Note Archives, updated weekly.

E-mail us: Tips, Compliments, Complaints.

News summary

"NO CHANGE OF TONE: A 47% plurality says Bush hasn't kept a 2000 promise to improve Washington's tone; 36% say he has. The president, seen in a far more partisan light in Congress than last year, is 'going to have a harder time getting bipartisan applause' for his televised Tuesday speech, says Democrat Peter Hart, who conducts Journal/NBC polls with Republican Robert Teeter."

And Jackie also notes: "Tuesday's speech, aides say, has three parts: defense of his tax cuts as a boon to all, a 'care and compassion' section, and one on national security."

The Big Question, as we head into Monday's deadline and Tuesday's State of the Union address chewing over the president's apparently forthcoming Medicare reform proposal, is this: for all the things President Bush wants to achieve, both foreign and domestic, in this year before the presidential election year, can he leverage the SOTU to get both Democrats and US allies to go along with him?

One way to approach this would be to strike compromises. The other way would be to make himself so politically strong and popular that Democrats and the "allies" have no choice.

To quickly dispense with That Which Lies Beyond Our Expertise … David Sanger of the New York Times LOVES the White House beat — as long as he can cover it from Seoul or Paris.

He writes under the City of Lights dateline today (which is nowhere near City Lights, or Meiwah, for that matter), about his globe-trotting fact-finding about how Ugly some of the Europistas find our President to be:

"Over the past several months, as Mr. Bush has mounted his argument for forcing Iraq to disarm, the president himself has once again become the issue here. In interviews in three capitals over the past week, diplomats, politicians and analysts said they believed relations between the United States and two of its most crucial allies — Germany and France — were at their lowest point since the end of the cold war." LINK

Does that ever turn back around? Does it matter in 2004 for political purposes, or in 2003 for substance purposes?

And to return to more familiar territory, we're entering a critical 96-hour period here, stretching between the annual Alfalfa Dinner Saturday night — simply the apotheosis of bipartisan bonhomie — to Tuesday night's big speech.

The Monday deadline will produce at least some lawmakers rallying around the president, and when he walks into the House chamber Tuesday night, the atmospherics will have him viewed by many in the room, and many watching on TV, as a Commander in Chief, not as a political leader.

But that doesn't mean his SOTU will produce bipartisan applause or support, and on his domestic agenda and politics, how will Bush leverage what will almost certainly be a good night for him into success in passing what he wants on health care and the budget?

Or will he simply try to ram these things through on partisan, party-line votes?

(On the other hand, remember: Ari Fleischer's definition of a "bipartisan" vote is one that "includes one or more Democratic votes.")

Which brings us to the formally leaked (we must assume, judging from the widespread, detailed coverage) outlines of his Medicare reform proposal, which entails spending a little more money than the administration had previously talked about on a prescription drug benny, but probably stopping short of a universal benefit, amounting to basically a carrot to get people into HMOs.

The Wall Street Journal 's excellent version says the roll-out will ultimately include "a separate White House event on health care."

And the paper's thumbnail political analysis goes thusly: "Such a plan, however, carries substantial political risks. Democrats are likely to attack any proposal that doesn't offer a full benefit to those who stay in traditional Medicare. Not giving a comprehensive drug benefit to everyone in Medicare 'opens them up to a significant amount of criticism from Democrats that would continue through the 2004 elections,' said Jim Manley, a spokesman for Senator Edward Kennedy (D., Mass.)."

Per the Washington Post 's Goldstein, the plan is now described as "the centerpiece of the president's domestic agenda this year along with a new round of tax cuts." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35396-2003Jan23.html

"[A]dministration officials, sources said, believe that their ideas may prove more politically palatable than similar proposals, because their plan would not force into managed care patients who are in Medicare now or who will soon turn 65, the age at which people become eligible for benefits under the federal health insurance program for the elderly."

(That "current recipients or those nearing retirement" language, of course, echoes the [mostly] successful verbiage used to sell personal savings accounts for Social Security. And by "successful" we mean that Senators Dole and Sununu and others used it and won in 2002, as did George W. Bush in 2000.)

"Even as Bush prepares to promote his ideas for Medicare prominently in his State of the Union address Tuesday night and in a speech in the Midwest the following day, senior health, budget and legislative aides continue to hone the details. Some important aspects may not be decided for perhaps another month. The public attention Bush will place on the issue next week does not mean the entire plan has been defined, one source said."

The still-organizing and still-hiring Democratic hierarchy continues to lay out its front-end bracketing of the Bush speech today (apparently, they don't have confidence that Gov. Gary Locke will be The Answer), with major speeches from Senator Daschle in Cleveland and Senator Clinton in New York.

