Morning Political Note: Jan. 31

W A S H I N G T O N, Jan. 31, 2002 -- Only four more shopping days until the reality of Big Casino hits with the release of the federal budget —after the president's apparently casual acceptance of deficits in the State of the Union, and indications of some pretty serious rifts within the GOP over the whole affair.

Click here, and we'll let you know when the note is ready each day.

News Summary

Only four more shopping days until the reality of Big Casino hits with the release of the federal budget — after the President's apparently casual acceptance of deficits in the State of the Union, and indications of some pretty serious rifts within the GOP over the whole affair.

Subhead/your lead for this news cycle: President Bush continues to get overall high marks for the SOTU, but now that the press has had time to pick through it, and certain concerned parties have had time to react, the second-day focus is (still) on the "axis of evil."

The axis gets lots of coverage, with USA Today and others, for starters, playing up the reaction from the three named nations.

One thing is clear: they are plenty mad, with Iran seemingly trying to use Bush's words to mix things up further in the Middle East; ABCNEWS' London bureau reports that Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said today that Iran is honored to be the target of attack by the United States, calling it "the most hated Satan in the world." And China isn't happy with Bush's words, either. And the Europeans are at least scratching their heads.

And the South Koreans are probably unhappiest of all, since their fragile government has staked everything on rapprochement with the North, and all this, on the eve of the President's visit, makes things so very messy.

We may get more favorable reax from a closer-knit member of the coalition when President Bush meets with German Chancellor Schroeder later today.

But two more interesting and potentially more important storylines are growing out of the President's bellicose words.

First, in order to keep it from leaking, very little consultation was done, or heads-ups issued outside or even inside the Administration, and that appears to have caused all sorts of ruffled feathers.

Second, those not consulted inside the government and who think that the rhetoric, particularly regarding Iran and North Korea, was a bad idea, spent a lot of time yesterday trying to convince reporters that the President hadn't really dramatically changed the dynamics.

(And on the President's description of "tens of thousands" of al Qaeda-trained terrorists out there, and threats to US nuclear facilities, some in the Administration apparently are having to spend time arguing that he was not overstating the case. But we'll get to that in a sec.)

Imagine if the The Wall Street Journal carried these words about President Clinton, regarding the major policy shift of one of his States of the Union: "Aids say the president's words reflected his feelings, not a comprehensive strategy for military action." (See "Bush Administration Strategy/Personality" below for more on that theme.)

The walkback came from all quarters — even Ari Fleischer on the record, saying no US military attack is imminent.

But State Department and Pentagon officials spent a lot of their day on this yesterday, with each building playing its own historical institutional role, with the former always wanting to make nicey-nice with other nations, even if it means dissing its own president, and the latter resisting having to actually USE all the hardware they fight so fiercely to have the taxpayers purchase.

Per the The Wall Street Journal (and again: imagine if this happened in the Clinton Administration): "The language 'reflected what the president believes and what sounded best to the speechwriters,' one administration official says, adding, 'Now people can start talking' about the policy to go with it."

"The Bush passages were a clear blow to Secretary of State Colin Powell and his top aides, who had been hoping to keep alive the option of an eventual dialogue with Iran, and possibly North Korea as well."

From the Washington Post : "[S]everal Pentagon officials stressed yesterday that there is no impending military action against Iraq. 'It would be news to us,' said one defense official familiar with military planning. Another Pentagon official went even farther, saying that current military planning is focused primarily on other areas where al Qaeda and its sympathizers are believed to be active. 'We're looking more at Somalia, the Philippines, places like that,' the official said. Nor is it clear that military operations are the best way to address the threats posed by Iraq, Iran and North Korea, administration officials said."( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64527-2002Jan30.html )

The Washington Times takes a more gentle look: "Pentagon officials privately concede that the military's readiness problems of the late 1990s, and a dwindling supply of precision guided munitions, makes it unlikely the U.S. armed forces can attack Iraq anytime soon. The military is structured to be able to fight two regional conflicts at once. Some military analysts contend the force, at 1.4 million active personnel, is too small and stretched out globally to meet that goal."( http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020131-18790220.htm )

