Bush’s Plea for Bipartisanship

What happened

Standing for the first time before a Con­gress controlled by Democrats, a conciliatory President Bush this week offered a modest agenda of domestic initiatives and appealed for bipartisan cooperation. In his State of the Union address, Bush proposed a plan to cut projected gasoline consumption by 20 percent over 10 years and boost production of alternative fuels, particularly ethanol. He also asked Congress to create a new standard deduction for health insurance that would reward individuals for buying their own insurance and enable the uninsured to buy coverage. With California Democrat Nancy Pelosi, the first female House speaker, sitting behind him, he asked Democrats to join him in tackling such problems as immigration and education. 'œOur citizens don't much care which side of the aisle we sit on,' he said, 'œas long as we are willing to cross that aisle when there is work to be done.'

Turning to Iraq, the president defended his plan to send an additional 21,500 troops to Baghdad and Anbar province. He asked Congress to give the troop increase 'œa chance to work,' arguing that the alternative was a 'œnightmare scenario' in which unchecked sectarian violence would engulf all of Iraq, sucking its Sunni and Shiite neighbors into the vortex. In the Democratic response to the speech, freshman Virginia Sen. James Webb warned the president that if he does not change course in Iraq, the Democratic Congress 'œwill be showing him the way.'

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up

What the editorials said

'œWhere was this Bush a year ago?' asked National Review Online. His 'œsolid case for victory in Iraq' made the Democrats look like the defeatists they are, and he offered a 'œgenuinely innovative' plan on health insurance. But the Democrats contemptuously brushed aside his proposals, and with polls showing Bush's approval ratings down to the low 30s, they may get away with it. 'œThe president is down, way down, and the State of the Union address is not going to do anything to change that.'

Especially not this address, said the Los Angeles Times. The president attempted to show a Democratic-controlled Congress and a disillusioned public that he is still a political force to be reckoned with. But he made an unconvincing case, offering a domestic agenda that was either recycled from previous speeches or, in the case of health care, a cautious echo of bolder proposals by some state governors. Bush knows he's negotiating from weakness, which may be why he 'œseemed at times to be going through the motions.'

What the columnists said

To save what's left of his presidency, said John Dickerson in Slate.com, Bush needed to hit a home run. 'œYet he did nothing in his speech to change the political dynamic.' He asked for bipartisanship, but despite a brief mention of 'œglobal climate change,' offered nothing surprising or daring. He was especially uncompromising on Iraq. By nakedly pressuring Congress to get behind the troop increase—or else—'œhe undermines his efforts to reach out.'

The Democrats came off no better, said Ruth Marcus in The Washington Post. They reflexively brushed aside a health-care proposal with real merit, which would pay for covering the uninsured by raising taxes on 'œthe well-off.' But the president invited this kind of partisan reaction. After six years of being treated with 'œpoisonous' disdain, 'œDemocrats would be crazy if their instinctive reaction' to any Bush proposal was anything but deep suspicion.

Let's not forget that we're at war, said John Podhoretz in the New York Post. Democrats have a responsibility to the nation, and Bush graciously offered them a chance to support 'œthe most critical struggle of our time.' Most Democrats declined the invitation, sitting on their hands when the president called for victory in Iraq. They seem to think a war-weary populace won't punish them for their defeatism. For the nation's sake, I hope they're wrong.

What next?