Democrats Add Edge in Response to Bush Talk

Spurred by polls showing President Bush’s popularity slipping, Democrats on Tuesday challenged his assessment of the state of the union with a boldness and bite that was unthinkable when he last addressed a joint session of Congress one year ago.

In floor speeches, casual comments and their formal response to the president’s address, Democrats tried to pump up public skepticism about Bush’s proposed $674-billion economic stimulus plan.

Washington Gov. Gary Locke, delivering the Democrats’ televised response after Bush spoke, underscored what many see as a troubling political weakness in Bush’s economic plan -- the strong opposition primarily from the nation’s Democratic governors, who fear Bush’s plan will aggravate their states’ own fiscal woes.

“Today, the economy is limping along,” Locke said. “States and cities now face our worst budget crises since World War II.”

While many Democrats remained reluctant to challenge the president on foreign policy, a growing number complained that Bush had failed to make a clear and convincing case for a unilateral war against Iraq.

“He didn’t spell it out tonight,” said Sen. John B. Breaux (D-La.).

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) said: “The president didn’t give us any hope that war could be avoided with Iraq. A great leader would lay out the path to peace.”

Last October, the House and Senate passed by solid margins a resolution authorizing Bush to use force against Iraq if the president determined it necessary. But Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) said he would introduce a resolution today requiring Bush to present “convincing evidence” that Iraq posed an “imminent threat” before an attack could be launched.

The Democrats’ aggressive push-back stood in striking contrast to their strategy a year ago, when they hailed Bush’s leadership on the war in Afghanistan and were far more timid in questioning him on economic issues. The contrast speaks volumes about the shifting fortunes of both Bush and congressional Democrats.

Last year, Bush was still riding the wave of public approval that came in the wake of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. On Tuesday, Rep. Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.), in responding to Bush’s address, tried to strike a delicate balance between standing “shoulder to shoulder” with Bush on the war while urging compromise on economic issues.

Now, polls show the public’s support for Bush’s conduct of economic and foreign policy is on the wane. Many Democrats have concluded that the lesson of their drubbing in the 2002 congressional elections is that they should be more forceful in their opposition to Bush.

“There is a feeling we need to be more aggressive,” said House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.).

The 2002 elections included one bright spot for the Democratic Party: It gained three governorships, putting Democrats in charge of 24 states.

That is part of the reason why Democratic leaders ceded the spotlight usually accorded to a member of Congress when Locke was chosen to respond to Bush.

The last time a Democratic governor gave the party’s response to a GOP president was in 1985, when then-Gov. Bill Clinton of Arkansas spoke after President Reagan’s State of the Union address.

Locke has been elected governor of Washington twice by wide margins, and is chairman of the Democratic Governors’ Assn.

Republicans argued that Locke is a failed leader who has presided over the souring of a once-booming state economy. Democrats touted Locke’s distinctive life story. Born to immigrant parents in a public housing project, Locke is the first Chinese American to be elected governor of a state.

Locke, whose state is struggling with big deficits and one of the highest unemployment rates in the country, summed up Democrats’ critique of the Bush economic stimulus plan that is anchored on the elimination of taxes on dividends.

He said the Bush plan would cost too much and would take too long to pump needed stimulus into the economy.

“We think it’s upside-down economics,” Locke said. “It does too little to stimulate the economy now and does too much to weaken our economic future.”

While Locke focused on domestic policy, other Democrats raised pointed questions about Bush’s foreign policy with an edge few would have dared last year.

Sen. Byron L. Dorgan (D-N.D.) chided Bush for failing to discuss the whereabouts of Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

“It’s apparently Osama bin Forgotten at this point,” Dorgan said.

Democrats and Republicans alike have said that Bush still has work to do in persuading skeptical Americans as well as international allies that diplomacy has run its course.

Critics said Tuesday’s speech did not do the job.

Bush’s announcement that Secretary of State Colin L. Powell would present further evidence of the Iraqi threat to the U.N. Security Council next week raised hopes among some lawmakers that the U.S. could yet build a broader coalition

“Colin Powell has a big responsibility next week,” said Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.). “The American people don’t want us to go it alone.”

*

Times staff writer Nick Anderson contributed to this story.