GOP Pressuring Bush to Focus on Home Front

President Bush’s determination to maintain harmonious relations with Democrats while waging war on terrorism may sit well with the public, but the love fest is beginning to unnerve Republicans.

With the beginning of a key election year just weeks away, many Republicans are pressuring the White House and Bush himself to focus anew on his domestic goals--and promote them far more vigorously than he has so far.

Since Sept. 11, Bush has done little more than periodically urge Congress to act on his major proposals while eschewing the hardball tactics often required to win hearts and minds on Capitol Hill.

As a result, much of the president’s original domestic agenda is languishing. His energy bill is dead for the year, his faith-based initiative stalled, his economic stimulus package mired in partisan wrangling. Even his priority before the terrorist attacks, education reform, has yet to become law, though it enjoys bipartisan support.

Bush faces the prospect of ending his first year in office with little to show on the domestic legislative ledger besides a $1.35-trillion tax cut that could become a political liability if the recession and budget deficit deepen.

No wonder Republicans are getting nervous.

One GOP senator is urging Bush to use his veto pen to pick a fight with Democrats. Other Republicans want the president to start twisting arms and enmesh himself in detailed legislative give-and-take, though that is not Bush’s style.

“All of us are anxious for the president to use his ratings,” said one high-ranking GOP senator, referring to Bush’s stratospheric job-approval numbers in the polls.

Added Scott Reed, a Republican strategist: “With the slowing economy, this administration needs to be focusing on growth, on creating jobs, on breaking down regulatory barriers--because that is what will affect the midterm elections.”

Failure by Bush to achieve tangible results on these fronts, Reed said, not only could thwart GOP hopes of retaking the Senate, but it also might cost the party control of the House.

“And then the whole agenda is off the table,” he said.

Fear Democrats Could Step Into the Breach

But as Bush weighs an action plan for next year--and a new chairman of the Republican National Committee, following Virginia Gov. James S. Gilmore’s decision to resign the post amid mounting GOP concern about the party’s prospects--he clearly faces a dilemma.

If the president chooses to spend some of his political capital by more aggressively pushing his priorities, his approval ratings are all but certain to drop. That’s because the same polls show the public remains sharply divided over his pre-Sept. 11 domestic agenda.

On the other hand, by staying focused on the counter-terrorism war and getting along with Democrats, Bush opens himself to criticism of overlooking pocketbook concerns during an economic downturn and a return to huge deficits--a perception that hurt his father nine years ago.

And Bush’s reluctance to engage in partisan activities may further embolden Democrats to stymie his agenda and push their own.

“It is a dilemma that obviously [Bush and his aides] haven’t found a solution to,” Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) said. “They have to be concerned about the parallel that exists, potentially, between this administration and its economic difficulties and the former Bush administration and what they experienced.”

One experienced Republican consultant, who requested anonymity, said Bush may have little choice but to increase his involvement in partisan disputes. If he doesn’t, “by January he’s going to have the House in a full uproar,” the consultant said.

Since the terrorist attacks, Bush has shunned the campaign trail and the fund-raising circuit, although he has dispatched Cabinet officers and top White House aides, including Vice President Dick Cheney, as his emissaries.

Reed concurred with the need for Bush to soon wade into both the legislative arena and the upcoming off-year election campaigns.

“Politics is about action, forward motion, being on the offense,” he said. “Right now, Republicans are none of the above.”

But at the White House, communication director Dan Bartlett dismissed the calls for a more direct Bush involvement.

“There are always some who believe that there never is enough. But the president has focused on these issues and will continue to do so,” Bartlett said. “And the American people are savvy enough to understand that this president is engaged on issues other than war itself.”

Reluctance to Risk Approval Ratings

Independent analysts offered several theories to explain Bush’s avoidance of aggressively lobbying Congress.

“He believes providence created a role for him on Sept. 11, and it transcends every other mundane aspect of the presidency,” said Norm Ornstein, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

“It’s a heady experience to be at 90% approval, especially after an extremely divisive election,” added Larry Sabato, a University of Virginia political scientist. “Only human, presidents are inclined to savor the popularity and refrain from doing anything that might return them to the previous state of little grace.”

Stuart Rothenberg, who publishes a political newsletter, believes Bush actually has little room to maneuver.

“I don’t think he has as much power as the numbers suggest. These are very artificial job approval numbers--tied solely to a patriotic response to a presidency and to the country,” he said. “The war hasn’t increased Bush’s clout on prescription drugs, a patients’ bill of rights or most budget matters, because voters apparently haven’t changed their opinions about those issues or about the two parties’ overall agendas. On those issues, he has no new power.”

Bush loyalists do not fault his stance, given the exigencies of the counter-terrorism war. As the president himself noted on Wednesday: “I’ve been a little busy lately.”

But many congressional Republicans insist the time is ripe for Bush to more forcefully make his case on issues.

Whether Bush will follow such advice is another matter.

“He’s not really that hard-hitting a guy,” said Washington lobbyist Robert H. Michel, a former House Republican leader. “He’ll make a point, but he doesn’t want to ruffle too many feathers.”

Republicans are loath to criticize the president, but some conceded that his aloofness set back the GOP’s preferences on the much-debated aviation security measure.

Congress eventually passed the bill, and Bush signed it, but it was the Democratic version that called for federalizing airport security workers. That prompted Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska), chairman of the House Transportation Committee, to declare that Bush’s involvement was “not as much as I would have wished.”

Bush Wary of Being Called Opportunist

The president also has avoided pushing his controversial energy plan, which would open a portion of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil exploration.

But a top House Republican staffer said that Bush did so to avoid a political backlash. “We were very concerned that people would call him an opportunist, and that could cause some erosion in support for the war,” said the aide, who asked for anonymity.

One Republican proponent of a more hands-on Bush approach is Rep. Rob Portman (R-Ohio). “It’s going to be necessary to get some of this legislation through,” he said.

Another influential Republican calling on Bush to lobby harder is Sen. Larry E. Craig of Idaho, who recently urged the president to veto one of the annual government spending bills to prompt a showdown with Democrats.

Like Portman, Craig senses a new willingness on Bush’s part to engage more directly. He said the president’s veto threats helped keep recent spending bills within limits acceptable to most Republicans.

“He can afford to expend some of that credit with the American people,” Craig said.