This from the Washington Post on the tens of thousands of al Qaeda-trained terrorists: "Administration and intelligence officials yesterday said all the elements of that portrait were 'for real,' although in each case Bush used the most expansive interpretation of available information."( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17-2002Jan30.html )

"In terms of training, 'the numbers get squishy,' one official said. 'You don't have tens of thousands of people doing terrorism out there, but there were tens of thousands who went through this training experience' since 1991, some of them al Qaeda-allied foreigners and some members of the Afghan Taliban forces."

"'The bottom line is that the figures are very inexact. But the president can say with high confidence that there are a lot of people, non-Afghans, who have gone through this process.'"

And on those threats to US nuclear facilities:

"Bush said Tuesday that U.S. forces in Afghanistan had 'found diagrams of American nuclear power plants and public water facilities, detailed instructions for making chemical weapons, surveillance maps of American cities, and thorough descriptions of landmarks in America and throughout the world.'"

"The diagrams found in al Qaeda offices, homes and camps were 'simple drawings, but they showed that attention was being paid to particular sites,' one said. 'None were operational plans,' he added. Administration officials have said previously that the 'detailed instructions' were essentially chemical formulas for such weapons and that no firm evidence has been found that such chemicals were produced."

Making the case in the other direction, the Washington Times leads with an exclusive (we think) on a US intelligence internal alert "that Islamic terrorists are planning another spectacular attack to rival those carried out on September 11."( http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020131-617330.htm

"The detailed warning was issued within the past two weeks in a classified report that said one target was a U.S. nuclear power plant or one of the Energy Department's nuclear facilities … Officials familiar with the report said it contained six potential methods and targets of attack" via various bombings.

The Washington Post 's David Broder provides us with our segue from the war to budget politicking. Arguing that Bush paid too little notice Tuesday night to the rising costs of health care, at least for his taste (and note, your Note authors note, that Tommy Thompson's budget announcements aren't getting that much coverage … ), Broder argues, "It's clear this is not where Bush's mind is centered. The import and intent of this State of the Union was to wrench the nation's focus back to the subject that is all-consuming to the president: the war on terrorism."( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64990-2002Jan30.html )

Get ready, Mr. Duffy, for the drip drip drip of Robert Pear stories in the New York Times pegged to the release of the budget, laying bare the "best of times, the worst of times" effects of the budget cuts — or, in most cases, restraints in growth of spending.

The conventional wisdom throughout most of Washington is that the White House has chosen to live with deficits for awhile, because of the huge spending on defense and homeland security, rather than take on the political fights (particularly with The Appropriators) that saving even small amounts of money would instigate. Since you'd only be effectively getting nickels and dimes back, the argument goes, why pick the fight?

Well, the reality is, not only do they need the nickels and dimes, but the chump change has significance for GOP conservatives. So there will be some scaling back, but too much for some and not enough for others, and all that will be chronicled.

Today Pear leads: "Even though unemployment has increased sharply in recent months, President Bush's budget will seek cuts in several job-training programs for laid- off workers and young adults most affected by the rise in unemployment, budget documents and federal officials say." ( http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/31/politics/31BUDG.html )

He follows with this: "Budget documents also indicate that the administration will propose a cut of $9.1 billion, or 29 percent, in federal highway spending, to $22.7 billion next year from $31.8 billion this year."

And this: "The chairman of the House Transportation Committee, Representative Don Young, Republican of Alaska, and the panel's senior Democrat, Representative James L. Oberstar of Minnesota, said the proposed cut was unacceptable. In a joint statement, they said it would force states to abandon or postpone many highway projects and 'could result in hundreds of thousands of Americans being thrown out of work.'"

The aforementioned Mr. Duffy, OMB spokesman, does his best to roll the boulder up the hill, fighting gamely to break through with some clever points and words, but with the Honorable Mr. Young and other Republicans against him, this is likely (however unfairly) a no-win situation.