Those two big guns have offices that don't always, shall we say, see eye to eye about how aggressive to be in pushing back against the president (guess which one more often asks, "where are OUR people??!!"), and about HOW to fight back, but today they both go at it.

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton will take the administration to task for failing to adequately fund first responders in what her staff bills as a "major" policy address at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York today at 1:30 p.m.. She'll also sketch out some new homeland security legislation she plans to introduce.

Timed to coincide with the SOTU focus, and to be given right around the time that new homeland security chief Tom Ridge is being sworn in, Senator Clinton is expected to compare the country's call to arms in the wake of Pearl Harbor to what she says is a lack of vigilance in the 16 months since September 11. The speech is also being coupled with a report showing that homeland security funding is not flowing throughout New York the way she would like.

One line from the prepared text: "Homeland Security is about having the right attitude, focus, policy & resources — right now we're lacking in all four."

We aren't sure how many members of the national media trailed Senator Daschle to Cleveland, but he gave his own quasi-SOTU, contrasting his economic plan with that of the president's.

The advanced text suggested that Daschle's plan would grant every working family a $300 tax cut. Parents would get an additional $300 per child (up to two).

He says a typical family of four would save $1,200. He casts it as a demand-side injection into the economy, targeted at middle income families. And he notes, pointedly, that it won't become "a drain long-term economic growth … It contains three times more stimulus this year than the president's plan — at a fraction of the cost."

His plan would also tinker with depreciation allowances to spur business investment, create a small business health care tax credit and a new broadband credit, and provide $40 billion in aid to states.

The Democratic National Committee is also doing some pre-SOTU briefing today (but no mention of Demzilla, we sadly suspect).

Meanwhile, glance over your shoulder with us to some coverage of the FPOTUS' tour de force yesterday. Mr. Clinton "assailed his successor's domestic priorities, saying the Bush administration's eagerness for tax cuts is rendering the government unable to address fundamental shortcomings in the nation's health care system, including the 41 million people who are uninsured." LINK

President Clinton's health care speech was seen as pretty darn tough by Reuters. LINK

And Senator Breaux gets lots of ink for his two speeches, as well.

The Wall Street Journal 's Calmes ups the ante on Bush's tax cut: "Resistance grows among swing-vote senators to Bush tax cuts. Moderates of both parties air concerns with Senate Finance Chairman Grassley. Fed Chief Greenspan met with Senator Breaux's centrist group. For Republican Grassley, a bigger priority is a crackdown on tax shelters. New wild card is Democrat Miller, often Bush's ally, who now demands more emphasis on spending cuts."

"Cheney promotes tax cuts Thursday at the Conservative Political Action Committee's annual meeting. Bush's new budget, by making five-year projections instead of 10, will mask tax cuts' huge longer-term costs. Budget chief Daniels warns of bigger deficits, due to weak revenues."

The New York Times /Viacom poll, splashed above the paper's fold, should be heartening to those anonymous White House officials who have taken pains in recent days to point out that the press seems to stress bad poll numbers and bad economic news over the president's successes and high-flying. LINK

Even Bernie "Now Available in Paperback" Goldberg would agree, however, that that phenomenon doesn't represent liberal bias, but, rather, is the way all POTUSes get treated.

The nut graph of the New York Times story: "Taken together, the poll is the latest indication of the conflicting sentiments Americans hold for the president. While his overall job approval rating remains at what most politicians would view as an enviable level — and Republicans remain confident about his reelection prospects — the poll offers reasons for hope among the six Democrats now seeking the nomination to challenge him in 2004."

The mayors, still in town for their conference, will have a closed meeting with President Bush in the EEOB later this morning, followed by a likely stakeout with the mayors around 11:45 am, and a press conference by the mayors back at their conference hotel at 12 noon.

Big Casino Budget Politics

Here are three dense David Rogers Wall Street Journal graphs that will — if you are hardy enough to read them — reward you with an understanding of why the Senate's budget work yesterday (while a lovely short-term feather for Dr/Leader/Sen Frist) doesn't get the GOP out of the woods:

"When the bill was introduced last week, Republicans proposed to pay for the farm assistance and other spending add-ons with across-the-board cuts from domestic accounts. But neither the leadership nor the White House was happy with this approach, especially when the percentage approached 3% in the course of debate. By now reclassifying the farm aid, Appropriations Committee Chairman Ted Stevens (R., Alaska) hopes to reduce the percentage cut to a more manageable number. But so much money was added Thursday night, he chose to wait until the dust settles."

"Just 10 days before the president is scheduled to unveil his new fiscal-2004 budget, the bill illustrates the contradictions that can bedevil his economic agenda. Republicans beat back Democratic attempts to add billions more. But the final product raises questions as to whether his new spending targets will be any more realistic."

