Note Archives, updated weekly.

E-mail us: Tips, Compliments, Complaints.

Because this is going to be a pretty busy month, kicking off a pretty busy year, leading to an even busier year after that.

So watch us try to shoehorn all the major political flotsam and jetsam out there — President Bush's economic stimulus plan rollout scheduled for Tuesday; growing tension with North Korea and the build-up toward possible war with Iraq; the administration's trial-ballooning of the rest of its domestic agenda in the face of the upcoming State of the Union; and Democrats' growing presidential field filing to challenge Bush and ready to critique it all — into a lead for the first Note of 2003.

Gotcha.

Also on tap for today: the Republican National Committee's convention site selection panel plans to convene and vote this morning via (closed press) conference call, with a call to the winning city likely to come immediately thereafter.

Our strong sense at this writing is that the GOP is likely to select New York to showcase the September 11-tested President Bush. But the world probably will have to wait for Andy Card to leak that to John King before we can be sure.

It's Three Kings Day in New York, just fyi, and Mayor Bloomberg is scheduled to march in the parade this morning, followed by an announcement of the Winter Festival at 11:00 am, at which he'll do Q&A. We wonder whether a call from DC might come right about then … .

President Bush's sole currently scheduled public event today is a Cabinet meeting this afternoon.

New Senate Majority Leader/Dr. Bill Frist is set to meet with his leadership team at 1:00 p.m..

Former House Democratic Leader Dick Gephardt is expected to establish a presidential campaign committee with the Federal Election Commission today, making him the fifth Democrat to do so.

Senator John Edwards filed last week to greater media fanfare, benefiting from a New Year's dearth of other news and 30-something interviews. He also got his very own Republican National Committee press release, unlike any of the others who have filed so far.

To review, in addition to Gephardt and Edwards, the following Democrats have set up what are, despite their calling them "exploratory," presidential campaign committees in the eyes of the FEC and the law, and thus The Note: Senator John Kerry, Gov. Howard Dean, and the Rev. Al Sharpton.

By mid-January, we expect the Democratic presidential field to have expanded to seven or possibly more, upon the additions of Senators Daschle and Lieberman, both of whom have said recently — Daschle as recently as yesterday — that they are inclined to run. LINK

The political story of the week (at least, the beginning of the week) is sure the be the thundering down of the actual tax 'n' spend plan of the president, with today's papers and TV folks pretty much in agreement on the details.

Our bottom line: as long as the administration doesn't suffer a political cost for running deficits, and as long as interest rates stay low, this something-for-everyone budget is likely to be a political winner in the short term, and much of it will likely pass.

The Wall Street Journal 's lead story is an outstanding round-up of the substance and politics of the president's emerging plan. (See just about anywhere else for the details, which we won't list here.)

This is probably the most important Big Casino sentence: "The White House clearly sees assuring a strong economic rebound as more important than near-term deficits, arguing that a faster-growing economy is the best way to improve the government's budget balance."

And then these two: "Mr. Bush needs help from Democrats in the Senate to win quick approval of the package by the spring, as Mr. Bush's strategists want. A continued weak economy could undermine prospects for Mr. Bush's broader agenda of revamping Medicare later this year, and then turning to Social Security later in his presidency."

House Democrats are expected to release their own economic plan today in the middle of the afternoon.

The Journal story seems to have the best details on that, too: "House Democrats were putting final touches on their own plan to be released Monday. It would cost $100 billion to $130 billion mostly this year. Key features include a rebate for individuals; significant aid to states and local governments to help with increased homeland security and Medicaid costs; and tax breaks for small businesses to encourage more capital investment."

"Democratic leadership aides were still tinkering with the particulars but the rebate was expected to give about $500 to a typical household. Democratic aides said that while their package would be much smaller overall than Mr. Bush's, it would deliver more juice to the economy in the near term. Almost all of the package's impact would come in 2003, they said. The plan also would include Democrats' extension of expiring unemployment benefits. As the White House negotiates a deal with Congress, Democrats will try to get some of their provisions added to a final package."

More generally, after declaring it "an understatement to say George W. Bush starts 2003 in a much stronger political position than when he took office almost two years ago," the Los Angeles Times ' Brownstein writes, "despite Bush's high overall standing, there remain sharp cleavages in the country's assessment of his presidency. He has solidified enormous, almost unprecedented, support from his base: Republicans and conservative independents." LINK

"But other segments of the electorate remain skeptical — perhaps not as hostile to Bush as they were in 2000, but still unconvinced. It's from these groups that the eventual Democratic nominee will have to try to assemble a coalition in 2004." Basically: moderate to liberal independents are pulling away from conservative independents.