Before meeting with Chancellor Schroeder in Washington late this afternoon, President Bush will head from Daytona, FL to Atlanta today to continue trying to leverage his wartime popularity into support for his domestic agenda.

From the ABCNEWS London Bureau: Pakistani police said today they were taking seriously a death threat against kidnapped The Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl and were questioning the radical Islamic leader suspected of involvement. Pakistan's Interior Minister, Moinuddin Hader, told ABCNEWS that three FBI agents have been authorized to join the investigation. … Heavy fighting has broken out again in the Afghan town of Gardez in Paktia province, south of Kabul, as rival warlords grapple for power. … Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon says he regrets not having killed Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat in Lebanon 20 years ago. … Israeli security forces killed two Hamas gunmen who ambushed a convoy headed for a Jewish settlement in Gaza Strip. In response, Palestinians fired two mortar shells into a Jewish settlement, injuring one Israeli … The Nigerian Red Cross says more than 1,000 people are still missing in Lagos, three days after explosions at a military armory which caused more than 600 deaths. Most of the missing are young children.

And, if all this isn't enough for you, there's certain entertainment to be found in the oral arguments in US District Court today regarding the Mary Frances Berry/Bush Administration US Civil Rights Commission war.

More State of the Union Reaction

Bob Novak's column makes some outstanding points: "President Bush's unexpected blunt threat to Iraq, Iran and North Korea trumpeted a turn in the war against terrorism not previewed by White House aides."( http://www.townhall.com/columnists/robertnovak/rn20020131.shtml )

This, according to Novak, did two things: it "removed" Enron from the forefront of our brains, and it caught members of Congress by surprise, particularly those who are more knowledgeable about intelligence, military readiness and diplomacy.

"Nevertheless, without congressional consultation, the president proclaimed a new course in the war on terrorism that more clearly reflects the Pentagon's mindset than the State Department's. He did not refer to the search for Osama bin Laden, nor even utter the name of the world's most famous terrorist. He mentioned al Qaeda only once."

The always hawkish Bill Safire of course LOVES the "axis" language (and, unlike the butter-wouldn't-melt Ari Fleischer, Safire does think it was an historical allusion). And Safire believes the Administration is headed toward trying to topple Saddam: "If Bush follows words with deeds, he will avert that disaster. Instead he will apply his Afghan template: Supply arms and money to 70,000 Kurdish fighters in northern Iraq and a lesser Shiite force in the south, covering both with Predator surveillance and tactical U.S. air support."( http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/31/opinion/31SAFI.html )

"In Phase II, I'll bet it was recently agreed in Washington that Turkish tank brigades and U.S. Special Ops troops will together thrust down to Baghdad. Saddam will join Osama and Mullah Omar in hiding. Iraqis, cheering their liberators, will lead the Arab world toward democracy."

The The Wall Street Journal editorial board was delighted overall with the President's performance, singling out his strong words for the "axis of evil." But they were disappointed that he didn't mention tort reform or the Senate's failure to confirm his judicial nominees, and that he didn't push harder for tax cuts and the right kind of economic stimulus.

Still, their closing graph continues their (intellectual) love affair of words with 43: "[O]ne year into his Presidency, Mr. Bush sits in a remarkably powerful position. He has overwhelming public support, he has reshaped the public's view of the Republican Party in his image and his war on terror at home and abroad dominates the national agenda. This is what strong presidential leadership can accomplish."

And right next to that, Peggy Noonan continues her own, gushier (intellectual?) love affair of words with the Big Guy.