"Together with two previously approved spending bills for the Pentagon, the $390 billion would bring total fiscal 2003 appropriations to about $755 billion. The new 2004 budget next month is expected to set a target in the neighborhood of $781 billion, but well over half the increase will be consumed by military and homeland-security agencies."

The Los Angeles Times looks at the consequences of the delayed passage: "For one, Bush will deliver his State of the Union address on Tuesday with much of the government effectively on autopilot, operating under a stopgap resolution that funds everything except the Pentagon at levels essentially frozen from fiscal 2002." LINK

"For another, Bush's new budget for fiscal 2004, which starts Oct. 1, in all likelihood will be unveiled before enactment of the fiscal 2003 bill. The president's spending plan for 2004 is due to be sent to Congress on Feb. 3. Comparisons between actual funding for 2003 and proposed funding for 2004 will thus be difficult to draw initially."

We want to have a party and chat with a representative group of this 21 out of 100 Americans, as ferretted out by the NYT/CBS poll: "69 percent said the deficit was 'a bad thing,' while 21 percent said it was a good thing."

USA Today 's Welch looks at the soaring deficit. "Some Republicans have grown alarmed at the rising deficit. They are voicing caution about Bush's tax-cut plans. Senator George Voinovich, R-Ohio, commissioned projections that show the deficit could total $2.89 trillion over 10 years if spending continues to rise at current levels and the 2001 tax cuts are made permanent." LINK

At the same time, Welch and colleague Jim Drinkard look at the pork that made it into the spending bill. LINK

SOTU

At noon today, the Democratic National Committee will conduct a pre-State of the Union background briefing, including the presentation of a DNC research report.

John Podhoretz's New York Post column takes on John King — brave man, that Podhoretz, but more to the point, it suggests that underestimating the president's sense of timing and bully pulpitism in rallying the world against Iraq is foolhardy: "I think that just as Bush held back until he had a world-historical forum to deliver his first major address on Iraq in September, he's holding back until next week. And if the analogy holds, during the State of the Union he will unveil some of the closely held evidence that world opinion has been demanding to prove Iraqi noncompliance." http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/53508.htm

"If it goes that way, next week Bush will once again take the lead politically and geostrategically."

ABC 2004: The Invisible Primary

Last night's caucus of Democratic mayors in Washington was opened to the press at the last moment, so the rest of us got to hear all six sorta announced would-be presidents give broad outlines of their domestic economic agendas, one after the other, for the first time, to a group of electeds upon whom Democrats are increasingly reliant.

Democrats are expecting the mayors to play a huge political and fundraising role in the next two years (here in the Post -McCain-Feingold world).

Highlights, courtesy of ABCNEWS intern Ed Hornick: "The theme from all of these Democratic hopefuls seemed largely influenced by what President Clinton had to say hours earlier on the healthcare crisis in this country. All six of them urged the need to strengthen the weakened health care system and attacked the Bush Administration's tax relief plan. These hopefuls knew their audience and it showed. Each sentence was aimed at such themes as 'urban renewal in small cities,' 'strengthening your local economy,' and increasing funding of education and local law enforcement in communities across America.'"

"[Kerry] said he plans to come up with a new urban strategy such as reducing traffic in bigger cities and wants to put money into urban renewal and strategic planning."

"In a very boisterous tone, Gephardt expressed great appreciation for the mayors by saying that all politics is local.' He then moved the speech into the 'what is wrong with the Bush Administration' zone, calling on all Democrats to 'restore Democratic leadership to move the country in the right direction.'"

"[Dean] started out very candidly; 'Most of you don't know me … In fact, my state is as big as most of your cities,' he joked. He called himself a 'fiscal conservative' arguing that 'we can't have social justice in this country without a balanced budget.'"

"Like the rest, [Sharpton] spoke of the need to invest more in cities and states, and reducing state deficits. He spoke of how Bush's tax plan is similar to the Reagan one-the Trickle Down effect. '22 years later, we got the down, we never got the trickle.'"

(Note Note: even Jack Kemp has gotta admit: that's a great line.)

"Lieberman gave a very short speech. He started out by saying that American dreams are in jeopardy today---by terrorists, the weakened economy and rising healthcare costs. Education: Like Dean, he wants more funding for special education and more money to be put into Bush's program."

The AP tried to keep up with Ed. LINK

On Wednesday, Sens. John Kerry and Joe Lieberman will address the New Democrat Network's closed "top of the year" meeting.

A source involved in planning the event notes that the presence of these two doesn't indicate a preference — Sens. John Edwards and Bob Graham and Gov. Howard Dean have not responded yet, and Rep. Dick Gephardt will be out of town.

