Looking for a way out

The president has said, in no uncertain terms, that his support for the Dubai Ports World agreement is intractable. Nearly all of the congressional leaders, from both parties, have said their opposition is equally rigid. Is there a way out? A growing consensus suggests Congress will have to blink first.

Slate’s John Dickerson said lawmakers, particularly Republicans, won’t have a choice.

Maybe Republicans have valid reasons for not trusting Bush, but it’s foolish for them to think they can separate their fortunes from his on this issue. When Republican-leaning voters go to bed at night, they don’t find comfort in the fact that Bill Frist is protecting them. They pin their hopes on George Bush. If Bush is weakened, they’re not likely to be comforted by the fact that Bill Frist is still at the helm of the Senate defending the homeland.

The New York Daily News’ Thomas DeFrank agrees, though he suggests there are lingering hard feelings among Republicans on the Hill. He quoted a senior Republican operative saying, “[T]his is what happens when you’ve spent five and a half years telling your Republican friends to go screw themselves.”

Now that Bush has placed his political reputation squarely on the line and played the national security card to strengthen his hand, however, it seems unlikely a Republican-led Congress, even one sorely annoyed with the White House, will humiliate its leader.

“It seems to be turning around already,” a top Republican congressional aide claimed yesterday. “Every day that passes makes [a rejection] less likely.”

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner (R-Va.) told Bloomberg something along the same lines. “I anticipate that the views of the commander-in-chief will eventually prevail, and that the country will settle back and suddenly realize — maybe not suddenly, but gradually realize — that the Administration did the right thing,” Warner said.

Maybe so, but how does the White House get from here to there?

With the uproar surrounding Harriet Miers, there was a fairly convenient way out. The Senate wanted Miers’ WH documents, the Bush gang didn’t want to share, so there was a plausible, face-saving withdrawal. The tumult is similar with the port deal, but the options are more limited.

DeFrank suggests the White House will stall a little and convince their GOP allies to come around.

Delay is Bush’s best tactical weapon. An emerging strategy is to slide next week’s decision date by 30 to 60 days so the White House can launch the education job with Congress and the public it should have done weeks ago.

“A delay gives everybody a chance to step back from the ledge,” said GOP consultant Rich Galen.

Maybe. As of now, there are a whole lot of conservative Republicans who appear awfully comfortable on that ledge. Could the White House, along with Bob Dole’s skillful lobbying efforts, convince enough lawmakers to stave off Congress blocking the deal? We’ll see.

The trickiest part will be lawmakers’ reversals. The inflexible opposition many lawmakers have expressed will not be easily changed, especially from some of the more high-profile complaints from the likes of Tom DeLay, Dennis Hastert, and Bill Frist. Even if the members’ concerns were fully addressed, what are they going to say? “We were upset, but now the president has convinced us that we didn’t know what we were talking about”?

Stay tuned.

From Talking Points memo:

Bush at cabinet meeting: “And so people don’t need to worry about security. This deal wouldn’t go forward if we were concerned about the security for the United States of America.”

  • Note that the Bush quote mentioned above by Tom Cleaver has now been “cleaned up” by Elisabeth Bumiller and the NY TIMES, where the line reads, “…if we weren’t certain our ports would be secure.”

  • Well, as JohnnyB points out, that is exaclty how the White House gets there. A frightened and kowed press. By this time next week the whole story may be that Bush opposed this thing but Dems in Congress really wanted it.

  • No bubba, you got it all wrong. Next week the whole story will be that UAE is a good friend and ally and that Congressional Dems and the liberal media told lies about the extent of the control Dubai World would have (they’re only running the terminals, my goodness!). The Repugs in Congress will be upset that they were swayed by the liberal media’s story and that in the future they will be more dilligent in gathering the facts.

    In the meantime, the electorate will be more convinced than ever that Congress is ineffectual and unnecessary and that an Imperial President makes good sense. Thank you for protecting us, oh mighty Bush!

  • I think a wide body of Americans were shocked to find that our ports were privatized at all and sold to whatever foreign powers, potentially hostile or not. What next? Privatize the Capitol and let both houses congress have priority booking rights? Privatize the Senate Office Buildings and rent space to Senators and their staffs? Rent out the White House grounds for private garden parties? Hey, there’s a buck to made there, after all. Only a commie or a terrorist-lover would pass up such opportunities.