Fifty-two million viewers watched the President's SOTU, "about the same number as caught the finale of the first 'Survivor.'" While "about 30 million viewers" short of his post-September 11 speech, the event got "more viewers than all but two" Clinton SOTU outings.( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A36-2002Jan30.html )

Budget Politics

Roll Call updates the battle between conservative House Republicans wanting a balanced budget, led by Majority Whip Tom DeLay, and the open-to-deficits White House, represented by budget director Mitch Daniels, who simply has to wonder, in private moments, exactly how he wound up in this position. "[O]ther House GOP leaders and senior Republican staffers said DeLay's enthusiasm for the strategy has angered Daniels, who believes that the war and the sagging economy leave the President little choice but to acknowledge a short-term return to deficit spending. 'It's a terrible idea to put the White House in a box when they are fighting terrorism and a recession,' one GOP leadership aide remarked."( http://www.rollcall.com/pages/news/00/2002/01/news0131g.html )

"One GOP leadership aide held out the possibility that conservatives would have an opportunity to vote on the alternative … plan on the floor, even if there was no chance of passage."

More from the Washington Post 's Broder: "Democrats have to try to separate the domestic issues on which they disagree with Bush from the war on terrorism to have any hope of prevailing in the November elections. So far their position looks weak — with no consistent message on taxes, trade or other issues … But the Democrats are not yet out of the game. When the budget comes out next week, there will be hundreds of freezes or cuts in programs important to domestic constituencies. When I asked Budget Director Mitch Daniels the other day how much political flak he expects, his answer was: 'It depends if we can sell guns vs. butter.'"

"That's an honest answer, but it implies that Bush, as well as the Democrats, will have to emphasize the gap between his top priority, the war on terrorism, and the domestic concerns now uppermost on the minds of voters."

The Washington Post covered Tommy Thompson's event yesterday laying out the Administration's budget priorities on health care. "Taken together, the proposals largely reflect conservative thinking about how to bring the health care system within easier reach of people who lack medical coverage, and is grounded in ideas that Bush adopted during his presidential campaign two years ago. But the administration also has adjusted many of its proposals from last year, modifying them in ways that take into account Democratic criticisms in the past."( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A58-2002Jan30.html )

The Economy

Awhile back, it was reported that Karl Rove told some business people that the government needed real-life examples of economic activity being hampered by Congress' failure to pass a fix for the problem of insurance companies being unwilling to issue policies covering terrorism. Well, here's one in the The Wall Street Journal : Marvin Davis is having trouble getting an office tower built next to Grand Central Terminal in New York because of that very problem.

Cheney/GAO/Energy Task Force Fight

Why is the GAO story getting so much attention in the press, beyond the underlying substantive executive-legislative fight? As the Bush Administration is learning, and the last few administrations learned all too well:

1) The Washington press corps, particularly cable news (particularly CNN), LOVES process stories, in part because they tend to fill up the news cycle. Nothing "feeds the beast" more regularly than a narrative arc that allows for endless, breathless live stand-ups (cheaper by far than produced packages) updating viewers are the latest developments.

And, as yesterday's coverage of the GAO/Cheney story illustrated so well, nothing actually has to happen to set off the reports — simply word that something is GOING to happen is enough. And once a cable news channel has teased that something is going to happen, surely its viewers are entitled to know step-by-step as it gets closer. And when the event itself takes place, well, that must be covered in full, in addition to the aftermath, reaction, etc.

2) Judicial Watch understands Point #1 above better than anyone but Lanny Davis and Chris Lehane.

3) In a just world, it would have been only a matter of time before Rep. Henry Waxman's media- and process-savvy staff was profiled in Talk magazine.

David Walker gets New York Times profile treatment, and we think this is the best part: "Mr. Walker is most certainly the first comptroller general to tool around the nation's capital with a sleek blue Jaguar with the vanity tag: 'CG GAO.'" And not just because it would make a good TV picture.( http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/31/business/31WALK.html )

Other good parts: "Of his current campaign, Mr. Walker said that Democrats in Congress had been openly supportive while many Republicans told him they believed he was correct but preferred not to oppose the administration publicly;" Walker's wife is a flight attendant who was on a flight from Boston to the West Coast the morning of September 11; and his pedigree includes lots of Republican ties and stint running the Atlanta office of Arthur Anderson.

Janet Reno Faints

According to her spokesperson, the former Attorney General likely will be released from the hospital this morning after fainting during a speech last night in Rochester, NY.