NDC hopes to have each of the candidates in to meet with their members during the course of the year. The group will not endorse any one candidate — each of the members has his or her own favorite(s). For example, NDC co-chief and Rep. Adam Smith will introduce his own fave, Kerry, on Wednesday.

Speaking of Kerry and Lieberman, the Boston Globe 's Washington reports that "in the 1990s raised serious questions of his own about affirmative action, stands that have prompted concern from minority leaders and civil liberties activists about just how strongly the two presidential contenders support a policy widely embraced by blacks and Latinos, both large constituencies in the Democratic primaries." LINK

"In 1995, Lieberman said many affirmative action programs 'must change because they are inconsistent with the law and basic American values of equal treatment and opportunity,' words that became an issue within the party when he was selected as the vice presidential nominee in 2000. During a speech at Yale University in 1992, Kerry said affirmative action 'kept America thinking in racial terms' and was failing to reach those who needed it most."

"Some minority group leaders, speaking on condition of anonymity, said they are particularly concerned about Lieberman's position on affirmative action. Officials at the American Civil Liberties Union … say they are concerned about the reservations about affirmative action expressed by Kerry and Lieberman."

"On Wednesday, both senators said they support affirmative action and are opposed only to quotas, which reserve rigid numbers or percentages of benefits for minorities."

"Lieberman's reservations about some affirmative action policies is better known than Kerry's and has African-American leaders and civil liberties groups more concerned."

Never, ever lose focus on how the timing of the release of the twin Clinton memoirs is going to influence the 2004 nomination fight and general election.

With Al Gore on the sidelines, just HOW the influence will work (who will be helped and who will be hurt) is unclear, but the fact and substance of the tomes will have an impact, you betcha.

While one Clinton is focused, disciplined, and determined to meet every deadline, the other is, well, less so.

For reasons the world will never truly understand, Bill Clinton spent some time on Tuesday at the New York Post , and the incomparable Keith Kelly spins out a ton of good stuff today about his chat with Clinton, and it is one of those items we are duty-bound under Note Standards to reproduce in full — and if you skim (or if your name is "Sue Schmidt"), please make sure you read to the end: LINK

"Former President Bill Clinton says he's hard at work on his memoir and hopes to finish the manuscript in time to have it published by the 2003 holiday buying season."

"But a spokesman for publisher Alfred A. Knopf — the Random House Inc. imprint that paid an estimated $12 million in 2001 for world rights — thinks that might be a little optimistic."

"'The manuscript hasn't been delivered yet, which means it is still unscheduled, but I'd say it is likely to be published in the fall of 2004,' said the spokesman."

"Clinton said he is writing without a ghostwriter and he is finding it tough going. 'I worked on it late into the night last night,' he told Media Ink Tuesday, while on a visit to The Post ."

"'It's killing me,' Clinton added. Part of the problem, he said, is, 'I save everything. It's pathetic the things I save — so it may take a while.'"

"'I just found the speech I gave for the American Legion medal,' he added, referring to an award he won as 16-year-old, which earned the Arkansas boy a photo with his idol, John F. Kennedy, at the White House in 1963."

"'I saved all the letters my mother wrote me in college,' Clinton said."

"Asked if he would cooperate with Vanity Fair writer Robert Sam Anson, who is seeking to profile him, Clinton said, 'Should I cooperate? . . . [Anson] wrote me a letter and he seems like he is interested in doing a serious story. I think you should cooperate with all journalists.'"

Graham

Senator Bob Graham has announced he will undergo heart surgery on February 3 at the Naval Hospital. His doctors expect him to make a complete recovery. The situation was picked up as part of a physical he was having as part of his preparation to possibly run for president.

A Graham adviser told us that this is a condition that he has had for years, but it requires treatment now because of continued degeneration.

He is continuing to think about running for president, and he has told aides he is encouraged about what he has heard.

Graham is not expected to announce a decision on running until after his operation.

While we are still told that all indications are that he plans to run, he still has not taken some of the basic steps — figure out an Iowa strategy, figure out a New Hampshire strategy, figure out who would staff the campaign — that one would think he would want to take before announcing.

Still, the Senator from Florida appeared on the precipice of announcing a decision to run — consultants were being consulted, fundraisers were being asked for commitments, trips were being planned. The date of February 3, floated by people close to him, was said to be key.

For now, and until late February or early March, he'll focus on his health. LINK

Graham said he believes he can mount an aggressive campaign if he begins in March, but others aren't so sure.

"If Graham ultimately decides to run, a delay could be costly. Other Democrats have been aggressively raising money, campaigning and organizing for the past year. Many observers think Graham can ill afford to wait much longer to get started." LINK

"Graham's advisers have planned on raising half his money from Florida, but even before Thursday's news, some Florida Democrats had complained that he's taking too long to make an announcement."