Some Democrats argue that the crowded field is good for the party, giving them lots of spokespeople to take on Bush at a time when they have lost control of Congress.

We'll revisit that question later in the year (in our upcoming, post-Gore Invisible Primary ratings), after the Democrats begin attacking each other. For now, they are indeed focused on Bush's economic plan, his tax cuts, and his approaches toward Iraq and North Korea.

We still wonder how Senator Lott will be treated by staff and colleagues, and how he will treat them, upon his return. And how will his long-running love affair with the Capitol press corps be affected?

The Washington Times ' Z. Hallow writes, "Republican lawmakers predict that the House will remain the power base for President Bush and his legislative agenda in the Republican-led Congress that will be sworn in tomorrow," because, as Senator Hagel predicts, Frist is going to have to cut some deals. LINK

"Politically, the White House regards action on prescription drugs a must but is counting on Mr. Frist and other Republicans to get something passed that doesn't look like a cave-in to Democrats."

"One dynamic won't change in the new Republican-led Congress. 'The Bush agenda ideas came from and will continue to come from the White House, through his strategists and his aides on the Hill,' a senior Republican aide said, adding, in reference to the narrow Republican majorities in both houses, 'Now that we have the White House and both houses of Congress, we need to get something done, but the sheer math requires that we move to the left.'"

USA Today 's Kiely puts it this way: "Republicans control both the House and the Senate, but there's no guarantee that reaching agreements will be any easier this year: Democrats have enough power to thwart parts of Bush's agenda they oppose." LINK

The Los Angeles Times ' Hook raises the possibility that "Republicans' ability to act quickly" on Bush's economic proposals "may be set back by the gut-wrenching change of leadership," and adds in a separate item that "[s]ome GOP sources predict there will be residual tensions between some Senate Republicans and the White House because of perceptions that the White House undercut Lott and forced his resignation." LINK

ABCNEWS' Textor reports that Bush's rollout of his stimulus plan tomorrow in Chicago will be followed by a series of sales events with Vice President Cheney and Cabinet members. With Treasury Secretary-designate Snow on ice, should we look for Commerce chief Don Evans to step up big?

Democrats (and John McCain) are already so hating the tax cuts, along with (predictably) the Washington Post ed board and (tonally) many of the reporters writing about it with tart skepticism (since, as we have said before, most reporters are NOT supply siders). LINK

The Post front-pages some economists' verdict that eliminating the tax on dividends would not spur growth. LINK

Reading through all the coverage and picking apart of the various components of Bush's plan and the administration's new efforts to hold the line on spending, we wonder: will THIS be the Bush budget where those groups and individuals inside and outside of Congress who care about 1) eliminating deficits; 2) not raiding the lockboxes; and/or 3) truly cutting government spending (and not just cutting the rate of growth) finally stop allowing the administration to use the war as an excuse?

It sure doesn't look that way.

When was the last time you saw a story that made it clear that the deficit figures, as big as they are, are softened with all that trust fund money?

And how much traction will all those Democrats who voted for Leave No Child Behind get for attacking what they claim is insufficient funding? And will Gov. Howard Dean prove to be prophetic, as state education officials of all stripes turn against various aspects of the scheme (which we use here in the British sense), especially the funding levels?

Republicans remain giddy about their party's poll standings on education, but could problems with implementation ding that standing at all?

Although 2004 politics, Big Casino budget politics, and plenty of other issues will be in play in 2003, The Note is left facing the reality that the war against terror, and/or the war against Iraq could become the dominant political event of the year.

Nevertheless, we have preemptively made the decision to only cover the war as a political issue for the Congress and the president field.

In the event of outright hostilities, however, watch us turn on a dime.

On Tuesday, Congress returns and President Bush travels to Chicago to roll out his economic stimulus package before the city's Economic Club.

On Wednesday, the Bushes will make remarks on the first anniversary of the No Child Left Behind Act, at the White House.

Any presidential events on Thursday are TBD. Bush currently has no public events scheduled for Friday.

