|
Iowa primary precinct caucus and caucuses news">
Iowa primary precinct caucus and caucuses news, reports
and information on 2004 Democrat and Republican candidates, campaigns
and issues Iowa
Presidential Watch's IOWA
DAILY REPORT Holding
the Democrats accountable today, tomorrow...forever.
PAGE 2
Thursday,
September 4, 2003
“Bush’s
reelection liabilities mount” – Headline
on column by Robert Kuttner, co-editor of
The American Prospect, in yesterday’s
Boston Globe. Excerpt: “With Labor Day 2003,
the race to November 2004 is on. Seemingly,
President Bush will be seriously on the
defensive on the issues, but with a big
advantage on the politics. However,
voters are likely to be energized in 2004 as
they have rarely been in recent years. And
voter mobilization will ultimately determine
whether Bush gets a second term. First,
the issues. Bush's foreign policy is a
shambles. The architects of the Iraq war
have been proven wrong on every contention
they made -- the imminent weapons of mass
destruction, the alleged Saddam-Al Qaeda
connection, the supposed ease of occupation
and reconstruction. Thumbing America's nose at
‘old Europe’ proved a major blunder. Bush
now needs the United Nations to clean up his
mess, but he is insisting on US control.
France and Germany, not to mention Russia and
China, aren't exactly lining up to donate
money and troops to bail Bush out. The
administration line -- that the Iraq mess
proves that the place is a magnet for
terrorism -- just isn't selling. This is a
hornets' nest that Bush's policy stirred up.
GIs are still getting killed for a war that
the American public is turning against. Bush's
vaunted Israel-Palestine ‘road map’ is a path
to nowhere. Colin Powell, the prudent
internationalist in the nest of reckless
hawks, has been reduced to a pathetic token.
Barring some improbable breakthrough, photo
ops of Bush in a flak jacket won't divert the
spotlight from the real damage. Then
there's the economy. Most economists believe
that the recovery will continue to be jobless
right through next year. Corporations are
in such a profit squeeze that they are cutting
jobs faster than they are accumulating orders.
Even more seriously, the Bush program of
serial tax cuts plus militarism has pushed the
deficit into the half-trillion range for the
foreseeable future. Not only does that kind of
deficit force cuts in public outlays that
voters actually value; at some point, it
starts pushing up interest rates…An
ordinary president would be reeling from these
setbacks. But while Bush's stratospheric
popularity ratings have returned to the normal
range, he is no ordinary president. For
starters, he will have almost limitless
amounts of money and will massively outspend
his opposition thanks to unprecedented
business investment in Republican politics and
a half-baked campaign finance ‘reform’ that
backfired. He also has an incomparable
team of political strategists, speechwriters,
and spinners. And the press is still cutting
him a lot of slack. Second, the
administration retains the capacity to time
another ‘war of choice,’ as it did with the
Iraq war drums on the eve of the 2002 midterm
election. Another terrorist attack on American
soil would rally patriotic support that Bush
could willingly exploit. (At the same
time, terrorist attacks overseas do not stir
the same outrage and seem to demonstrate the
overextension of Bush's policy.) Third, it
remains to be seen whether Democrats will have
a strong candidate. Yet this election will
rouse the base constituencies of both parties
like no election in recent memory. Democrats
are in a state of rage about the stolen
election of 2000, the gutting of public
services, the assault of liberties, the
economic damage, the environmental pillaging,
and the foreign policy calamity. Republican
conservatives, meanwhile, view Bush as Reagan
redux, only better. Recent conventional
political wisdom has it that elections are won
by appealing to swing voters. But in the
great defining elections of American history
-- 1932, 1964, 1980 -- the winner rallied his
base and then persuaded independent voters
that he could be trusted to do the right thing
for the country. The 2004 contest, I suspect,
will be one of those elections. And
here is Bush's greatest potential liability.
His actual administration has been so unlike
his moderate, conciliatory campaign of 2000
that even with the best campaign machinery,
independent voters will be skeptical. After
years of declining turnout and passivity, 2004
will very likely see a reenergized electorate.
Ultimately, the election will be a test of
democracy itself: mobilized voters debating
real substance versus imagery and organized
money.”
The Union
Leader responds – editorially – to Rush
Limbaugh.