Graham "is expected to spend five to seven days [in the hospital] and likely will have to wait an additional week before he can return to the Senate. It will take as long as six weeks to fully recover, one of his physicians said." LINK

"Graham had intended to announce plans to run for the 2004 Democratic nomination on Feb. 3 in Tallahassee. 'That final step will now be held in abeyance until he has the surgery and he has a chance, as he put it, to assess both his personal and political state,' said Paul Anderson, Graham's communications director."

The Washington Times ' Dinan gets at a good part of what hinges on Graham's decision: "Senator Bob Graham yesterday postponed a final decision on seeking the Democratic presidential nomination until after he recovers from planned surgery, putting on hold a decision that some Republicans believe could significantly change President Bush's electoral map." http://www.washtimes.com/national/20030124-437141.htm

"Republicans worry that if Mr. Graham wins the Democratic nomination he could win Florida in the general election, taking a key state Mr. Bush won in 2000 and making the electoral math much more difficult for Republicans."

Kerry

In the first of a series of speeches designed to set the national security agenda in the Democratic nominating contest, Senator John Kerry yesterday blamed the Bush Administration's "belligerent, and myopic unilteralism" for the surge of anti-US sentiment in Europe and the Middle East, advocating instead a "bold, progressive internationalism" that works with America's allies to spread liberty and promote prosperity across the globe.

But Kerry also cautioned the United Nations to abide by its mandates, and rebuked the strident anti-war rhetoric propagated by some Democrats and liberals.

Confronted by a student questioner after the event at Georgetown ended, he vigorously, and somewhat emotionally (and, judging by crowd reaction, somewhat effectively) said he favored ousting Hussein not for political traction but to preserve the integrity of the United Nations' own commitment to regime change, and to ward off the possibility that Hussein would use nuclear weapons against the United States in the future.

The main part of his nearly hour-long speech was a sustained critique of the Bush Administration.

Fox News took part of it live, and it got a mention in the New York Times ' poll story, and plenty of stand-alone newspaper stories and cable voice-over coverage.

Money quote: "Mr. President, Do Not Rush To War."

Mr. Brownstein offers the sharpest analysis of the Georgetown University effort: "The speech also marks another shift in emphasis for Kerry on Iraq. Last year, he accused Bush of ignoring international opinion in the administration's initial moves toward a confrontation with Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. But after Bush pledged to work through the U.N., Kerry voted for the congressional resolution in October … " LINK

"Kerry now has moved closer to the war's critics, who maintain Bush is once again risking dangerous divisions with allies in repeatedly raising the prospect of invading Iraq, even without U.N. approval. Indeed, the heart of Kerry's speech was a charge that, across the board, Bush has pursued a 'belligerent and myopic unilateralism' that has isolated the United States and increased threats to American security."

"The complexity and shifting nuance of Kerry's message on Iraq may reflect the delicacy of his political situation. He faces a Democratic primary electorate increasingly dubious of a war. But many Democratic strategists believe any candidate who overtly opposes a Bush move against Iraq could damage his credentials as a potential commander in chief for the general election if a war turns out well."

"For Kerry, that concern may be especially acute. Although he is a veteran of the Vietnam War, his advisers also remember how effectively Republicans painted the last Democratic presidential nominee from Massachusetts — Michael S. Dukakis in 1988 — as weak on defense."

Gov. Howard "Dean, in one of the first criticisms aimed by one Democratic presidential candidate at a potential rival, welcomed Kerry's remarks but denounced the senator's vote for the use-of-force resolution. That measure, Dean charged, gave Bush 'a blank check to go to war.'"

"In an interview after the speech, Kerry said his views have remained 'exactly consistent' in stressing that the United States needed to maximize international support for any action against Iraq."

The Chicago Tribune's Zeleny describes the speech as "blistering." LINK

The Washington Post 's Von Drehle has this: "In a speech last February in New York, Gore struck most of the same themes Kerry sounded yesterday: the menace of Hussein, the need for cultivating alliances, the importance of U.S. leadership to address global warming and the AIDS crisis in Africa." LINK

"In describing the war on terror, the two even shared the same metaphor: that poverty and oppression in the Middle East are the stream supplying the 'swamp' of terrorists."

Dean's critique gets him a shared headline and lead with Kerry in the Boston Herald. "During a campaign stop in New Hampshire, Dean noted tartly that Kerry (D-Mass.) and other Democratic White House hopefuls voted last fall to give President Bush authority to use military force against Iraq." LINK

"The Kerry camp last night refused any comment on Dean's charge. Among the six major Democratic hopefuls, Kerry and U.S. Rep. Richard Gephardt (D-Mo.) have voiced the strongest criticism of Bush after casting votes to authorize the use of force against Iraq in October."

