CHANGE MY LOCATION
Commentary - Jules Witcover: Glimpses of the future
SEE HOW THIS STORY DEVELOPED
Related Topics:
Thanks to John McCain and the House Democrats, voters got a couple of advance peeks the other day at what American policies might be starting next January, depending on the election results for president and Congress in November.
On the Republican side, McCain’s speech in Columbus laid out what his presidency would seek to achieve in four years — an end, in victory, of the war in Iraq with most American forces out. It would also see, he said, a defeated al Qaeda in Iraq, a “functioning democracy” though a still-troubled one there, and only a much smaller U.S. military that “does not play a direct combat role.”
Without setting a firm date for withdrawal as the Democrats are advocating, McCain’s prognostication has the political objective of dampening down their drumbeat attacks on his loose comment that American troops could remain in Iraq for as long as a hundred years.
McCain also foresaw more bipartisanship with Congress on shaping policy and inclusion of Democrats in his administration. He said he would ask Congress to imitate the British House of Commons by holding its version of the prime minister’s question period, wherein he would address criticism openly.
That innovation would be a dramatic change in how presidents have dealt with the legislative branch, and one that would be a supreme test of his vaunted straight talk. On top of that, McCain said he would hold weekly press conferences, but they predictably would be overshadowed by the give-and-take with members of the House and Senate. Don’t hold your breath waiting for that one to happen.
As McCain was offering this outlook of military success in Iraq and openness and togetherness on Capitol Hill, the House Democrats were providing a preview of what a Democratic administration, under either Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton would look like, without mentioning either one.
With the crafty cooperation of House Republicans, their Democratic counterparts for the first time were able to claim they had cut off spending for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan — albeit only temporarily. With 131 Republicans voting “present” for tactical reasons, a $162.5 billion war funding provision failed, while accompanying Democratic provisions for domestic spending and other features passed.
The bill now goes to the Senate, where the lack of a veto-proof Democratic majority signals restoration of the money for the two wars and the stripping of most of the domestic features. These include expanded education costs under a revised GI Bill for Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans, a 13-week extension of unemployment benefits and other Democratic initiatives. The White House has said President Bush will veto the whole bill unless the domestic provisions are dropped.
Nevertheless, the proposals telegraphed a package that would likely be reintroduced and strengthened in a new Congress in January that would have a more heavily Democratic House and possibly a veto-proof Senate, under a Democratic president.
In the wake of last Tuesday’s third straight Republican defeat in a House special election in a traditionally strong GOP congressional district, predictions of just such a Democratic sweep for Congress and the presidency have plunged Republican tacticians into despair.
For the remaining eight months of the presidency of George W. Bush, however, the prospect for defunding the war continues to be dim, for one practical reason. His argument that cutting off the money would abandon American troops in the field has been shared by Republicans in Congress and has intimidated many Democrats from supporting such a politically hazardous step.
With the prospective Republican presidential nominee riding his unwavering backing for the Iraq war and proclaiming the success of the troop surge he recommended, the Democrats are reduced to seeking symbolic successes only, in their commitment to end it and start bringing troops home.
For all the legislative maneuvering, the Democrats are well-aware that their strongest objectives must await election results in November that can foil McCain’s plans for his presidency and strengthen their own prospects for a friendlier presence in the Oval Office and many more Democrats on Capitol Hill.
Jules Witcover, a Baltimore Examiner columnist, is syndicated by Tribune Media Services. He has covered national affairs from Washington, D.C., for more than 50 years. His latest book, on the Nixon-Agnew relationship, is “Very Strange Bedfellows.” juleswitcover@earthlink.net.