  • Category 5 storm headed for washington.
    The unprecedented confluence of events….as public awareness of unsafe security of all the ports and borders…. as well as disasterous homeland security performance reviews after Katrina, Cheney’s secret shooting , and upswing of civil war in Iraq, NSA reveleations, phlamegate, with ongoing money scandals in washington, medicare drug program dissatisfaction, slumping polls and the lame duck realities.. have a cumulative effect not unlike a perfect storm where the opportunity exists for Bush to have a political version of Katrina. How much more can the levies hold?

  • This is a really complicated issue for the Republicans. Delay helps the administration, but only up to a point. Once you get into election season, local races will complicate the response of congressmen. We’re already having primaries. Election season is already under way, and it will only get more influential as time goes on.

    Secondly, this could be a good issue for Democrats if the Republicans mishandle it. Bush isn’t up for re-election. People are already beginning to view the Republican congress as a rubber stamp for the administration. If the back down under pressure, it will just reinforce that view, which could have bad consequences in the fall.

    The idea that

    When Republican-leaning voters go to bed at night, they don’t find comfort in the fact that Bill Frist is protecting them. They pin their hopes on George Bush.

    would make sense if the president were popular. He is not, far from it.

    I think the Republicans in congress are in deep trouble. If they cave in to the president, they will lose moderate votes and piss off some of their core constituents (the ones who have a visceral reaction to turning our ports over to Arabs). If they buck the president, they will weaken the president and piss off some of their core constituents (the ones who have a visceral liking of anything Bushy).

    This looks like a lose-lose for them, particularly in an election year.

  • i must say, i really didn’t know john dickerson from a hole in the wall until he showed up at Slate, but christ is he an idiotic purveyor of conventional wisdom. now i know why Time is so bad.

    as for the way out, i think it’s relatively straightforward: the administration agrees to the 45-day investigation that it should have had in the first place. the investigation concludes that the deal is fine. gop leaders say our concerns have been addressed. everybody’s happy.

    that’s why the dems should be pounding away on the failure of the bush administration to do anything to improve port security: that’s the real issue. the issue on the uae ougtht to be a simple process issue: there was a right way to go about this, and it wasn’t done that way.

    but port security is an ongoing failure of the bush administration, and dems ought to be saying that every day.

  • Years of cultivating racism and fear have caught up to them. Those who support the current Administration typically are not concerned for the Arab world, they hate them and want to destroy them.

    Even capitalist rednecks only want to use the Middle East to make money.

    I’m not sure the Administration or Congress has what it takes to reverse the previous years of fear mongering and racism they have sown.

  • During a 30-60 day delay any number of other stories will take over the press and the public’s attention. During that time, the admin will have a closed door meeting with a few Repub members of Congress. When the door opens, Congressional members will say they heard enough to be satisfied that the deal is okay and they no longer oppose it.

    Remember the NSA investigations? I don’t.

  • I don’t think we’ll even see the 45-day public comment period. The White House will continue to browbeat Republican lawmakers, and Hastert, Frist and Delay will quietly concede their concerns have been addressed. It might happen as quickly as the end of the weekend. It may look awkward, but the “liberal” media certainly isn’t going to hold their feet to the fire.

    Port security is the important underlying security issue here .But I still think there are enough lingering concerns about the UAE and their links to 9-11, Al Qaeda, and allowing their ports to serve as a conduit for nuclear weapons technology to North Korea and Iran. The fact the White House is waiving accountabilty standards makes the deal stink even more.

    This was a golden opportunity for the Democrats, and, as usual, they blew it.

  • There was a young doctor named Frist /
    Who learned of a deal and got pissed /
    But once all that’s rotten
    Gets quickly forgotten /
    He’ll only slap Bush on the wrist.

  • you know, prm, i don’t mean to aim this at you specifically, but when i read things like “This was a golden opportunity for the Democrats, and, as usual, they blew it,” i wonder what in the world you’re thinking.

    we don’t live in a parliamentary system, so there isn’t one go-to person on the dem side to articulate this issue. dems have generally, in fact, taken the correct position: we should have the 45-day investigation that is legally mandated. there are significant reasons to doubt that this deal is a good idea, but we’re open to hearing otherwise.

    meanwhile, for 4.5 years now, dems have been talking about improved port security (kerry raised it in one of the debates) and gotten no traction at all.

    so what, excatly, is this “golden opportunity?” how did the dems “blow it?”
    what is your prescription for how they could not have “blown it?”

    i’d like to see the dems back in control of congress and the executive office as much as the next person, but there is no magic bullet. there are a lot of people who will accept anything and everything that bush and the gop do. do you honestly think that there is some simple way to get rush to wake up tomorrow and say, “you know what folks? bush is really an incompetent hack of a president and i’ve been wrong all this time supporting him and i now urge you to do the same? that democratic response to the outsourcing of port management really convinced me?”

