Bush benefits from Homeland shift
Posted on 11/26/2002 4:28:20 AM PST by MeekOneGOP
Bush benefits from Homeland shift
Once a doubter, he reaps political rewards by backing new agency
11/26/2002
WASHINGTON - For someone who once resisted the idea, President Bush got a lot of mileage out of the Department of Homeland Security.
It helped fuel the Republican takeover of the Senate in the Nov. 5 elections, analysts said, and also gave Mr. Bush a chance to exercise his new political muscle on the lame duck Congress that voted to create the department.
Not bad, considering that many prominent Democrats pitched the idea that Mr. Bush did not endorse until a nationally televised speech June 6.
| Bush's changing views | |
|
"They turned on a dime, clearly," said Charles Cook, publisher of a Washington-based political report.
Aides said Mr. Bush, who signed the department into law Monday, developed a thorough plan based on careful study led by Tom Ridge, the White House adviser he ultimately tapped to be the first secretary of homeland security.
Rather than for political reasons, aides said, Mr. Bush decided to back the idea of combining 22 agencies into one department because it is the best way to defend the country from terrorism.
"The new department will analyze threats, will guard our borders and airports, protect our critical infrastructure and coordinate the response of our nation for future emergencies," Mr. Bush told a crowd that packed the East Room of the White House.
The proposed Department of Homeland Security, the biggest re-organization of the federal government in more than a half-century, became a political issue when it stalled in the Senate in a dispute over workers rights.
Mr. Bush said he wanted more authority to hire, fire or transfer people in so sensitive a department. Democrats said dedicated employees should not lose their rights just because they are shuffled into a new bureaucracy.
Campaign issue
In speech after speech on the campaign trail, Mr. Bush complained about how Senate Democrats were more interested in "special interests" than in homeland security. Political analysts said the hold-up of the bill may well have contributed to Democratic defeats, particularly that of Sen. Max Cleland in Georgia.
"Here we are with a threat to the United States' people, and we can't get us a homeland security bill," Mr. Bush said during a Nov. 2 campaign appearance in Atlanta. "And the reason why is some in the Senate wanted to extract too high a price from this president and future presidents."
After the election, Mr. Bush moved quickly to capitalize on his party's strong showing. While some Republican leaders suggested that the Department of Homeland Security be pushed into next year, when Republicans took control of the Senate, Mr. Bush made it his top priority of this month's lame duck session.
The House passed a new version of the bill Nov. 13; the Senate followed suit six days later.
Playing politics
Stung by the presidential criticism, Democrats said Mr. Bush is the one who played politics with the Department of Homeland Security. They said he refused to compromise with Senate Democrats on workers rights because he wanted a campaign issue rather than a bill.
Sen. Tom Daschle, D-S.D., soon to lose his status as Senate majority leader, said Democrats could have approved a homeland security department on their own before the election, but Republicans blocked a vote.
"The reason we couldn't break the filibuster is because Republican leaders wanted to use homeland security as an election issue," said Mr. Daschle, who wound up voting for the final bill. "They wanted to be able to blame Democrats for the impasse they created and question the patriotism of good and decent people."
Mr. Bush and his aides said they sought the same authority other presidents have had, including the right to suspend collective bargaining when national security is threatened. On the campaign trail, Mr. Bush frequently said that under the Democratic plan, he would have had more authority over the Department of Agriculture than the Department of Homeland Security.
"I need to have the ability to put the right people at the right place at the right time to protect the American people," Mr. Bush said during the Atlanta campaign stop.
Jennifer Duffy, who analyzes Senate races for "The Cook Political Report," said Mr. Bush's comments about homeland security touched on several issues. In addition to the war on terrorism, it involved criticism of unions and the Daschle-led Democratic majority in the Senate.
"It pushed a lot of buttons with Republican voters," Ms. Duffy said.
Criticism of Bush
And with a few Democratic officials, as well. Sen. Robert C. Byrd, D-W.Va., who voted against the final bill, not only raised privacy concerns but suggested Republicans planned to use the new agency to funnel contracts to political contributors.