The New Congress

One big question is whether Daschle's likely attempt to stay on as Democratic Leader and run for president simultaneously will bog down the caucus, generate ill will, or both. Some Democrats are already itchy about it, and how Daschle's colleagues (particularly those already running for president) will react to all this is anyone's guess.

Did anyone catch Democratic Whip Harry Reid's turn on "Meet the Press" yesterday? Do you think that perf solidified his hold on the slot to replace Daschle, or emboldened the Dodd forces?

If you REALLY wanted to know what is going to happen with the president's legislative agenda, your best bet would be to wiretap all Rove-Frist and Rove-Blunt phone calls. You wouldn't believe how much business those guys are going to transact.

In fact, even though Senators aren't supposed to even THINK about what the House is doing, and vice versa, these cats are so operational and clear-thinking that they might even engage in the rational process of thinking about how to get bills passed with a macro, bicameral strategy.

(For your who's who in FristWorld, check out this Roll Call story: LINK

Those of you who thought that Dr./Senator Bill Frist had self-term limited his Senate service in a manner beyond Nethercuttian, check this out, from Sunday's Los Angeles Times : "Frist is someone who faces the issue. In 1994, he won election to the Senate after saying he planned to serve just two six-year terms. He won a second term in 2000. Now the incoming Senate majority leader, who has built a public image as a doctor-turned-legislator, must decide whether to leave Congress to become a private citizen again in January 2007." LINK

"A Frist spokesman, Nick Smith, said the Tennessee senator 'never made a pledge' to limit his terms. 'He said it was his intent' to do so, Smith said — leaving some wiggle room for an about-face."

Our attempts to get this clarified by Note-time were unsuccessful.

Ed O'Keefe and Helen Dewar: over to you.

In a near must-read, John Tierney of the New York Times writes a fable that is the worst nightmare of Chuck Lewis and Ralph Nader about how Ed Gillespie, Bob Livingston, and other well-connected Republican lobbyists are on top of the world in the new all-GOP Washington. LINK

Don't you just LOVE the Ken Johnson quote?

Budget Politics

That lead Wall Street Journal story has this important section on the MEGO-but-vital alternative minimum tax problem: "Mr. Bush is also looking at ways to make sure that those who get rate cuts don't wind up actually paying more in taxes because they get caught under the so-called alternative minimum tax. That levy was created in 1986 to ensure wealthy taxpayers can't claim so many preferences that they wipe out their federal liability. But the minimum tax has never been adjusted for inflation, and is now hitting increasing numbers of middle-income Americans, sharply raising the tax bills of some."

"Fixing the problem would be too costly to handle in the current plan, administration officials said. Instead, they want to make sure that new tax changes don't make the problem worse."

"Under a White House budget plan that the Republican-controlled Congress will take up in the next few days, spending for domestic programs other than homeland security would be held at $316 billion in the current fiscal year — the same as last year, according to figures provided by the House Appropriations Committee," reports the Washington Post 's Morgan. "Congressional aides expect this frugal approach to continue in the 2004 budget that President Bush will propose next month." LINK

"The policy marks a major adjustment of federal priorities in the face of soaring defense outlays, new demands for funds to protect the nation against terrorism, and stagnant tax revenue … Administration officials defend the shift as essential in light of new security threats abroad and the economic downturn at home."

"But Democratic leaders have been charging for months that the administration's main motives for squeezing domestic programs are to offset the revenue lost through the president's 2001 tax cut and make room in the budget for further cuts and new priorities such as a Medicare prescription drug benefit for seniors."

Senator McCain on Imus this morning said that all the leaking of possible plans was part of the standard White House tactic of floating different ideas to see how they fly.

If that's true, somebody should tell the president about that stratagem, because he seems pretty ticked off about all the leaking.

ABC 2004: The Invisible Primary

NARAL's January 21 gala, pegged to the 30th anniversary of Roe v. Wade and what it gloomily anticipates could be "a fully anti-choice" US Supreme Court, may become a Democratic presidential cattle call. The organization's year-long campaign also will include radio and TV ads and other voter education efforts, and the targeting of at least 15 battleground states.

And there will be a mini-cattle call in the Hawkeye State this month, too.

Senator John Kerry and Gov. Howard Dean will headline the annual fundraising banquet for the Linn County Democratic Party in Marion, IA on January 18. Linn County, of course, is home to more Democrats than any other Iowa county save Polk (Des Moines), making this event arguably the first major political event of the year in the caucus state.