  • An emerging strategy is to slide next week’s decision date by 30 to 60 days so the White House can launch the education job

    Yeah, time spent edumacating worked really well with Social Security guttingreform.

  • I don’t think the Democrats have blown this opportunity either. Just because Frist and Hassert tried to get in front of Schumer, doesn’t mean that when they cave, Chuck won’t be able to say the Administration and the Republican congress have made America less safe.

    Two of the 9/11 highjackers came from the UAE (not Dubai, but still)

    The Emir of Dubai is a friend of Osama’s???

    The UAE recognized the Taliban government of Afganistan (along with Texas 😉

    The President didn’t know this was going to happen.

    Almost all our ports are managed by foreign-owned firms and the Bush Administration still hasn’t done enough about port security.

    It’s a pity about Senator Warner, though.

  • Howard, no offense taken. I should have elaborated on the last sentence.

    The only Democratic Senators making an issue of this on this are from New York and New Jersey. How about the Democratic senator from Louisiana? The senators from California? Or minority leaders Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid? The fact that there is no ” one go-to person” make it all the more important for every single Democrat on the Hill to say that want to stop the deal from going through. It would be a clear demonstration of party unity, discipline and a single instance where the Democrats assumed the mantle of an opposition party.

    The “golden opportunity” is this: Democrats could have pointed to three problems.

    1. Why hand management of the ports to a country clearly linked to terrorism and has a hand in nuclear proliferation in the third world? Can we really trust this administration to make the right call in light of their miserable performance?

    2. Since management of our ports is being handled by foreign countries, why are we not making every possible effort to screen every single shipping container that enters our ports?

    3. The waiver of the 45-day comment period and accountability standards once again shows the Bush adminstration thinks the rule of law doesn’t apply to them.

    If that’s not enough, here’s a bonus: Treasury Secretary John Snow is rewarding his former employer with a sweetheart deal. Snow was the former head of CTX, which was purchased by Dubai World Ports. Could that have had any influence on this decision?

    Have you heard a unified Democratic Party make a case like that? One of the reasons the Republicans are so damn successful is because they have the party discipline to consistently and repeatedly get their message across. In this case, as in so many others, the Democrats don’t have a message.

    There may not be a “magic bullet” that brings down the Bush administration and the GOP congress. And you’re never going to convert the Rush Limbaughs and Bill O’Reillys of the world. But there are certainly enough wrong with the port deal and dozens of other scandals that could fit into a larger narrative about what is wrong with the GOP Congress and White House — cronyism, corruption, gross incompetence, exploitation of national security for immediate political gain, and willful ignorance. The Democrats aren’t making that case.

  • The big news that no one is picking up on is this bit about Bush appointing a guy named David Sanborn as Maritime Administrator (you know, in charge of ports and what all). Turns out Mr. Sanborn was nominated by the Prez on 1/24 and Mr. Sanborn used to work for a certain company.

    So how is it that Mr. Bush was not aware of this deal until last week when the news media reported on it?? Wasn’t Mr. Sanborn vetted properly?

    Or perhaps more sinisterly, could it be that Mr. Sanborn got the post because DP World was buying out the previous port operator?

    Hmmmmmmm

  • Wait. There is a “magic bullet.” Fire the consultants who can’t win a damn election. Start with Marshall Whitmann and the DLC. That should solve at least 50 percent of the Democrats’ problems.

  • prm, i appreciate the elaboration.

    on the other hand, i still think you’re hoping for a parliamentary party: the democrats aren’t, and frankly, that the gop has been in recent years is an historical abberation that is showing signs of ending.

    As for your desired points of attack, from what little i’ve read about the hearing this morning, these are precisely the points that dems are making, with Levin taking the lead.

    More broadly, i don’t know what more the Dems could have done the last few years to highlight port security as an issue then they have been doing: in a better world, the media would, like, cover this matter, but this isn’t a better world.

    port security, after all, isn’t the only issue in the universe, and different dems are better at speaking out about different issues. i’m far more concerned, for instance, that the dems haven’t done enough with presidential lawlessness than i am that they haven’t done enough on this story.