"It is intended to protect the president from criticism and fault, should another attack occur," he added.
John J. Sweeney, president of the AFL-CIO, protested "the Bush administration's intractable belief that our nation's security cannot be guaranteed if workers have rights on the job."
"Democratic senators proposed a Department of Homeland Security long before the Bush administration recommended the agency," he said.
Some Republicans had also supported the idea earlier. Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Clarendon, introduced a House bill in the spring of 2001, well before the terrorist attacks made the issue more prominent.
Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., with Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., proposed a department of homeland security bill on Oct. 11, 2001, a month after the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon.
At that time, aides said, Mr. Bush held off on the idea because the government faced more pressing duties, such as launching the war on terrorism and preventing another catastrophic attack.
"He said we did not have time to do it in 2001, we needed to protect the nation immediately - but let us consider this in 2002," said White House press secretary Ari Fleischer. "And that is exactly what transpired."
As for the political impact, aides said they would leave that to pollsters. They said Mr. Bush's goal was to protect the country, and they added that some Democrats wanted the new department approved by the anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks.
"This president has been pressing Congress for months to pass homeland security along the lines of what he had proposed," Mr. Fleischer said.
Some political analysts pointed out that this is the not the first time Mr. Bush has changed his position on an issue and made it his own.
He resisted many proposals for campaign finance reform but signed a bill passed by Congress (though he did so without a public ceremony featuring the bill's prominent backers, including former Republican primary rival John McCain). As part of his final tax cut package, Mr. Bush embraced another idea initially proposed by Democrats, immediate rebates to taxpayers.
This pattern extends back to his governorship, when Mr. Bush adopted many Democratic ideas on a patients bill of rights, pre-kindergarten funding and pay raises for teachers.
Stuart Rothenberg, publisher of a nonpartisan political newsletter, said the homeland security issue fit neatly into Mr. Bush's overall message of national security, from the war on terrorism to Saddam Hussein.
"It's George Bush's version of political jujitsu," Mr. Rothenberg said. "He's able to turn on issues very quickly, when he's seen it's reached a tipping point ... He ends up getting credit for it and frustrating the opposition."
E-mail djackson@dallasnews.com
Bush benefits from Homeland shift
Once a doubter, he reaps political rewards by backing new agency
The 'RATS were the ones that were insisting that the President Bush AND FUTURE Presidents' hands be tied by injecting "Labor Rights" into the bill. The 'RATS paid the price for that and they and The Dallas Morning News have sour grapes now. They just don't get it. To the 'RATS and the DMN, it's ALL about POWER ! They have NO vision whatsoever anymore, and haven't had for MANY years now.
Please let me know if you want ON or OFF my President Bush or General Interest ping list!. . .don't be shy. 
When the Times Herald went under, DMN committed to both sides but imho they are more liberal than conservative.
One of Bush's hallmarks is his ability to stay ahead of his opponents and set the table with "his" issues. This allows him to "run the table" with his issues.
Be Seeing You,
Chris
I didn't know that. Good info. Thanks ! 
Hmmmmmm.....
Last night, a funny and good thing happened on the way to this hearing about a national homeland security agency – President Bush endorsed such an idea, and going beyond that, by executive order, created this agency with Governor Ridge of Pennsylvania as its designated head, with cabinet status. This morning, it is not clear exactly what the contours, makeup, and powers of the agency will be. I certainly look forward to having this Committee meet with Governor Ridge and others in the Administration to discuss this proposal. But I feel very strongly, though I greet President Bush’s action last night as a welcome and significant first step toward greater homeland protection, that Congress needs to pass a law, after deliberate consideration, to make this homeland security agency permanent, because it is clear that we crossed a bridge on September 11. In a way that has not been true for most of our history, for the future as far as we can see, we will have to be prepared to protect the American people as they live and work in the fifty United States.
Opening Statement of Chairman Joe Lieberman Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, Friday, September 21, 2001
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.