Lieberman

At first glance, Michael Kinsley might make Joe Lieberman's day by pairing him up with that Democratic wannabe touchstone, John McCain, but then Kinsley awards Lieberman a dubious honor that gets right to the heart of our "sadness/anger" view of the Senator: "even among the self-promoters of Washington, Lieberman and McCain stand out for their enthusiasm and their skill. An important part of that skill, of course, is making enthusiasm look like reluctance. Both are fond of the conceit that they are saddened or alarmed or deeply disturbed by whatever matter impelled them toward the microphones that particular day. The image in your mind, though, if you are an irritated fellow senator or even just a lay cynic, is of Joe or John perusing the newspaper over breakfast as if it were a shopping catalogue, looking for something to be saddened by today." LINK

"By any objective standards, Lieberman and McCain are among the very best of our national politicians. They are smarter, more interesting and probably more honest than most of their colleagues. On the issues they choose to spotlight, they're usually right, often first, and occasionally even courageous … Yet there is a mystery to solve about both these virtuous politicians: Why, despite their virtues, are they so annoying?"

"Obviously it is in part because of their virtues, not despite them. Or rather, it is because of the way they wear their virtues on their sleeves. They are, in a word, pious. If hypocrisy is the tribute vice pays to virtue, piousness is virtue paying tribute to itself."

"Lieberman is literally pious — a devout Orthodox Jew — and that is admirable, especially in a politician with the highest ambitions. But he also has the hectoring, bromidic high-rhetorical style reminiscent of an especially pompous clergyman."

Lieberman's MISTIA* statement on Jerry Thacker's withdrawal from the AIDS panel makes the New York Times . LINK

Curious, though largely irrelevant factoid: Lieberman loved — but didn't support — Paul Tsongas in 1992. He supported Bill Clinton. LINK

The Courant's Lightman also notes that Lieberman missed Wednesday's confirmation vote for Secretary Tom Ridge.

The Boston Globe 's Johnson, tailing Lieberman through the Granite State, finds that "so far [Lieberman] is finding himself no favorite son in New Hampshire." LINK

" … [S]ome of the people who heard him speak in the state over the past two days said they remained unconvinced by his pitch and uncommitted to his 2004 campaign for the White House."

"Lieberman also appears to have made a slow organizational start in the first presidential primary state, in part because of uncertainty created by his pledge not to run if his former running mate, Al Gore, decided to seek the presidency in 2004 … He is finding that many of New Hampshire's major political players are committed to other contenders or have already been courted by three or four of them."

"Lieberman is not trailing only regional candidates. US Representative Richard A. Gephardt of Missouri has already landed the support of Hampton lobbyist Jim Demers, a party strategist and two-time congressional candidate. Gephardt also ranks second to Kerry in an unofficial tally of committed activists maintained by politicsnh.com, a website devoted to state politics."

"By yesterday, Kerry had commitments from eight activists, Gephardt from six, and Lieberman from three, placing him third. Edwards, a Southerner, was next with two committed activists, but in recent days his campaign has released a list of dozens of other supporters in the Seacoast, Nashua, and Concord areas. And yesterday The Union Leader of Manchester published the names of a dozen other supporters."

"Lieberman's campaign is being run by Peter Greenberger, an experienced hand in national and state politics, and is backed by Jeff Woodburn of Pembroke, a respected former chairman of the state Democratic Party."

The Lieberman people would say they have expected this problem all along. That can't make it any easier to see it all laid out in print.

Iowa

Coming off their triumphant fundraiser from last Saturday night, which drew presidential wannabes Dean, Gephardt and Kerry, the Linn County Democrats have announced that Joe Lieberman will headline their Phoenix Club reception on Sunday, February 2.

South Carolina

This coming Sunday, Lieberman will make his first visit to South Carolina since declaring his candidacy for president. His first event will be an address to the congregation of the New Ebenezer Baptist Church in Columbia, after which he'll hold a media availability. Later in the afternoon, Lieberman will attend a fundraising luncheon at a private home in Columbia and meet with local activists and supporters.

Leaving the state GOP temporarily at a loss for one voice of loyal opposition, executive director Ed Matricardi was indicted yesterday on five counts of wiretapping charges dating to his tenure as ED of the Virginia GOP, and resigned his post shortly thereafter.

"If convicted, Matricardi faces up to 25 years in prison and $1.25 million in fines." LINK

"GOP chairman Katon Dawson hired Matricardi in July on the recommendation of White House political director Karl Rove and the Republican National Committee."

"State GOP communications director Luke Byars was named interim executive director. Dawson said party officials will discuss how to find a permanent director when they meet Feb. 15."

Washington, D.C.

