Look to Home for Answers, GOP’s Watts Says

Arguing that the state of the union resides far from the nation’s capital, Rep. J.C. Watts (R-Okla.) responded to President Clinton’s speech Tuesday with a call for federal lawmakers to grant average Americans a larger role in public life.

“The strength of America is not in Washington,” Watts said during his 20-minute speech delivered shortly after Clinton’s State of the Union address. “The strength of America is at home, in lives well-lived in the land of faith and family.”

Watts underlined the Republican coda that Washington’s ability to spend and regulate should be curtailed. That point was echoed by other Republicans as they emerged from the House chamber after Clinton’s address. But most also added that they could work with Clinton on a range of issues.

“There’s a lot there we can work on,” said Rep. John Shadegg (R-Ariz). “Regrettably, he still sees the world as centered from Washington. But there’s a lot we can work on.”

Sen. Connie Mack (R-Fla.) said: “We’re ready to go to work. There are a lot of areas of common interest.” Among them, he said, are a balanced budget, education reform, toxic cleanup, and safer streets and schools.

“We all have the same big goals,” said Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas). “Now let’s roll up our sleeves and see if we can come to terms.”

On the other side of the aisle, Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) was unreservedly upbeat, suggesting the speech offered something positive for everyone.

“I expect Wall Street will like the speech because of the priority the president places on balancing the budget, and Main Street will like it because of the practical solutions he’s proposing to the everyday needs of working families,” Daschle said in a statement.

Some Democrats, however, sounded skeptical of the generally favorable GOP assessments. “The proof will come in the next few weeks, won’t it?” said Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa).

Even before Clinton’s address, the theme of the GOP lawmakers was clear, based on “talking points” circulated among them: After the acrimony of recent sessions of Congress, there is a real possibility of doing the public’s business this time.

The Republican response was far warmer than perhaps any of Clinton’s previous four State of the Union speeches. Time after time, Republicans jumped to their feet to join Democrats in applauding the president.

Only once did they unmistakably and collectively show their disapproval--when Clinton spoke disparagingly of a GOP-sponsored constitutional amendment to balance the budget. Many Republicans hissed and some booed.

In his response to Clinton, Watts pleaded with the administration to work in a bipartisan effort with the GOP-led Congress to pass a balanced-budget amendment to the Constitution that he said would remove Uncle Sam’s hand from taxpayers’ pockets.

“The balanced-budget amendment will force the government to change its ways--permanently,” he said. “No longer will a president or a Congress be able to spend money we don’t have, on benefits our children will never see.”

Watts, a Baptist preacher and second-term legislator, is widely considered a bright and rising star among GOP lawmakers.

His youthful and vigorous presence--and his African American race--projected a fresh image for a party viewed as far less inclusive than the Democrats, and it stood in contrast to the response given last year by an aging Sen. Bob Dole, whose comments were regarded as dour and uninspiring.

Watts’ appearance also helped downplay House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s role as the GOP’s leading spokesman. Gingrich chose Watts to give the address.

Watts’ hour in the national limelight was shadowed by a controversy stemming from remarks he made to the Washington Post. A profile published in the paper on Tuesday quoted Watts expressing contempt for “race-hustling poverty pimps” like civil rights activist Jesse Jackson and other liberal black leaders.

Jackson and Washington Mayor Marion Barry “talk a lot about slavery, but they’re perfectly happy to have just moved us to another plantation. What scares them most is that black people might break out that racial group thing and start thinking for themselves,” the Post quoted Watts as saying.

Jackson said he called Gingrich to complain after reading the article, and the civil rights leader said Gingrich had “expressed his disapproval to Watts” about the remarks. Hours later, Jackson watched Clinton’s address from the House gallery as Gingrich’s invited guest.

“Newt assured me” that Watts’ comments in the paper were not the view of the party, Jackson said in an interview before the president’s speech. “It’s offensive no matter who said it--besides it’s not true.”