Analysis: Dems confront, deal with Bush (learning 'the art of compromise' the hard way)

AP on Yahoo ^ | 8/6/07 | David Espo - ap

[NormsRevenge]

WASHINGTON - In seven tumultuous months in power, congressional Democrats have learned to compromise with President Bush as well as confront him.

The first minimum wage increase in a decade and expanded power to eavesdrop are early fruit of the Congress that convened in January. So are the historic clash over the Iraq war and a veto on stem cell research.

"We've done a lot of heavy lifting," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada said last week as Congress lumbered toward its month-long summer vacation. Across the Capitol, House Democrats offered evidence that they had already accomplished more of their early agenda than Republicans ever did with their conservative Contract With America.

With presidential veto threats in place on major bills ranging from farm subsidies and children's health to energy and troop withdrawals, Republicans argue that Democrats have less to show for their efforts than it appears.

"The president has signed virtually nothing because virtually nothing has gotten to his desk," said Rep. Roy Blunt of Missouri, second-ranking House Republican.

He said a high percentage of bills passed to date were measures to name post offices after prominent people — 15 by last count.

In the current era of divided government, Bush does the signing or the rejecting, confident so far that despite his poor approval ratings he has enough Republican support to avoid a veto override.

It's far from tidy, and not likely to get any prettier in September, with the president and Congress both pointing toward a spending showdown as well as a resumption of their struggle over Iraq.

Dealings with Bush and Republicans aside, Democrats have also had to adjust to life in the majority. That has meant compromising among themselves.

"What we are here to do is to govern," Democratic Rep. Hank Johnson, a first-term Georgian, said last spring as he decided to vote for a slower-paced Iraq troop withdrawal timetable that he preferred.

For Rep. Nancy Pelosi, who took office in January as the first female speaker of the House, governing has meant trying to satisfy seemingly irreconcilable demands of her Democratic caucus.

Iraq has been an overriding challenge — forging agreement between liberals who want the war to end quickly and moderates fearful of tying the hands of the commander in chief.

Even in the final hectic pre-vacation rush, Democrats vacillated between permitting a vote on legislation to require the Pentagon to produce a troop redeployment plan. Many liberals opposed the bipartisan measure as toothless, and ultimately it was shelved at least until fall.

The farm bill was another recent challenge. No sooner had Pelosi announced support for reform of crop payment programs than farm state lawmakers, many of them from political swing districts, complained.

She satisfied them by agreeing to increase money for the programs they favor. But that, in turn, drew criticism from urban lawmakers. They demanded — and got — more money for nutrition programs, as well as more than $100 million to settle discrimination claims by black farmers against the Agriculture Department.

"More needs to be done, but we have gone in the right direction for change," Pelosi said in a speech on the legislation, a summation she could easily have applied to Iraq, energy and other issues.

The farm bill passed, 231-191, on a near party-line vote — and drew one of Bush's veto threats.

So, too, the energy bill. Confronted with one group favoring higher auto emission standards, and another opposed, Pelosi punted. The bill is silent on the issue, leaving the matter to be settled in negotiations with the Senate in the fall.

The Democrats' maneuvering room is narrower in the Senate, a nominal 51-49 advantage that leaves Reid far short of the 60 votes needed to advance an agenda past Republicans.

By GOP count, Reid has formally tried 49 times so far to cut off debate on legislation, an extraordinarily high number.

Democrats argue it's necessary to block Republican obstruction. Republicans disagree.

When Democrats "agreed to let Republicans participate and shape legislation, we've achieved good, bipartisan results," said Sen. Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader.

"When they've blocked that cooperation, they've failed."

Minimum wage was an early, illustrative example. With Bush signaling he was ready to sign legislation, McConnell and fellow Senate Republicans insisted that businesses receive tax breaks to help offset the cost of higher pay for employees.

Pelosi and Reid were opposed, but Senate Democrats were divided, and Republicans held firm.

After months of stand-off, there was accommodation. Bush signed legislation that gave the lowest paid workers a raise, and included a small tax cut for business, as well.

[jrooney]

Analysis, dems can’t beat GW, so they are forced to compromise (lose), so the American public does not see they are the party of retreat, surrender and defeat.

[AlphaOneAlpha]

Reid and Pelosi are second rate amateurs. They can try all they can to convice the American public that they’v had a great 7 months since becoming the majority, but the public already knows that they elected damaged goods. So, you will see the Dems create one of the telling times in US history when in Sept they rail that we have lost in Iraq because they need the country to lose in Iraq. They are betting on a fading horse, they know it, and are panicking

[stylin19a]

...more money for nutrition programs, as well as more than $100 million more to settle discrimination claims by black farmers against the Agriculture Department.

fixed !(I hate doing the AP's work for them)

Of about 22,400 claims decided by January of 2006, 14,300, or 64 percent, were approved for payments and benefits to black farmers totaling more than $900 million, the GAO said.