Our friends at The Hotline will have an interview with Ms. Donna Brazile today in which she comes out AGAINST the early DC primary. "I am opposed to moving the DC primary date to January. As a member of the Rules Committee, I am not planning to violate the current window and exceptions for Iowa and New Hampshire."

Dean

Gov. Howard Dean will attend a fundraising luncheon on Capitol Hill today, starting at 11:30; the luncheon is billed as a "matching funds project" event to "help Dean for America qualify for federal matching funds." Suggested contributions: $250, $125, or $25.

Edwards

"In a new fund-raising letter, Edwards tackles questions about his limited foreign-policy experience, arguing that he would be better prepared than the two previous presidents," the Raleigh News & Observer's Wagner reports. "'They will say that I'm a novice on the issues of foreign affairs and national defense,' Edwards writes toward the end of a four-page appeal. 'My answer: After serving on the Senate Intelligence Committee, I will have more foreign affairs and national security experience than either Governor George W. Bush or Governor Bill Clinton had combined when they became President.'" LINK

We guess Edwards is not impressed by his friend Bill Clinton's time as a Foreign Relations' committee intern.

William F. Buckley (whose appearance at the Lieberman announcement in Stamford has still not been fully explained) has a rambling op-ed in the New York Times about why he thinks legacy admissions favoritism is A-OK, with this typically confusing (confused?) graph: "Senator John Edwards of North Carolina, a Democratic presidential hopeful, has complained that legacy preference 'is a birthright out of 18th century British aristocracy, not 21st century American democracy.' Well, if you're going to use that kind of language, the United States Senate in which Mr. Edwards resides, however restively, can be denounced as a birthright out of the House of Lords. It isn't very democratic that North Carolina, with a population of eight million, should have as many votes in the Senate as California, with its population of 34 million. So should we leave it that some legacies are O.K.?" LINK

Hart

The New York Times ' Tierney tells us all about his talk with former Senator Gary Hart as their flight landed in Des Moines, and then he tells us about what happened when the two of them were on the ground, and it is a really good story about Hart, and the would-be candidate will most assuredly like the kicker two graphs: LINK

"To some young voters, though, he still is a fresh face. It was hard to find students in the audience at Iowa State who could identify the Monkey Business."

"'Was he involved with Clinton in that Lewinsky scandal?' asked Nicole Woodroffe, a freshman. 'If he didn't do anything illegal, why was there such a fuss? He sounds like an intelligent man. He could do very well.'"

Our final thought on this Tierney opus: does David Axelrod realize he is at risk of becoming the Norm Ornstein of the Democratic nomination fight? (And we mean that in a good way AND a bad way.)

The former Senator seemed to appreciate the "fair and balanced" tie he got when he did "Fox and Friends" this morning. Hey, Roger: can The Note get three of those?

Sharpton

The New York Times couldn't find anyone on the streets of Harlem who DOESN'T believe the Sharpton fire was arson meant to harm his candidacy. LINK

The headline talks of a "conspiracy theory," but the story makes no mention of Julia Roberts OR Mel Gibson.

And while Sharpton is quoted as saying that he doesn't plan to become an "investigator," he also doesn't seem totally settled on how he plans to deal with the aftermath: "Asked about his supporters' suspicion about the cause of the fire, he said he would need some time to figure out what had happened. 'I have to sort it out myself,' he said. 'Probably Saturday, I'll make a definitive statement.' For years, Mr. Sharpton has used Saturdays to rally his supporters."

The Daily News highlights Sharpton's move to Dannis Rivera's pad (on 43rd Street, just down the block from the New York Times ), and the Pataki pal's pledge to help raise money for rebuilding. LINK

POLITICS

Save time this weekend to read your metro dailies' thickish Sunday magazines. The New York Times has a Safire "On Language" mention of John Kerry and class warfare, and a cover story by Bill Keller on how 43 is more 40 than 41 (titled "Reagan's Son," and referring to Karl Rove as a "political judo master").

Remember the old days, before they shortened up most of the stories in the magazine, and lots of them would jump multiple times, and start wrapping around real estate ads? Well, this is one of those, so, again, save time.

Those short of time will get the point from the main art on pages 26-27, in which Reagan morphs to W. in five pictures.

The story, however, is preceded by a Warren Zevon piece by John Pareles that some Note readers will, in fact, find more captivating.

We also have been led to believe that Mark Z. Barabak (the "z" is not for "zesty," but it should be) has a longish profile of Leader Pelosi in the less-read-in-the-East Los Angeles Times magazine on Sunday.