    Those of us who have the time to comment on political blogs actually are, by and large, far better informed on a wide variety of issues than most senators are: they’re too damn busy raising money, the single most time-consuming job a politician faces. I bet i now know more about port management, this deal, and port security than most Senators (dem or republican) because i didn’t have to fund raise, attend committee meetings, plan my next banquet speech, vet my travel plans, handle a constituent service request, etc., etc., etc. i could, therefore, spend a few hours reading blog postings, documents, and informed comments threads that have helped me understand the issue better and formulate a better response.

    is that how the world should operate? of course not, but it is, and that’s not (or at least, not only) the dems fault.

    forgetting about the useless advice of centrists who are scared of strong positions? couldn’t agree with you more.

    but i think we do have to have some sense of perspective about what is – and is not – realistic for “dems” to accomplish on any given issue.

  • prm –

    Sen. Murray from WA has been on this issue (port security) from day one, and look how much the east coast press has ignored her. Quit blaming the Dem’s for the Republicans mess.

  • You know what really irritates me? Comments from supposed democrats who say that “Dems don’t stay on message”, and then repeat the Repug’s talking points. If you really believe the Democrats need to stay on message why aren’t repeating it? And don’t tell me you can’t find it – just go to http://www.democrats.org.

  • JonnyB- one limrick deserves another

    Once some rich shieks from Dubai
    Tried to buy U.S. ports on the sly
    George Bush was amazed
    At the ruckus this raised
    “Just trust me”, he said, “Don’t ask why.”

  • I think the situation in Iraq will make this whole issue pale in comparision.
    Combined with the fact that the Arab countries are calling Isreal’s bluff by funding the Hamas, the energy left from the cartoon fiasco, the animosities this port conflict is raising in the Arab elites, a real split is forming.
    As well as the situation in Niger, I think in a few weeks there is serious potential for a real crisis situation.
    Also the peaking out of the housing bubble and the inverted yield curve, combined with this situation, the markets might go wobbly as well.
    Interesting times.

  • This is what is known in the technical trades as the 5 phases of a failed project. Iraq qualifies, don’t you think?

    1. Enthusiam – Gen McAffry said, “We’ll hei’em with shock and awe”

    2. Disillusionment – Pat Buchanan said, ” the president should declare victory” and Bush promptly did a “stunt” landing on an aircraft carrier in the pacific ocean, declared victory in Iraq and congratulated himself and the Navy on a job well done.

    3. Panic – Two years later it’s time for an election and the war drags on and on and on,,,, “We’re staying the corse” said he and ridiculed those who voted for the war.

    4. Search for the guilty – The never ending war is now the subject of investigation. Not from the stumble bummed approach to conducting it but the “throwing money at it” and of course to all those old cronies like Haliburton. We are now in this phase.

    5. Praise and honors for the non participants – This is a time when those Dems that either opposed the war or stood silent can thank their luck stars. Any Republicans in that group?

  • Howard,

    Sure Levin, Clinton, Schumer and Murray made a strong and compelling case during hearings for why the port deal was a bad idea today. Great. Will we hear the same points tomorrow, or the next day or the next week? Making the point once isn’t enough.

    And I disagree that the Republican Party lockstep is a historical aberration. For one thing, it has served them exceedingly well for at least the last 12 years. If they lose the House and Senate, that party discipline isn’t going to disappear with the 2008 Presidential elections. And it isn’t like they have a single spokesperson. Turn on any of the televised roundtable discussion and every conservative pundit and politician is saying essentially the same thing. Compare that to the Democrats. A handful take a principled stand, Joementum rushes to embrace Bush’s position, and the rest hem and haw. And forget the sob story about how Senators and Representatives are overworked and underinformed. They and the committees they sit on have staffs to help keep them informed.

    Democrats may not “win” on this issue, but they have to at least show that they’re at least in the game and trying to win. I just don’t see that happening.

  • If the Democrats are smart they will keep this issue alive before the
    public.
    They should be running ads in various television and radio markets
    questioning the soundness of Bush’s idea and give the phone number
    of their local GOP Congressman or woman to find out what they
    think of this proposal.
    Bush continues to look inept on this matter and driving a wedge
    between him and Congress can only make him look worse.
    They could even use the phrase: “Do you feel you are safer now
    with the Republicans in control of Congress while they undermine
    our national security in the name of greater profits for George Bush’s
    friends? Is this the way you want your country run?”
    Bush is going to have to do a lot of conjuring to get out of this one.

  • Comments are closed.