Tuesday, November 5, 1996
ELECTION:
UCLA experts predict president would stay politically moderateBy
Christopher Bates
Daily Bruin Staff
"Dewey defeats Truman."
A picture of a triumphant Harry Truman holding a copy of the
Chicago Tribune with a false headline has come to forever epitomize
one of the central facts of American electoral politics: A race is
never over until it is officially over.
Still, every major poll has President Clinton’s lead over
contender Bob Dole in the double digits the day of the election.
Barring an upset of Dewey-like proportions, Bill Clinton will
continue on to a second term as president.
If President Clinton continues on to a second term, he will be
faced with a situation that is different than the one he faced at
the beginning of his first term, according to many experts.
In 1992, Clinton said, "I did not run for this job just to warm
the seat. I desperately want to make a difference." He proceeded,
in his first 1 1/2 years, to promote an agenda that was far too
liberal for Congress’ tastes and was defeated on several key
issues, namely health care reform. Perhaps stung by defeat, Clinton
spent the latter part of his first term steering a much more
moderate path.
But the election of 1996, win or lose, will almost certainly be
Clinton’s last. He will no longer need to be concerned with
re-election. It is a worthwhile question to ask, then, if he will
abandon the centrist tendencies that marked the latter part of his
first term and gravitate again toward the left in another attempt
to "make a difference."
Scholars almost universally agree, for a variety of reasons,
that he will not abandon the political center.
Professor John Bader, associate director of the UCLA Center for
American Politics and Public Policy, argues, "Clinton learned his
lesson during a disastrous 103rd Congress, where he swung wide to
the left and tried to govern without the Republican Party … Given
the late legislative successes of the 104th Congress, he is more
likely to follow a more moderate, more bipartisan approach to
policy making."
UCLA political science Professor Thomas Schwartz agrees that
Clinton has learned his lesson. He adds that Clinton’s desire for
immortality will also tend to act as a restraint.
"Clinton is now playing before an historical audience and though
he wants to look like he stood up for the right things, he also
wants to seem like the great presidents of the past, as though he
actually accomplished something … rather than simply upholding
ideological purity at the cost of doing anything."
Schwartz continues that the president’s tendencies toward
centrism will generally be complemented by a tendency on behalf of
Congress to compromise.
"He will undoubtedly have trouble over certain things, but both
sides having thumped their chests … have marked off their
territories … (and) because they have taken their initial stance,
both sides are going to be willing to compromise," Schwartz
said.
That is not to say that relations with Congress will be smooth
over the course of the entire four years.
"I think you’re going to see a lot of unhappiness in the
Republican Party and a lot of frustration," contends UCLA political
science Professor Steven Spiegel. "And often when that occurs, it
leads to serious problems for a president."
Given the consensus that Clinton will remain near the political
center, it seems unlikely that the president will attempt to
revisit any of the issues that gave him difficulty in his first
term, such as health care reform.
Instead, Bader says, Clinton will undertake a series of modest
proposals that he offered during the campaign such as school
uniforms and anti-smoking campaigns for kids.
Serious changes in the educational system, though, are unlikely,
said Schwartz.
"Clinton already committed himself … it’s too bad, say, from
the point of view of, let’s say, parents of children who live in
the slums, that education reform will never get through until
there’s a Republican president," Schwartz said.
In addition to a compromise-oriented approach on domestic
issues, experts agree that a second Clinton term will be marked by
a much greater need for attention to foreign issues.
"I think three key areas are Russian policy and Eastern Europe,
China and the Middle East. I think China and the Middle East, in
particular, are going to take a lot of Clinton’s attention in the
second term," said Spiegel. "I see both of those situations
worsening, and very serious issues on both of those fronts."
Historically, Democratic presidents have had difficulty when
dealing with foreign policy. The presidencies of Harry Truman,
Woodrow Wilson and Lyndon Johnson were all besmirched by errors in
the handling of foreign policy. Spiegel does not think that Clinton
will have as much difficulty, however. "I think he can handle it
… (in the first term) there were specialists, which I think was
the appropriate perspective."
Another historical precedent that the president will have to
overcome is the tendency of second-term presidents to become
embroiled in a scandal. From Wilson’s fight for the League of
Nations to Reagan’s Iran-Contra affair, every president of the 20th
century except Eisenhower to serve more than four years has been
forced to deal with some major political scandal.
Once again, experts agree that it is within the reach of the
president to avoid these difficulties.
"Clinton seems to have been revitalized with the budget battles
of last winter and a significant victory next week may give him the
extra capital he needs to put his experience to good use," said
Bader. "So it may be a more positive four years."
More pragmatically, Clinton has already shown an ability to
weather scandals, from Whitewater to lastweek’s allegations that he
might have accepted an inappropriate campaign contribution from
Japanese leader Dr. Hogen Fukunaga.
"If you can get re-elected with Whitewater hanging over you,"
Spiegel said, "I don’t see that it should be a major problem for
the president."