Bush Takes Long View

Just two weeks into his second 100 days--a yardstick he prefers--President Bush is advancing an array of controversial initiatives with long-term consequences--and short-term political risk.

After touting education reform, an immediate tax cut to stimulate the economy, and federal aid to religious organizations that provide social services--all targeted for congressional passage this year--Bush is pivoting toward a panoply of long-range issues. Social Security reform. A missile defense system. A national energy policy. And a permanent lowering of all tax rates.

On Wednesday, the president opened another front in his drive to put a conservative stamp on American life, announcing 11 mostly conservative nominees to the federal bench for life.

On Thursday, Bush took another such step, ordering a fundamental shift in the war against drugs, focusing on curbing domestic consumption of drugs as well as on treatment and interdiction.

And on Friday, he tackled the problem of AIDS in Africa, earmarking new U.S. funds for an international drive to combat the epidemic.

For the legacy-minded president, these initiatives are rife with political peril, and it is far from certain that he will prevail.

Because these long-term initiatives by definition are unlikely to yield tangible, short-term results--and may not until long after Bush’s White House tenure--the president risks being seen as out of step with the American people on problems that cry out for immediate redress.

Two such examples are the rising gasoline prices throughout the country and the rolling power blackouts in California. Although Bush expressed his “concern” on both matters at a banquet here Tuesday night, he offered little beyond some conservation efforts while citing his national energy policy (to be unveiled later this week), which will emphasize exploration and expansion of the infrastructure to deliver power.

On Friday, Bush said in a news conference that his tax cut can help consumers who are being hurt by higher gas prices.

And on Saturday, the president responded anew to the growing criticism that his administration is emphasizing exploration while giving short shrift to other approaches to the energy crisis, such as conserving gasoline and other fuels.

In his weekly radio address, Bush called for a “new kind of conservation” that saves power through tax incentives and energy-efficient technology.

It remains unclear whether such a rhetorical shift will allay the anxieties among many congressional Republicans who are worried that the White House view could cost the GOP House seats in 2002--and thus tip the balance of power back to the Democrats.

And in seeking to partially privatize Social Security--the biggest proposed change in the program’s history--Bush may be handing Democrats their favorite and time-tested campaign cudgel: warning senior citizens that Republicans are cutting their benefits. The president earlier this month named a commission stacked in favor of privatization advocates, who are to report their recommendations this autumn.

“Democrats are going to hammer him on that,” said James Thurber, director of the Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies at American University here.

As for national missile defense, it’s far from clear that the technological know-how to build such a system exists; in the meantime, the huge financial investment for its research and development threatens to drain funds from other military priorities. Abroad, even many U.S. allies are skeptical about the feasibility and the geopolitical ramifications of such a system.

So why is Bush embarking on such an ambitious agenda, one so filled with land mines?

Senior White House aides insist that Bush is undaunted by the political pitfalls, and they characterize his long-term agenda as that of a bold leader.

“The president is now building a base for long-term solutions,” said Andrew H. Card Jr., White House chief of staff.

“This shows that the president is willing to address long-term challenges--and that he’s not as interested in a day’s headline as in years of progress,” said Karen Hughes, the president’s counselor.

“He’s tackling the big issues for the next generation,” deputy counselor Dan Bartlett added.

And if the long-term initiatives prove politically costly to Bush in the near-term, then so be it, Hughes said, adding, “But I hope not--because these issues need to be addressed.”

Some analysts, however, detect an ulterior motive.

“The president and his strategists believe that, especially after this last election, to just coast, to play it safe, to pursue incremental changes, would be to forgo any opportunity to reshape the political and policy world,” said Thomas E. Mann, Harriman Fellow in American Governance at the Brookings Institution, a nonpartisan, centrist think tank based in Washington.

“And therefore, they are really going to go for broke, to play from their base, take on major policy changes that, if enacted, might provide the basis for building a new Republican majority.”

That tactic may strike some as surprising, especially given the narrowness of the 2000 presidential election, in which more voters backed the agenda offered by Democrat Al Gore.

“The only way I can make sense of this is to assume that George Bush is a very ambitious president, that he has no interest in just making micropolitical, tactical moves,” Mann said.

Added Andrew Kohut, director of the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press: “In order for him to keep his job, he has to succeed in the broadest sense. So, he has to take on these big issues.”

In any case, this much is clear, analysts said.

“This is no caretaker administration. They are determined to make something of it--even though there is little evidence that the country is with them on some of these issues,” Mann said. “They are trying to create something substantial out of nothing.”

But when White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer was asked recently about the president’s focus on long-term solutions, perhaps at the expense of a more immediate payoff, he replied:

“One of the things that’s wrong with Washington--in the president’s opinion--is people too often move from one quick fix, one short-term nonsolution to the next short-term nonsolution, without focusing people’s attention on the big matters that really count.”

Indeed, Bush’s desire to make a long-term difference is unmistakable.

As the president himself put it during Wednesday’s East Room ceremony, while introducing his judicial nominees:

“A president has fewer greater responsibilities than that of nominating men and women to the courts of the United States. A federal judge holds a position of great influence and respect--and can hold it for a lifetime.”

Although Bush withheld, at least for now, several other nominations that would have been highly contentious--including that of Rep. Christopher Cox (R-Newport Beach)--there is little dispute over the conservative bent of most of his 11 nominees.

“There’s no question that--if all the nominees are confirmed--it’d be a substantial movement toward a conservative bench,” Mann said.

American University’s Thurber concluded:

“All presidents are worried about their legacy--from their first day in office. But George Bush also has to worry about five months from now--the campaign of 2002.”