Bipartisan Games

Less than two weeks ago, while we were still on our so-called intersession break, the President addressed the country and declared the state of our union to be strong. To no less than 90 thunderous interruptions, President Clinton unleashed what the New York Times dubbed his midterm political manifesto. On the face of it, the whole evening--bipartisan applause, soundbites, no mention of the dangerous M. L.--seemed not much more than politesse, a perfectly orchestrated performance in which a scandal-torn government and a scandal-fixated media pretended that the state of the union was, indeed, sound.

However, there seems to have been another force driving the bipartisan show of support besides political etiquette. A quick review of what occurred during the State of the Union Address reveals a stunning array of new proposals. In little over an hour, the President proposed to increase the minimum wage, to spend over $7 billion dollars on hiring 100,000 more teachers, to double the number of children eligible for subsidies to the tune of $21.7 billion dollars and to increase federal medical-research spending. In fact, the list goes on to include a host of other, somewhat costly social service programs. Both sides of the House chamber applauded.

Make no mistake about it, Jonathan Chait writes in last week's The New Republic, "Clinton's new program represents a renewal of liberal activist government after three years of legislative ennui." Labeling the shift a sea change, Chait goes on to explain that not only is Clinton flying forward with a markedly liberal agenda, but the Republican majority is powerless to stop him.

At first glance, Chait's claim appears rather improbable. After all, these past weeks certainly have not been carefree for the Clinton administration or for its sex-scandalized leader. If ever during Clinton's five years he has been beaten down by the press and challenged throughout the nation on his integrity and honesty, now is the time.

However, while Monica Lewinsky has taken up press time, Clinton has gone on the legislative offensive. Chait points to a memo released by Christina Martin, Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich's press secretary, that cautioned fellow Republicans not to criticize the President's political plans. She writes: "Don't take the bait. The White House is setting up straw men on popular issues, hoping to draw us into bloody fights, so they can demagogue that we are `against' the environment, the elderly, the poor, the sick, and the young." Whatever your feelings about the Republican predilection to, in fact, be against the environment, the poor, the sick and the young (the elderly are a different story), or about Martin's use of the word "demagogue," Martin's memo speaks pointedly to the Republican inability to challenge the new initiatives. After six years in office, Clinton has created an agenda that is as politically powerful as it is publicly palatable.

The modus operandi is simple and incredibly effective. The Republicans have constructed their platform against the inefficiency and slovenliness of big government, not against the philosophical goals of liberalism. For instance, on the issue of universal health care, the Republicans argued against bureaucratic overkill, tax burden and fiscal waste, not against the principle of health care for all. Faced with the micro-initiatives and focused policies that Clinton has presented, ones for which the traditional conservative rallying cries do not apply, the Republicans are--literally, at least according to Gingrich's press secretary--silenced. They have no lexicon with which to attack the streamlined proposals. And so instead, they applaud.

The initiatives Clinton outlined in his State of the Union address are, as of yet, mere words. They have not been put to a vote; they have not even been written into usable legislation. But, as press secretaries and Washington in general remind us, words are powerful devices. Clinton offered his Republican majority and our country a very different vision of government than the one prevalent during the past two decades.

The President who was mocked for blurring the distinction between Republican and Democrat and who was ridiculed for realizing a Republican platform--like tax cuts and reduced government--more effectively than the two Republican presidents who preceded him has articulated forcefully and, it seems, effectively, a plan for bringing this nation closer to its liberal ideals. In the President's own words: "We have moved past the sterile debate between those who say government is the enemy and those who say government is the answer. My fellow Americans, we have found a third way. We have the smallest government in 35 years, but a more progressive one." If the Republicans keep applauding, he may be right.

Talia Milgrom-Elcott '98 is a social studies concentrator and a resident of Mather House. Her column will appear on alternate Mondays.