Headline – “Yes,
Rush, it’s true: RNC chief rejects GOP
traditions” Excerpt: “Rush Limbaugh read
from one of our editorials yesterday, and a
lot of people have asked if what he said was
true. It is. The editorial was titled ‘GOP,
MIA’
and it was printed in last weekend’s New
Hampshire Sunday News…We wanted to take
this opportunity to assure Rush and everyone
else that the editorial was and is 100 percent
true. Over the course of an hour-long meeting
with Ed Gillespie, the chairman of the
Republican National Committee, we took great
care to give him every opportunity to explain
himself fully so that nothing could be
misunderstood. The result was a surprisingly
frank admission that the Republican Party
defines ‘fiscal responsibility’ as increasing
the federal budget at ‘a slower rate of
growth’ than the Democrats (his words). We
asked him three times to explain why President
Bush and the Republican Congress have
increased discretionary non-defense spending
at such an alarming rate, and why the party
has embraced the expansion of the federal
government’s roles in education, agriculture
and Great Society-era entitlement programs.
‘Those questions have been decided,’ was his
response. The public wants an expanded federal
role in those areas, and the Republican Party
at the highest levels has decided to give the
public what it wants. We were fully aware
that publishing those comments — all made on
the record — would mean we would never be
invited to any $1,000-a-plate Republican
dinners in Washington. But the
rank-and-file Republicans, the men and women
who vote GOP because they believe in
federalism and limited government, deserved to
know what we knew. Now they do. And they
can use the information as they see fit.”
(Iowa Pres Watch Note: See the original
editorial – titled, “GOP, MIA” – that
inspired Limbaugh’s comments and the above
editorial, see Tuesday’s Daily Report.)
This morning’s headlines:
Des Moines
Register, top front-page headline: “Powell
calls for U. N. support…The move is a
major turnabout for the Bush administration’s
policy on Iraq”
Quad-City
Times, main online heads: “Long Beach,
Calif.: Protester eggs Schwarzenegger” & “Nuclear
plants receive warning”
Nation/world
headlines, Omaha World-Herald online: “Ex-minister
executed for killing abortion doctor,
bodyguard” & California recall – “Arnold
skips debate, but gets shelled anyway”
Featured
online stories, New York Times: “U. S.
Drafts Plan for U. N. to Back a Force for Iraq”
& “U. S. Court Blocks Plan to Ease Rule on
Media Owners”
Top headlines,
Sioux City Journal online: Regional – “Gateway
cutting jobs here; won’t say how many” & “Bush
administration acts to share control over Iraq
with United Nations”
Chicago
Tribune, main online reports: “Guerilla war
sapping troops” & “Pentagon probing bid
by Boeing”
Inside the Beltway: U. S. civilians to Iraq.
Under the subhead “Civilian deployments,”
John McCaslin reported yesterday in his
“Inside the Beltway” column in the Washington
Times: “Inside the Beltway has learned that
the Defense Intelligence Agency, given
‘extraordinary demands placed upon agency
personnel’ in fighting the U.S.-led war on
terrorism, is implementing a ‘mandatory
deployment policy’ that could soon deploy DIA
civilian employees to Iraq. An
unclassified bulletin from DIA Deputy Director
and Chief of Staff William W. Thompson to DIA
staff explains to employees that the DIA is
engaged in support of combat and national
security operations at an ‘unprecedented
level.’…’The extraordinary demands placed
upon agency personnel warrant dynamic policies
and exercise of command discretion in ways
heretofore rarely implemented,’ Mr. Thompson
writes. ‘Due to the volume and persistent
demand for DIA expertise and the corresponding
strain on our skill base, it has become
necessary for DIA to affect a mandatory
deployment policy. Consistent with his
authorities, the Director [of] DIA may direct
assigned military or civilian employees to
deploy in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom,
or other operations as required by our
mission.’…’The norm for DIA deployments
will be 179 days.’ The DIA is the
Pentagon's combat-support agency and member of
the U.S. intelligence community, employing
more than 7,000 military and civilian
employees. The unprecedented memo concludes: ‘The
agency is committed to ensuring that assigned
military members or civilian employees
identified for deployment are notified as
early as possible such that personal affairs,
training, and other preparations can be made.
Information on employee responsibilities when
directed to deployed assignments will be
forthcoming.’
…
Harkin to lead
Dems into battle on Bush’s proposed overtime
rules.
Excerpt from
AP report on CNN.com: “Democrats
and their labor allies renewed their drive to
block proposed Bush administration rules that
opponents say would cost 8 million workers
their overtime pay.
Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, said he would
propose an amendment to a spending bill to
derail the proposed regulations and predicted
he would prevail. A similar bid by House
Democrats lost in July by a 213-210 vote after
the White House threatened a veto. In
addition, the AFL-CIO said it was beginning to
run television ads nationally and in pivotal
states aimed at pressuring senators to support
Harkin's provision. Labor has opposed the
administration proposal, while numerous
business groups have lobbied for it. Harkin
said he believed he had three to six
Republican votes, which could be decisive
in the Senate, where the GOP is in control by
a narrow margin. He told reporters that
President Bush and his supporters would suffer
political consequences should they persist in
trying to redefine which workers would qualify
for time-and-a-half pay after a work week has
exceeded 40 hours. ‘He may satisfy some of
his business friends, but he's going to lose
middle America,’ Harkin said.
Republican aides said the vote seemed likely
to be close, and they expected a clearer
picture to emerge this week. The Senate
reconvened Tuesday after its four-week summer
recess, but few lawmakers were around.
Harkin conceded that one difficulty he faced
was making sure enough Democratic senators are
in town for the vote, which may not come until
next week. Four of them are running for
president and often are on the road
campaigning…The administration, which
proposed the regulations in March, says they
represent a needed update to rules first laid
out in the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act.
Republicans say the proposal would clarify
confusing regulations and reduce an increasing
number of lawsuits by workers seeking overtime
pay. The administration rules also would raise
-- from the current $8,060 to $22,100 -- the
annual pay below which workers must be paid
overtime. The Labor Department says up to
1.3 million additional low-income employees
would gain overtime under that proposal, and
Harkin's amendment would let that
change take place. The AFL-CIO said its ad
would run this week nationally on CNN and in
Maine, Ohio and Missouri.”
… Republicans in Senate to push “gay
marriage” issue. Excerpt from coverage by
the Washington Times’ Charles Hunt in
yesterday’s Washington Times: “Senate
Republicans plan to use a hearing this week to
force Democrats to take firm positions on
same-sex ‘marriages,’ a prospect that could
prove particularly dicey for some presidential
candidates. Sen. John Cornyn, Texas
Republican and member of the Senate Judiciary
Committee, scheduled a hearing [Thursday] on
the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) to find out
if it has been threatened by recent court
rulings. ‘I believe we must do whatever it
takes to safeguard the institution of marriage
and ensure that the principles defined in DOMA
remain the law of the land,’ said Mr. Cornyn,
chairman of the panel's subcommittee on the
Constitution, civil rights and property
rights. ‘This hearing will remind people
why traditional marriage is so important for a
healthy society, and will determine the
extent of the threat posed to DOMA by judicial
activism in light of recent court decisions
and pending cases.’ If Republicans determine
that DOMA is under threat, they said they
will consider drafting an amendment to the
Constitution that would inoculate it from any
future court rulings. Senate Majority
Leader Bill Frist, Tennessee Republican, has
said he strongly supports turning DOMA into a
constitutional amendment. After initially
shying away from the issue, President Bush
said an amendment remains an option he would
consider. A spokesman from the Howard
Dean campaign, former Vermont governor and
a Democratic front-runner, said yesterday that
Mr. Dean supports overturning DOMA and
strongly opposes an amendment. David Smith,
spokesman for the Human Rights Campaign,
called DOMA and the current effort ‘a
mean-spirited attack on gay families.’…Just
months ago, DOMA was a faint memory that had
passed the House and Senate overwhelmingly in
1996. But this summer's Supreme Court ruling
striking down a Texas sodomy law caused some
to wonder if DOMA was quite so settled. In
addition, similar laws have been challenged in
state courts, such as in Massachusetts. ‘There
was no threat to DOMA, but now there is
possibly a very real threat,’ said Don
Stewart, spokesman for Mr. Cornyn. ‘Judicial
activism has forced our hand.’” Today’s editorials, Des Moines Register:
State – “Let
Vilsack set pay for his managers…The
Legislature shouldn’t micromanage compensation
for agency heads…It’s the governor, after all,
who is held accountable for the performance of
the executive branch and agency heads.” & “Clear
air: Cause for concern…Rules changes
aren’t all bad, but they raise a red flag…Iowa
is not expected to see air pollution worsen
appreciably, but pollution from power plants
in the Midwest drifts east.”
DSM 7 a. m. 51, fair/clear. Temperatures
drop into the 30s this morning in Iowa --
37 in Sheldon and 39 in Harlan
at 7 a.m. – to 53 in Dubuque, 54
in Muscatine and 56 in Davenport.
Today’s high 78, sunny. Tonight’s low 53,
clear. Friday’s high 84, sunny. Friday night’s
low 58, clear.
back to page 1
click here
Paid
for by the Iowa Presidential Watch PAC
P.O.
Box 171, Webster City, IA 50595
privacy
/ agreement
/
/ homepage
/
search engine | ||||||||||||||||||||||
THE CLINTON COMEDIES: 
