinterpreting last month’s election and failing to develop a legislative strategy to rebuild their party.

Their dismay was reflected in comments after Democratic leaders met with the President on Friday. Sen. Tom Daschle (D-S.D.), the new Senate minority leader, talked about how “excited” Democrats are about their “opportunities.” But he also suggested that there will be more distance between Democrats on the Hill and those at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

“Obviously, we are going to have to develop our own agenda when we have to,” Daschle said as he and other House and Senate Democrats left the White House. “And we will be articulating that in the coming weeks with greater specificity. Obviously, to the extent possible, we want to work with them (the White House),” he added.

“We had a frank discussion about the election,” the new House minority whip, David E. Bonior (D-Mich.), said.

Other Democrats have been even more blunt.

After Democratic legislators who lost their seats met with Clinton earlier this week, several warned their former colleagues that they thought key members of the White House staff were in a state of denial.

“To be candid with you,” said Rep. Lynn Schenk, who represents a San Diego district but was defeated in November, “I believe the President got the message but his closest advisers have not. . . . White House people who understand the problems across the country don’t have the access to Clinton. Those that do (have access) don’t have a feel for the country’s mood, so he’s not getting the message.”

Similarly, a recent meeting between state party officials and White House Deputy Chief of Staff Harold M. Ickes in Florida “got really ugly,” according to one senior Administration official.

“A lot of us up on the Hill have gotten the feeling that they don’t have any strategy for how to win back the Senate or the House,” said one top Senate Democratic aide. “When we have met with them (in the White House), all they have is a list of bills they want to push. That’s not a strategy.”

“The feeling we have is that they are down looking at polls trying to figure out what to think,” said the top aide to another leading Democrat. “What they ought to be doing is saying to themselves: ‘What are the things that we really care about and will define who we are and where we stand.’ ”

Rep. Vic Fazio (D-West Sacramento), the newly elected chairman of the Democratic House Conference--in an interview before meeting with the President--said one problem is that “the battle continues inside the White House” over how to interpret the elections. “There is a good deal of ferment there still.”

But while many Democrats have criticized the White House for failing to respond to the election results, others said that they think Clinton is a political liability for them that no amount of tinkering can fix. As he walked into the meeting with defeated candidates, one unseated lawmaker whispered to a colleague: “What do you say to the guy who lost your congressional seat?”

The White House, however, said that finger-pointing is counterproductive.

“It’s unfortunate that these comments are being made,” a White House spokeswoman said. “If you look back at the November election you could blame a lot of people. But that doesn’t get you anywhere.”

Clinton has acknowledged since the election “that the American public wants something to be done,” she said, and is focused on delivering improvement for working Americans.

“It’s very important that we learn from this election,” Sen. John B. Breaux (D-La.) said in an interview. “Defeats are only important if you don’t learn from them.”

In health care, Breaux said, “the White House targeted the 15% of Americans who didn’t have health insurance and said to them: ‘We’re going to make your lives a lot better.’ Republicans went out to the 85% of those who already had insurance and said: ‘If this plan passes, you’re going to lose. They’re going to take from you to give to them.’

“So we tried to make a majority out of 15% of people. Republicans are trying to create a majority for their position by talking to the 85% of people who had health insurance. And I assure you that their task was a lot easier than ours.”

The battle over the direction of the Democratic Party is made more complicated because of the differences between the Senate, which has more moderate Democrats who want the party to move to the center, and the House, which has become more liberal because many of the defeated Democrats were moderates representing conservative to moderate districts, leaving a House minority that largely represents solidly liberal districts.