Florida Gov. Jeb Bush has a busy day in the District. LINK

The days of blue-slipping may be over in the Orrin Hatch Judiciary Committee. LINK

The Washington Post 's Eilperin gets at the odd-duck aspect of Pelosi's choice of Rep. Bob Matsui to chair the party's House campaign committee. LINK

We confess to not fully understanding the substance of phonics, but we do think we are beginning to get our mental arms around the politics of "Leave No Child Behind," and we do know the Republicans are next week on track to put their 2004 convention in a city in which the following tussle is rising: "President Bush's top adviser on reading said yesterday that the citywide phonics program unveiled this week by Schools Chancellor Joel I. Klein had no proven track record, suggesting that its adoption could cost the city millions of dollars in federal aid." LINK

"The adviser, G. Reid Lyon, a researcher at the National Institute of Child Health and Human Develop.m.ent, said there is no scientific evidence that the curriculum, called Month by Month Phonics, is effective with students who struggle academically … "

"A federal rejection of the city's program would be a major embarrassment for Mr. Klein and Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, who are imposing uniform reading and math curriculums on all but the top-performing city schools as part of an overhaul of the school system."

Since he apparently can't bring himself to go too far from Hilde, Dan Pfeiffer, of 2002's cutest he-said-she-said team (a/k/a communications director from Senator Tim Johnson's 2002 re-election campaign), has signed up with Senate Democratic Leader Daschle's office as press secretary, focusing on Daschle's South Dakota profile and assorted other projects.

BUSH ADMINISTRATION STRATEGY/PERSONALITY

Attention must be paid: Time magazine on the web has corrected their front-of-the-book item from this week's issue regarding a Jefferson Davis wreath and the Bush Administration. We urge you to read this in full. LINK

Paul O'Neill breakfasts alone but has dinner with Rummy. And, the Washington Post 's Kamen adds, "Reporter Ron Suskind, he said, 'has made [O'Neill] his project' for a 15,000- to 20,000-word profile of the outspoken executive and former secretary. More than enough space for O'Neill to put out his ideas and 'let them sit there' for people to judge their merit. This cannot be good news for the White House. Suskind's Esquire article this month — with Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card Jr. putting down political strategist Karl Rove, and former faith-based chief John J. DiIulio Jr. also putting down Rove, is still causing occasional heartburn in the West Wing." LINK

The White House is aggressively defending their nominee for Treasury Secretary, John Snow, by releasing letters that labor union leaders had written in support of Bush's decision to pick him.

The letters, penned by the Seafarers Union, the United Transportation Union, and even by the head of HERE — the Hotel Employees Restaurant Union — paint Snow as a friend to his employees and generally a good guy. HERE president John Wilhelm is one of the more influential progressives in the labor movement. And The Note has learned that Morton Bahr, president of the Wilhelm Communications Workers of America, wrote Bush a letter of endorsement.

An Administration official dismissed concerns that Democrats will be able to get leverage from the charge that Snow's CSX didn't pay much in corporate taxes for a few years.

"It will be easy for Snow to demonstrate that he is a leader in the area of corporate practices," the official said. "We take nothing for granted, but we have not heard from any member of any significant objection."

Karen Hughes and Paula Dobriansky sat side-by-side on "Today," and chatted with Katie, mostly about women's rights. But Ms. Couric tagged the interview with some politics. Ms. Hughes was Dowdy in saying that the president's poll standing is glass-half-full, these are challenging times, the president won't be satisfied until everyone has a job, etc., on and on, and Katie's by-remote attempt to stop the long answer with a "right" was ever-so fruitless.

ATTENTION Glover Park Group employees: Don't let Joe Lockhart read either The Note or the New York Times on his computer today, or he might throw something at the monitor and bust it when he reads this paragraph from Nicholas Kristof's column on affirmative action: "(While writing about Mr. Bush … during the 2000 campaign, I heard from his family friends that he had been turned down by St. John's, so I asked him about it. He indignantly denied the story. A few days later an aide called and said that Mr. Bush had checked with his parents and that it was true. I found his willingness to confirm this unflattering detail an impressive example of his political integrity, and it was this kind of honesty that won Mr. Bush the respect of many journalists who were covering him.)"

The New York Times eats the Journal's dust on Glenn Hubbard, and tries to make up for it by suggesting that he might not be leaving just yet. LINK

And Makiw's hometown paper has the goods on him. LINK

How DID all the papers catch Mitch Daniels reflecting on Hubbard's (eventual? imminent?) departure on C-SPAN?

Ron Bonjean, the well-respected communicator formerly of Senator Trent Lott's staff, will become Commerce Secretary Don Evans' Director of Public Affairs on February 3. Two Administration officials say the move signals an attempt to boost Evans' profile among the business community; pro-business lobbyists have separately complained that Evans was underutilized as a resource to communicate the president's economic agenda.

NETWORK ELECTION NIGHT COVERAGE

Uma-Oprah, Lenski-Mitofsky: LINK

*MISTIA = "more in sadness than in anger," now a regular Note abbreviation.