Dean was a quick responder, we were advised, while Kerry committed later. Edwards, according to an organizer, begged off because of a prior commitment. Gephardt's staff hasn't yet said whether he'll attend. And invitations also have been extended to Lieberman and Daschle.

Among the five candidates who have filed with the FEC, counting Gephardt, who files today, props for the most successful pre-announcement announcements go to Sens. John Kerry and John Edwards, both of whom garnered several days of positive press.

The Edwards people, after saying they didn't want their initial rollout to be high-profile like Kerry's, arguably wound up with one that was more so.

But the big piece on the board (or edging toward it) remains Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, who gave a "Sunday night" interview to the Sioux Falls Argus-Leader's David Kranz. LINK

"Daschle says he is leaning toward forming an exploratory committee to decide if he will enter the race for the Democratic nomination. He toured the state over the weekend to visit with friends and seek comments on his future." "'I will continue to discuss with close friends, supporters and colleagues over the next couple of days and make a decision in the next couple of weeks,' he said in an interview Sunday night in Sioux Falls. 'I've always come home and weighed these decisions with my circle of friends. Then I will be ready.'" "He said many people are questioning why he would want to run for president." "'I think they are skeptical until they hear the reasons. They worry about losing clout for South Dakota,' he said." "He answers those skeptics with a question." "'How much more clout would we have here if we had a president of the United States? I could be the single biggest economic boon for the state in its history, ' he said." The Raleigh News & Observer's Wagner leads his coverage of Edwards' "This Week" appearance with his stance on North Korea. LINK

The N&O has set up an Edwards page: LINK

The Washington Post 's Balz, quoting Matthew Dowd AND Ed Gillespie along with plenty of unnamed rival Democratic camps, pokes around Edwards' championship of "regular people." "Edwards's fanfare for the regular person prompts plenty of questions. Is it not-so-thinly disguised class warfare? Is it Gore Lite or an echo of Clinton '92? Or has Edwards reinterpreted the populist strain of the Southern political tradition … ? Just what does Edwards mean by regular people, or to put it another way, who isn't a regular person? And can a wealthy former trial lawyer successfully make this case?" LINK

"Many Republicans and Democrats said the 'champion of regular people' phraseology smacked of Democratic strategist Bob Shrum, one of the architects of Gore's 2000 campaign message who was a consultant to Edwards's 1998 Senate campaign. But the Edwards adviser said the candidate coined the expression himself … "

The Charlotte Observer looks at Edwards' money chase. LINK

And Republicans already are salivating over the potentially open Senate seat. LINK

Rep. Dick Gephardt has many friends in Iowa. But he'll need to silence the refrain of "but that was 14 years ago." LINK

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch, despite getting their print exclusive from Gephardt for Sunday, offered a pretty brutal take on his somewhat messy rollout, which they said raised "eyebrows about how a savvy political veteran like Gephardt could have bungled something as closely watched." Though we agree with Ms. Nichols that, taken in toto, it's a pretty minor deal. LINK

Killer lead to Kit Seelye's part-of-the-series profile of Gephardt in the New York Times : "On paper, Representative Richard A. Gephardt, the latest entry for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2004, has a lot going for him." LINK

And here's his index-card agenda, which is pretty good if specificity is a character issue this time around: "With can-do enthusiasm, he spoke of providing all Americans with health insurance through their employers, using tax incentives; offering preschool programs in all public schools; simplifying the tax code so that 70 percent of taxpayers would pay a flat rate of 10 percent; seeking through the World Trade Organization an international minimum wage that would vary by country; and overseeing a 'futuristic, optimistic, long-term energy policy' that would wean the nation from overseas oil and focus more on wind and solar power."

Also "he would strengthen domestic security by directing more money to local fire and police departments. He said he would start a teacher corps in which the federal government would pay tuition for college students to train as teachers (he likened it to R.O.T.C.); in return they would teach for five years in needy school districts."

Then Ms. Kit gets to the macro problem that (as they say in the newspaper biz) even Gephardt's allies know is there: "'He doesn't have a compelling biography, and he seems like someone whose time has passed,' said a Democratic strategist who admires Mr. Gephardt. 'I'd bet money that Dick Gephardt doesn't take off, which isn't fair because I think he'd make a good president. But that's not what this is about.'"

"What it is about, of course, is being able to win. That is the big question mark for Mr. Gephardt."

