The White House in the coming weeks plans to heavily lobby Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson and Georgia Sen. Zell Miller in hopes of luring them over to fully supporting the Bush economic stimulus package. Hopeful of using a legislative technique that would require only 51 votes to pass the tax cut plan, the White House knows that it is at least four votes short. That’s because Republicans John McCain, Lincoln Chafee, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins have already announced at least initial opposition to the Bush plan.
The White House has already begun lobbying Louisiana Sen. John Breaux, who while receptive to the discussions has made it clear the White House would have to go a long way in compromising to get his vote.
If the White House hopes to successfully get the bulk of its stimulus package through the Senate, use of the reconciliation parliamentary technique would appear to be its only alternative. But according to several White House legislative lobbyists who work Capitol Hill, the administration is ready to negotiate on the Senate side and believes that it may have to cut its dividend tax cut in half.
South Dakota Sen. Tom Daschle sure whipsawed his wife’s role in his decision not to run for the presidency. Linda Daschle, a well-known Washington lobbyist, was thought by many Daschle insiders to be opposed to a run by her husband. But just two weeks ago, the current Senate minority leader was telling friends and donors that his wife was supportive of a run.
In announcing his decision on Tuesday in Washington, Daschle again invoked Linda’s name, saying that after speaking with her in the past few days he had decided not to run, that his passion remained in the Senate.
Daschle was thought to be set to run. He’d brought former Clinton
White House chief of staff John Podesta into his inner circle to help advise him on national political issues, and seemed to be gearing up a grass roots organization in Iowa and New Hampshire.
But according to a Democratic Senate leadership staffer, several events and meetings in the past few days seemed to pull Daschle back from jumping into the race: “He wanted to serve as minority leader for at least part of this congressional session, but members of his caucus made it clear to him in meetings that they couldn’t afford a part-time leader, not now with this president and just after losing the majority,” says the staffer.
With no clear national leader, Democrats in both the Senate and inside the Democratic National Committee expect Daschle to be a key fundraiser for the party, as well as a recruiter of potential Senate candidates in 2004 now that untested Sen. Jon Corzine is running the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.
Daschle most likely would have served as minority leader for eight to ten months, then stepped aside in fall 2003. But Democratic caucus members indicated that that plan was unacceptable, when there were at least two other Senators — Nevada’s Harry Reid and Connecticut’s Chris Dodd — clamoring to take on the leadership mantle right away.
“To walk away mid-term would have created all kinds of problems,” says another Democratic leadership staffer. “Over the next year, you’d be seeing Daschle at events and fundraisers and wondering, ‘Is he doing this for the party, or for himself?’ Then there is time. You know he’d be spending more time on the road, and not on Capitol Hill strategizing. And then you walk away and create this fight for the job. It just doesn’t work.”
Daschle — legitimately — was also concerned about how four to five Democratic Senators could coexist on the floor of the Senate while also running for president. “You’ve already got Kerry, Edwards, Lieberman, maybe Graham preening for the cameras. I think Senator Daschle really believes we can do something up here if we have a strong focused caucus. With him running too, he knew we weren’t going to be at our strongest,” says a staffer on the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.
It wouldn’t be surprising if Daschle did stay on because of the size of the fight he faced. Depending on what happens with Republican popularity in the coming months, he himself may face a stiff challenge in South Dakota in 2004 from former Rep. John Thune. And Democrats are extremely concerned about losing more seats in the Senate next election cycle. Already, they are anticipating stiff competition from Republicans in New York, where Chuck Schumer may be forced to face GOP God Rudy Giuliani, South Carolina, where Fritz Hollings may retire, and in Washington state and California. The White House has already begun vetting possible candidates in all those states. “It’s going to be an extremely tough two years, and I think Daschle knew that. It had to affect his thinking,” says the DSCC staffer.
Perhaps also playing into this thinking was the increasing realization that he probably couldn’t win in 2004. Like several other candidates, Daschle would be counting on a good showing in the Iowa caucus to move his campaign forward into the big primary season. But in the past several days, Rep. Dick Gephardt, the former Democratic House leader, made several impressive moves to solidify his standing as the frontrunner in Iowa. First he rolled out union support in the state that made it clear to the competition that organized labor was again leaning toward the man it supported and who won the caucus in 1988.
Then on Monday, Gephardt quietly announced that he had retained political consultant John Lapp to manage his Iowa race this time around. Lapp is another Democratic hot commodity, having engineered the successful gubernatorial race of incoming Gov. Tom Vilsack. While it wasn’t clear that Daschle was pursuing Lapp for his own team, both John Kerry and John Edwards were heavily courting the 30-something consultant.
“The thinking was that Iowa was Daschle’s best chance at really making a splash and gaining some momentum,” says the DSCC staffer. “Part of his thinking may have been that he’s lost out on some good talent in the one state he seemed in a position to do well in right away. Gephardt’s moves may have helped make his decision for him.”
Notice to Readers: The American Spectator and Spectator World are marks used by independent publishing companies that are not affiliated in any way. If you are looking for The Spectator World please click on the following link: https://spectatorworld.com/.