Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: THURSDAY, April 29, 1993 TAG: 9304290122
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL PAGE: A1 EDITION: STATE
SOURCE: ROBERT A. RANKIN KNIGHT-RIDDER/TRIBUNE
DATELINE: WASHINGTON LENGTH: Long
The next 100 days, however, are likely to be far more decisive in defining Clinton's presidency and determining his political future.
Will he be a winner or a loser? A leader or a pushover? A "tax-and-spend liberal" or a "different Democrat"? The next 100 days should tell.
Between now and mid-August, when Congress leaves town for summer vacation, Clinton will have won or lost the big tax and spending battles at the heart of his ambitious economic program.
He also will have unveiled his sweeping health-care reform proposals, which are expected to touch off a political free-for-all that may last for much of his term.
Any day now, White House aides promise, Clinton will decide what if any military action America must take to stop the slaughter in Bosnia.
On Friday, Clinton will submit his ballyhooed program to give federal aid to select college students who volunteer for national service. And next week he plans to outline his ideas on how to reform campaign financing and lobbying.
As if that weren't enough, by August Clinton also will have nominated his first Supreme Court justice; received the long-awaited report from his defense secretary on how to integrate homosexuals into the military; and traveled to Tokyo in a high-profile mission to help Russia, increase trade and spur global growth.
Students of the presidency - from academic scholars to Clinton's own budget director, Leon Panetta - see grave political dangers rising from this ambitious agenda; they say it's overloaded, tax-heavy, and too complex to sell easily either to Congress or the public.
Although Clinton originally intended to emulate Ronald Reagan's tactics - setting one or two big priorities and selling them relentlessly - analysts say he is governing more like Jimmy Carter, flooding Congress with complicated proposals that confuse the public and multiply his enemies.
"He knew he needed to focus in the first 100 days, but he couldn't stop himself," said George Edwards of the Center for Presidential Studies at Texas A&M University. "He knew intellectually that gays in the military was not his highest priority, but he couldn't stop himself. He knew he needed to focus, focus, focus, but he couldn't stop himself.
"Part of his brain says, `I understand that,' but he has a lot of ideas. He wants to please a lot of people. He has an undisciplined personal style. And he has a party that's been out of power for a long time and they want a lot done," Edwards said. "The question is: Have they learned the lesson?"
The answer, apparently, is no.
This week Panetta ignited a mini-sensation in Washington by speaking candidly about these widespread concerns to reporters.
Clinton needs to "do a better job of picking and choosing the battles he wants to go through" or his entire program is in danger on Capitol Hill, Panetta warned.
In response, White House spokesmen insisted that Clinton intends to stick to his aggressive agenda. And the president himself dismissed such warnings Tuesday - the day Panetta's comments were published - in a speech to the National Association of Realtors.
"These problems are big problems," Clinton said of his multiple priorities. "They're the problems of our generation. We inherited them, and it's our job to deal with them, not to moan about them. That's our job, to roll up our sleeves and face them and deal with them."
Noble sentiments, analysts say, but dangerous strategy.
"That's always a problem with a highly self-confident president," said Erwin Hargrove of Vanderbilt University, author of a book about Carter's presidency. "There is a trade-off: You want to move fast while you have a certain momentum, a honeymoon period; but if you move too fast, you run the risk of failure across the board. The way [Clinton] handles that will tell us a lot about his staying power as president."
"He really has to have a big victory this year," said Al Tuchfarber, director of the Institute for Policy Research at the University of Cincinnati, "and the only place it looks possible is the budget. If he fails there . . . he really is in danger of being Carter-ized."
Clinton won a big victory in March when Congress approved the outline of his economic program. But the hard part comes next: persuading Congress to stick with his specific tax increases and spending cuts.
The House Ways and Means Committee begins voting next week on the president's taxes, but the big showdown is expected in June before the Senate Finance Committee, where Democrats hold a shaky 11-9 majority.
By then, if Clinton stays on schedule, he also will have recommended even more tax increases to pay for his health-care reforms. Republicans hope to exploit public resentment of taxes to blow Clinton's budget apart and perhaps fatally wound his presidency.
Perhaps even more important than any single legislative victory or defeat is the overall impression Clinton makes on the public, argues Hargrove of Vanderbilt.
"He must establish a reputation for being skillful and effective," he said, noting that Jimmy Carter was far more successful in Congress during his final two years in office than during his first two. But by then his public reputation was beyond repair.
Hargrove said Clinton faces the same risk: "If he doesn't establish that reputation in his first year, he may never catch up."
Memo: shorter version ran in the Metro edition.