And the ouching goes on: "Mr. Gephardt may also have trouble defining himself. He has switched his positions so often (on taxes, abortion and trade, among other things) and has split the difference so often as a legislative deal broker that there is some confusion about where his heart lies. This extends even to the location of his campaign headquarters, which he said he would establish in both St. Louis and Washington."

And check out this with-friends-like-these quote: "'This straddling goes back to his big problem — being definitive on the issues and who he is,' a longtime friend said."

"Already, his campaign is more advanced than most. He has named Richard Sullivan, a North Carolina lawyer and top Democratic fund-raiser, as his chief fund-raiser, and Steve Murphy, who ran his Iowa campaign in 1988, as his campaign manager."

In addition to Murphy, Team Gephardt has scored in signing up former Vilsack campaign manager John Lapp as their Iowa state director. While Murphy runs the campaign day to day, Gephardt's Hill chief of staff Steve Elmendorf will serve as COS and senior strategist to the campaign.

While the Gephardt folks, like the Edwards camp (ostensibly), wanted to keep their rollout lower-key unlike Kerry's and give it to their hometown paper, the Post -Dispatch was as tough as Ms. Seelye: "This time around, although Gephardt is promising 'bold' ideas, it is not yet clear how fresh or forceful his platform will be." Note David Axelrod's pulling double duty with quotes in both P-D stories. LINK

The likely entry of Senator Daschle means the Iowa caucuses now may well be worth covering, and not a Gephardt romp.

Keep your eye on the pop-culture image of Daschle that already seems to have formed/be forming. Leno joked that he was so boring, his Secret Service code name is "Al Gore" (come to think of it, that might say more about Gore … ).

More ominous (since Daschle can overcome a "boring" tag) is the cartoon on the last page of Time this week, by zeitgeist Bruce Handy, who pictures a confused, backboneless Daschle.

Daschle is scheduled to return to Washington by this afternoon, and plans to tell his Senate Democrat colleagues this week what he's already told the AP — that he is "leaning" toward running for president. He also plans to try to stay on as Leader for awhile.

Those involved now in Daschle's planning, and likely to play a role in his expected presidential campaign include: advisers John Podesta, Steve Hildebrand, Joel Johnson, Doug Hattaway, Karl Struble, Anita Dunn, and Ron Klain; chief of staff Pete Rouse; and other members of the Senator's current staff.

"For-mi-dable," as the French say. Too top-heavy, say some (jealous?) Democratic operatives.

Daschle would start somewhat behind the others in terms of Iowa, New Hampshire, and other early state travel and contacts. And he hasn't had a competitive race in awhile. But we believe he would have as good a chance to be the nominee as anyone else in the field.

Senator Kerry, his announcement over and done with weeks ago, has two pieces of good news: we hear that former New Hampshire Gov. Jeanne Shaheen's husband Bill is supporting Kerry, and that the campaign has signed up a top political operative to be their political director, Luis Navarro, formerly the political director for the SEIU.

This is a dangerous trend for Walter Shapiro, Glen Johnson, and The Note, not to mention Steve Scully: "Massachusetts Senator John F. Kerry came under the radar Friday afternoon and met with 30 activists at the home of state Rep. Jane Clemons, D-Nashua. The group ranged from teens to seniors in their 80s and Kerry wanted it private to deliver an important desire to have grassroots politics be the hallmark of his 2004 campaign for president. 'Having this be a public event would have taken away from what he was trying to say. I saw each one leave with a real feeling they were spoken to by the senator and not some prop for a C-Span event,' said Clemons. Those there included fellow state Reps. Mary Andosca and Angie Kopka, both D-Nashua." LINK

Mr. Leubsdorf over the break nicely rounded up where the 2004 Democratic primary/caucus schedule stands, reminding us that "[i]t will make a critical difference if candidates face one major contest each week or have to campaign simultaneously in several places."

And, most important of all, keep in mind that on the money front, that all President Bush will have to do to raise over $100 million is have Joe Allbaugh hold a press conference on a street corner and announce a post office box to which Americans who believe in faith, freedom, family and the president's strong national security record can send a $2,000 check.

Bush did not make a single phone call for a check in the 2000 cycle, and he surely won't this time. All the Democrats running will have to do that in spades.

