ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Thursday, August 8, 1996 TAG: 9608080014
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-13 EDITION: METRO
COLUMN: RAY L. GARLAND
SOURCE: RAY L. GARLAND
IT'S IRONIC that a man who has achieved so much, been so extravagantly praised by those in the best position to judge his worth - even among opponents - should gain a long-sought chance at the very moment few give him much hope of winning the great prize. That is the unenviable position of Robert Dole as Republicans gather in San Diego.
In politics, the stigma of prospective defeat feeds upon itself. Allies desert; foes pile on; a cowardly press treats you with disdain as it fawns upon the likely victor. Absurd figures like Dan Rather and Katie Couric become arbiters of your fate.
Assuming he makes a good choice for vice president, Dole should come out of the convention no more than 10 points behind President Clinton in the polls - not a bad position for a challenger at this stage. But Democrats and Ross Perot will then be heard from. Barring the unforeseen, things look decidedly bleak.
Until Theodore Roosevelt defined the "bully pulpit" of the modern presidency in the early years of this century, the office assumed major importance only in times of conflict. The president received diplomats and dispensed patronage.
But crisis always justifies the gathering of power and prestige to the center. From the arrival of the Great Depression in 1930 to the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, crisis was the president's constant companion.
In part, you can connect Clinton's success in 1992 with the end of the Cold War. That is, with the nation's chief foreign threat removed, why not get back to such domestic business as giving everybody health insurance?
But this isn't the only factor diminishing the presidency. All noncrisis periods in our history have produced nonentities as chief magistrate. Clinton can find an echo in those who came between Andrew Jackson and Abraham Lincoln, or between Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt. There is also the matter of the deficit and the rising mistrust of government to limit the president's discretion.
Of course, Clinton did not see himself as one who mainly reacted to his opponents. He saw himself completing the work of Lyndon Johnson, renewing Democratic control of national politics for another generation with national health, motor-voter, AmeriCorps, etc. But just as liberals controlled policy from 1932 to 1980 - even when they lost - conservatives now set the terms of debate. Even Clinton is compelled to say, "The era of big government is over."
The political success of the president is defined by perceptions of peace and prosperity. With the possible exception of Taft in 1912, all incumbent presidents in this century driven to step aside (Truman and Johnson) or defeated (Hoover, Ford, Carter and Bush) failed to deliver one or the other. Clinton can now claim to preside over both. And with the president embracing most of the issues on which Republicans since Reagan have run, Dole has precious few talking points.
Then, there is the little matter of the Texas egomaniac, Ross Perot. He performed a useful service in 1992 exposing the immorality of piling up deficits and unfunded liabilities. But when the GOP Congress got down to cases on the deficit in 1995, he was conspicuous by his silence. Whatever the reason, which might be a better subject for a psychiatrist, Perot has abundantly proved he's no friend of the Republican Party.
As Senate majority leader, Dole was between the proverbial rock and a hard place. Democrats were determined to make him look bad. But logic also said members of both parties had a vested interest in making Congress look good before the fall campaign. With welfare reform and a few other scalps on his belt going to San Diego, a Sen. Dole would be looking a lot more relevant. Now - not June - would have been a good time to resign.
My advice to Dole would have been to make the case that Clinton's bad character had diminished the office, asking, "Do you really want four more years of scandal and words that can't be trusted?" That would have been the basis for a broader message on the need to put the country's morals in better order. But personal attacks and public moralizing do not come naturally to Dole, so he has taken up tax cuts, almost the only issue left for him on the table. He must expect a rough time from Clinton-Gore and most of the media.
Having thrown his cap over the wall, Dole must stay "on message" and sell it for all it's worth. This must be presented in the context of limiting the federal government to empower the people, and those states and localities closest to them.
Right now, taxes claim almost a third of the personal income of the American people. It's often said this is a smaller burden than imposed in Western Europe. But unemployment here is about half what it is there, which suggests a lower tax burden is positive for prosperity.
It will be said over and over the Reagan tax cuts failed because they ballooned the deficit. But had the growth in federal spending been kept to no more than the rate of inflation plus population growth, and 10 percent more just for good measure, there would have been no deficit by the end of Reagan's term - in fact, a surplus.
What Dole must not do is be drawn into a debate over "paying" for the tax cuts. When the press raises the Reagan experience, he must point out that after two major tax cuts, federal revenues under Reagan increased by 80 percent. This should be compared to the eight years since, which saw two major tax increases but a growth of only 61 percent in revenues. He must always come back to the answer: "Give me the Republican Congress Reagan never had and we'll slow the growth of spending, just as we have the past two years."
The man from Kansas has given all that was in him to his country and his party. Those who wish him well must now hope there is a last measure of devotion to give.
Ray L. Garland is a Roanoke Times columnist.
LENGTH: Long : 103 lines KEYWORDS: POLITICS PRESIDENTby CNB