Bush Seeks to Capitalize on Wartime Spirit

President Bush sought Tuesday to use the surge of national unity surrounding the war against terrorism as both sword and shield in the divisive battles with Congress over the rest of his agenda.

In a forceful State of the Union address, Bush not only portrayed the struggle with terrorism as his administration’s defining mission but also tried to broadly extend the mantle of the war over his other goals. Even as he pointed toward potential new targets in the war--by heightening criticism of Iraq, Iran and North Korea as threats to American security--Bush also displayed a determination to apply his soaring wartime popularity to maximum advantage at home.

At times, Bush directly defined some of his other priorities--like building a national missile defense system--as part of the war effort. At another point, he moved to blunt mounting Democratic attacks on his tax cut by blaming the return of federal budget deficits instead on the cost of fighting the war. The war also inspired the boldest two new ideas in the speech: a call for greater human rights in the Islamic world and a summons to greater community involvement in the U.S.

More fundamentally, Bush repeatedly called on Congress to apply the “same spirit of cooperation” evident in the war to domestic issues, on which the administration and Senate Democrats have fought to stalemate.

The paradox is that Bush made the call for conciliation without signaling any substantive concessions on the key issues that have divided the two sides.

Bush reached out to Democrats with new initiatives in education and an expansion of the national service program launched under former President Clinton. But on the budget, economic stimulus, energy, Medicare reform, prescription drugs, missile defense and providing health care to the uninsured, Bush on Tuesday night indicated no shift in long-held positions that most Democrats reject.

The White House may be betting that Bush’s popularity will pressure Senate Democrats to bend in his direction on the largest issues dividing them. But most Democrats insist that, despite the public’s enthusiastic embrace of Bush’s wartime leadership, they see little political danger in resisting his domestic agenda, even if the post-Sept. 11 environment demands that they pursue those conflicts less acrimoniously.

Tellingly, in the Democratic response Tuesday night, House Minority Leader Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) offered a mirror of Bush’s speech. Gephardt pledged cooperation with the president at home and abroad, then immediately listed domestic priorities that clashed sharply with Bush’s.

These contrasting impulses could produce a year in Washington of sustained schizophrenia: cooperation on the war and conflict at home. “Because the government is divided,” predicts Bruce Reed, president of the Democratic Leadership Council, “there is only going to be progress where Bush and Democratic leaders can agree.”

The evening was a measure of how much American life has changed since Sept. 11. The threat of terrorism dominated Bush’s remarks and provoked stringent security precautions.

Bush himself was transformed as well: A year ago, he stood before Congress as the disputed winner of a razor-thin election. Tuesday night he returned with approval ratings topping 80% in most surveys and with praise for his war leadership from even some of his sternest critics.

Sometimes blustery, sometimes grave, he exuded resolve as he declared victory in Afghanistan and promised relentless pressure against terrorists and the nations that support them. Still, the speech lacked the drama and poetry of his address to the joint congressional session nine days after the Sept. 11 attacks.

Beyond insights into Bush’s political strategy, the speech also provided an unusually revealing look at his conception of the presidency. Though Bush discussed his share of specific programs, the speech was predominantly organized around three large goals: pursuing the war against terrorists abroad, defending the homeland and invigorating the economy.

That focus was more than a rhetorical strategy; it also reflected the way Bush is allocating his own time and energy. “He always wants to talk in terms of a few fundamental priorities for the country that he is going to focus on and make happen,” said one senior White House official familiar with the process of drafting the speech. “That’s the way he organizes, that’s the way he speaks and that’s the way he leads.”

The contrast with his predecessor, Bill Clinton, is instructive. It was revealing that Bush’s speech last night clocked in at a brisk 48 minutes, compared with the 89-minute marathon Clinton uncorked for his finale in 2000.

Long before Sept. 11, Bush preferred to paint with fewer but broader strokes than Clinton, always emphasizing a few central goals--such as cutting taxes or reforming federal education laws. The challenge of terrorism has demanded that Bush further sharpen the narrow focus he prefers anyway; it has made a necessity of what he already considered a virtue.

In the speech, Bush left no doubt that he believes the war will remain his priority for some time. He even opened a new front by loudly rattling sabers at Iraq, Iran and North Korea as potential suppliers of weapons of mass destruction to terrorists, though he stopped short of explicitly threatening military action.

Yet Bush also indicated his intention not to ignore other public concerns and contain other potential political vulnerabilities.

Though he never mentioned by name the collapsed Enron Corp., Bush continued his administration’s effort to focus the Enron debate on policy, rather than ethics, questions. By proposing new protections for employee 401(k) plans and new restrictions on the accounting industry at a time when congressional proposals are proliferating in those arenas, Bush increased the possibility that reform legislation may actually become law.

Bush also took no chance that voters might perceive him as insufficiently focused on the economy at home while he prosecutes war abroad. That perception helped doom the 1992 reelection bid of his father, former President George Bush. Keenly aware of that precedent, this Bush spoke with urgency about his desire to complete work on a plan to stimulate the economy.

Yet aides say he remains committed to the same stimulus package--centered largely on additional tax cuts--that has failed to reach the 60 votes needed for passage in the Senate. Despite a call for the two sides to resolve their differences, Bush signaled Tuesday no further give.

On several fronts, Bush did offer new initiatives that may have significant bipartisan appeal: more money for early childhood education and teacher training; a big expansion of the Peace Corps and Clinton’s national service program. His ringing call for the U.S. to stand more firmly for freedom in the Islamic world is likely to draw enthusiastic applause from human rights advocates in both parties.

But on existing issues where the two parties are locked in dispute, Bush mostly reinforced the lines he has already drawn in the sand.

Even as Democrats escalate their charges that Bush’s tax cut has vaporized the projected federal budget surplus, the president called for making the tax reductions permanent--and argued that the greatest threat to the federal balance sheet is excessive congressional spending. Likewise, Bush called for helping those without health insurance by providing a tax credit, an idea that sharply divides the parties.

Yet for all of the heat these disputes generate, it was clear Tuesday night that Bush believes he will be judged most on his success in combating what he called the “unprecedented dangers” confronting the civilized world. About the struggle against terrorism, Bush spoke with a singular sense of mission, in phrases that suggested he was addressing future generations as much as today’s voters.

“History,” Bush declared, “has called America and our allies to action, and it is both our responsibility and our privilege to fight freedom’s fight.”