Since 1980, the presidential candidate with the most money raised by the eve of the election year has become his party's nominee, for two conventionally accepted reasons: 1) the breadth and depth of financial support is often an indicator of popular support, and 2) he who has the most money generally has the most staying power and means to communicate with voters.

But looking at how much money the candidates have to spend as of January 1 of the off-year might prove just as predictive, for the same reason.

Iowa and New Hampshire are key early states, but in recent years, they have not made or broken every eventual nominee, and losses in those states can be overcome. In fact, the last Democrat to win the presidency, Bill Clinton, did not win either Iowa or New Hampshire in his first turn at bat (of course he won them both in 1996). He was able to stay in the race in part because he had enough money to campaign elsewhere.

Doing well in these key early contests matters, of course, since the die appears cast as we start the new year, and Iowa and New Hampshire appear to be safe bets to hold onto their disproportionately influential status. But defying expectations in these contests is almost as important as winning. And raising money is most important thing of all.

Which brings us to: since last August, Rev. Al Sharpton has been openly soliciting money for his exploratory committee. He's also held several fundraisers — the first in mid-September. That much is incontrovertible. LINK

His website asks contributors to write checks to the "Rev. Al Sharpton Presidential Exploratory Committee," and send them to:
"Rev. Al Sharpton Presidential Exploratory Committee" "PO Box 25812"
"Washington, DC 20007"
http://www.sharptonexplore2004.com/contribute.htm

So we beg forgiveness for being slightly confused that a spokeswoman said late last week that Mr. Sharpton would file his first disclosure forms to the Federal Election Commission on January 21.

How can Sharpton have an active exploratory committee without filing anything with the FEC? Could it have something to do with the changeover in election cycles?

Might Jan Baran or Ben Ginsberg (given the GOP's apparent interest in making sure Sharpton is part of the Democratic debate) offer up their services — at a discount — to make sure no mistakes are being made? Given the confusion, like our friends at www.politics1.com, we checked last week with the FEC and the IRS, and searched through District of Columbia business registrations, and couldn't find an entity set up to receive Sharpton exploratory checks.

Let's slog through the law. LINK

Sharpton is a candidate if he or a designated representative received contributions totaling more than $5,000 for a federal office. (True.) A "committee" is officially defined as such when an entity run by a treasurer receives more than $1,000 dollars during a calendar year. (True.)

So …

Each candidate for federal office must establish a committee within 15 days of becoming a "candidate." See above for the definition of "candidate." Once a committee is organized, it must "file a statement of organization no later than 10 days after establishment." The statement includes the "name, address and type of committee," the name of the treasurer, and other things.

The FEC does not have a record of any Sharpton committee being formed.

BUT — and here's where we think, guess, muse, that something went amiss — in a non-presidential election year, presidential campaign committees established during the fourth quarter of that year have until January 31 of the next year to disclose donors if they don't get involved with any other year's federal election activities.

Theoretically, since Sharpton's account began to get money in mid-September 2002 and he'd have 15 days to "establish" the committee and then 10 days to "file a statement of organization" — theoretically, Sharpton's committee counts itself as "formed" within the fourth quarter of 2002. So it doesn't have to file its disclosure reports until Jan 31.

Left unresolved is where (if anywhere) and when (if anytime) Sharpton's initial account was registered.

If you are 1) a Note reader and 2) someone who was one of Al Gore's top 50 fundraisers in the 2000 cycle, how about writing or calling and letting us know how you enjoyed all those warm holiday calls from the men (still) running for president, and, most important, whether any of you have decided in the last month to sign on with someone?

Our favorite part of the Boston Globe 's Globe-ish "why every Democrat running for president wants to be like John McCain" (although not to the extent that they would have the good sense to hire the Big O or Nancy Ives) is the part where some brave "Edwards associate" says on background that Edwards is "'a regular guy standing up for people in the darkest moments of their lives.'" LINK

In the wake of an awesome contretemps on "Meet the Press" yesterday, in which a totally straight-faced Bob Novak accurately corrected Tim Russert regarding the first cycle in which the Democratic field was dubbed "The Seven Dwarfs," ('88, not '92, although Novak inexplicably claimed there were only 2 or 3 candidates in '92), Bill Safire headlines his column today, ta-DA!, "The Seven Dwarfs": LINK

He writes all-too-predictably and none-too-kindly about the whole field, contradictorily saying Republicans shouldn't deride and write off the group, then floating a deadlocked fight leading to an Al Gore- or Hillary Clinton-brokered convention.

And it sounds like Jonathan Prince will have to do some more sidling up to Mr. Safire at the next Judson Welliver Society event.

Senator Edwards told the Concord Monitor that he has a fighting chance to win New Hampshire if he spends enough time there. LINK

Not a secret: Mudcat Saunders is "working out the details" with the Edwards camp about his potential future. Also not so secret is the belief that Mudcat and Steve Jarding can replicate their Virginia-honed rural turnout tactics across the South. LINK

PoliticsNH has some of the latest consultant/strategist/activist sign-ups for Edwards. LINK

And what about Ralph Nader? Throughout 2002, he whetted our appetites by saying he'd announce his decision about another presidential run "after the midterms." Friday, Mr. Nader told ABCNEWS that a decision was still "a long way off." He said he needed to make certain "verifications" before he decided one way or another.

We can imagine that one of these "verifications" might consist of a firm decision about running from Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich, whose name was being bandied about by Iowa labor activists last week, according to three sources.

Stu Rothenberg decides that probably none of the contenders has an edge. "But that doesn't mean all the Democrats start out with the same chance." And he finds two Democrats to be the early frontrunners "by default: former House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt (Mo.) and Senator John Kerry (Mass.)." LINK

The Washington Times ' Lambro looks at how "some political analysts are now saying that the Democrats' prospects of winning back the White House suffer from not having any heavyweight governors in its presidential lineup and too many career politicians in Congress." LINK

Edwards will hit Silicon Valley next weekend.

The State's Lee Bandy declares that Edwards "must" win the South Carolina primary. LINK

Dean will attend a fundraiser for the New Hampshire Young Democrats on January 11. On January 13, Kerry will address the Los Angeles-based ANGLE, a political group advocating legal rights for gays. Edwards spoke to ANGLE last April, earning him criticism from North Carolina Republicans, who contended that his support for the "gay agenda" undermined his commitment to the state's values.

Sharpton wraps up a three-day visit to the Boston area tonight with a speech at Harvard Law School. "He was to meet today with political and business leaders, including Mayor Thomas M. Menino." LINK

Dean is in Annapolis, MD today for a reception hosted by the outgoing Democratic governor. On Tuesday he'll be in New Hampshire, where state Rep. Peter Burling is throwing a meet and greet for him in Cornish. Dean will deliver his farewell address in Montpelier on Wednesday, followed by Dean for president events in the state on Thursday. On Friday, he will come to DC to receive the first annual AFL-CIO Senator Paul Wellstone Award.

Come early next year, when John and Jane Q. begin to pay attention to the presidential race, Team Edwards probably hopes they won't log on to www.edwards2004.com. (Try it yourself before you read further.)

That's because the domain name is owned by a group calling itself "BallotCast," which promises to use the site as a way to keep Edwards accountable by revealing his links to trial lawyers, labor unions, and drug companies.

Todd Stein, a BallotCast spokesman, said the group rejected an offer by Team Edwards to sell them the domain name. Stein wrote The Note in an e-mail that his group is "an army of citizen journalists equipped with nothing more than a laptop, a modem and the right to free speech." "Politicians aren't obligated to use any particular domain name," Stein wrote to The Note. "They are public servants in the public domain, not trademarked entities. Besides, what gives John Edwards the right to use Edwards2004.com more than TX Rep. Chet Edwards, actor Anthony Edwards, Jets coach Herman Edwards, or any other guy named Edwards?"

Indeed. BallotCast also claims to own, among other sites, HowardDean.com HowardDean.org, RichardGephardt.com, Gephardt04.com Gephardt2004.com.

Politics

Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) was finally asked about 2008. He said he hadn't even thought about it. LINK

Jeb Bush is actually going to an NGA meeting?!? LINK

Speaking of the NGA, here's a handy guide they put together of State of the State address dates for 2003. LINK

The Washington Times has an interesting look at Democrats' search for a counterpart to Rush, though the story doesn't mention the DNC's radio project … LINK

How about that candidate for California GOP chair who pulled a Trent Lott over the break?

"Bill Back, a candidate in next month's election for the chairmanship of the California Republican Party, has issued a statement apologizing for distributing an article that suggested the country might be better off, in everything from race relations to international affairs to morality, had the South had won the Civil War." LINK

Candidate for chair Duf Sundheim's "campaign strategist Dan Schnur said Saturday evening that Sundheim has been called to Washington for meetings next week with White House officials."

Gov. Gray Davis starts his second term today, and the Los Angeles Times forecasts political rough weather for Davis over his budget. LINK

Look for Davis to go all anti-DC and anti-Bush in his inaugural speech, in remarks that would cause quite a stir if the guy were still in the '04 sweepstakes. George Skelton will be the only one to get hot and bothered now.

How nice of the Union Leader to get all weepy over Governor Shaheen — now that she is on her way out. LINK and LINK

Peter King challenging Senator Schumer? LINK

Governor Pataki challenging Senator Clinton? (When will Pataki's allies realize that floating him to replace Cheney in the gossip pages of the New York Post is a mistake?) LINK

Vice President Cheney will headline this year's Conservative Political Action Conference on January 30. Cheney has addressed this convention of conservative activists before. House Majority Leader Tom Delay will keynote CPAC's Reagan banquet. ABCNEWS' Sam Donaldson will debate media bias again this year. Last year's largest applause-getter, then-Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris, will return this year as a member of Congress.

Thursday, January 9 … what to do? What to do? The National Federation of Independent Business and the US Chamber of Commerce have scheduled their 2003 political and business outlook breakfasts for the same day at much the same time. The one touting hot food will probably win.

Per the Landrigan Machine, Joel Maiola is about to lose his monopoly as a New Hampshire-based chief of staff to a Granite State Senator, as Sununu honcho Paul Collins will set up shop outside the Beltway.

Paul, do us (and Joel) a favor: at least stay out of Bow.

The Congressional Black Caucus didn't get their candidate for DCCC chair, but they're biding their time. LINK

Senator Elizabeth Dole's 101-year-old mother, Mary Hanford, remains hospitalized due to illness. LINK

The glorious and aforementioned Katherine Q. Seelye, who covers environmental policy and politics for the New York Times , will spend the next three months in Cambridge, MA as an Institute of Politics fellow.

There, she'll lead the up-and-comers through a study group focusing on something we like to call the Invisible Primary. She likes to call it that, too. Seelye has grand plans for her teaching venture: she wants her students to peek behind the curtain at all the pre-primary positioning. If anyone can get the access, it's Ms. Seelye.

Kit: give our best to "Senator" Glickman, and please keep our fall 2005 seats warm.

Bush Administration Strategy/Personality

Thirty-eight percent as powerful as Karl Rove (THAT'S powerful), but only 1.8 percent as well known — at least before today, when the New York Times ' Elisabeth Bumiller offers a must-read profile (and source-builds with) White House deputy chief of staff Josh Bolten in her "White House Letter." LINK

The deputy chief of staff for policy refused to be interviewed for the piece, but Dan Bartlett and Rove himself are extremely quotable, with Rove uncharacteristically dishing on Bolten's new girlfriend, and noting, "He's the explainer of all things Jewish to the White House."

Also: who knew that Bolten was briefly Jon Corzine's chief of staff at Goldman? And find us a better kicker in the paper today than this: "Also, he recently grew a beard, an unusual act in the Bush White House, and he likes to bowl."

Is there ANYTHING that the senior-Administration-official-in-charge-of-spoonfeeding-the-newsweeklies could say in recounting bold, leaderly presidential dialogue in "private" meetings with staff that the newsweeklies WOULDN'T print? (If you don't get that sentence, you are either too young to remember Larry King's USA Today column, or too much of an outsider to have ever had lunch at the Oval Room with Matt Cooper or Martha Brandt.)

Whoever is going to be the assistant secretary for public affairs at Treasury might want to read the The Wall Street Journal column on A2 that points out that designee Snow is going to have to figure out how to talk about the dollar — and all sorts of other things.

Still no Paul O'Neill exit interview that we have seen. We are just assuming that Ron Suskind is trying to nail it, but we wonder, who else? And what would the plain-spoken former Secretary have to say?

Al Kamen's Hughes watch offers this today: "Former White House counselor Karen Hughes, much less visible since her move home to Austin and job as Republican National Committee consultant, is said to be in the delegation traveling with Undersecretary of State for Global Affairs Paula Dobriansky to Afghanistan this week for a meeting of the U.S.-Afghan Women's Council. Pick Hughes in any one-on-one with Herat warlord Ismail Khan." LINK