Earlier in the day: "Before Wednesday's speech, Reno attended a press conference, where a reporter had to help her down from the stage." ( http://www.rochesternews.com/0131story1.html )

A witness: "'She did look pale and she paused. She had just said, "We need to have an open government," paused and said, "Excuse me, I'm going to have to sit down for a minute," and looked around for a chair and fell.'"( http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/southflorida/sfl-reno0131.story?coll=sfla%2Dhome%2Dheadlines )

The Miami Herald 's Walsteen notes that Parkinson's has not slowed Reno's pace. "Despite her Parkinson's, Reno has kept up a punishing schedule. For example, after speaking to a group of AFL-CIO leaders Monday night in Miami, she was at Miami International Airport Tuesday morning at 5 a.m. for flight to Tallahassee to attend Alan Sundberg's funeral. She never made it, however, when fog canceled her flight." ( http://www.miami.com/herald/content/news/local/florida/digdocs/005429.htm

Enron

Al Hunt's column in the The Wall Street Journal often gets some of its best ideas from James Carville and Paul Begala, and today Hunt actually uses their names, rather than just stealing one of their best jokes. But that's not our point about the his piece today. Focus on his recasting the Enron story, in one sense, in the right way.

The notion that the company got nothing from the government (in this Administration and the previous one) in return for campaign contributions is a red herring canard that has somehow grown out of the fact that no one has found a memo saying that Enron explicitly got something of value in return for contributions.

Enron, like almost all big corporate players, gave a lot of money to politicians to ensure it got a chance to lobby for all sorts of things it wanted from Washington (and, still under-reported, in state and international capitals, where less money usually buys even more, because of less press and other watchdog scrutiny, and fewer checks and balances). And it got a lot, no matter what Bush and Clinton and congressional officials say.

Thinking that lobbyists get a lot of access for campaign contributions doesn't, by the way, necessarily lead one to believe that changing the system along the lines of McCain-Feingold-Shays-Meehan is sensible, or that it would be effective.

(That said, here's a picture we might want: the Washington Post appears to suggest that Enron will be closing its Washington lobbying shop today.( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A63-2002Jan30.html ))

Hunt also has done some admirable legwork talking to Pennsylvania officials who don't recall Ralph Reed being involved in the Pennsylvania regulatory issue that he was allegedly paid by Enron to work on, and suggests that Reed has not spelled out much yet what he did for his retainer money.

The Washington Post front-pages this: "Members of Enron Corp.'s board of directors received detailed briefings as early as four years ago about the purpose and structure of controversial partnerships whose losses triggered the company's fall into bankruptcy, according to minutes of the meetings … Individual Enron board members, who themselves are being sued and investigated, have said little publicly about their role in the transactions that toppled the company. The minutes, made available to The Washington Post by a source critical of the board, suggest that the partnerships were a key part of Enron's growth strategy and show they were regularly reviewed by the directors.( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64820-2002Jan30.html )

And, the Los Angeles Times holds its breath and dives once again into the murky depths of Enron's web of business dealings and offshoots.( http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-000007875jan31.story?coll=la%2Dheadlines%2Dfrontpage )

Enron Investigative

Roll Call reports that Ken Lay has not sought immunity in exchange for his testimony next week. "Legal experts said Lay is taking a risk by testifying without immunity, but added that he seems more focused on rehabilitating himself politically than on forestalling any potential legal actions."( http://www.rollcall.com/pages/news/00/2002/01/news0131d.html )

We wonder what, if anything, his PR operation has in mind to soften the earth before his expected Monday testimony, after his family's NBC appearances garnered mixed reviews.

Enron Politics

In an effort seemingly certain to become de rigueur for all big companies that go bankrupt now, the Los Angeles Times looks at the political-contributing habits of Global Crossing. ( http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-000007755jan31.story?coll=la%2Dheadlines%2Dpolitics )

A Washington Times headline asserts that Democrats have "enlisted" Jesse Jackson's help in fighting the Enron war.( http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020131-691270.htm )

Legislative Agenda

Roll Call offers a "careful what you wish for" lead on the possible quick passage of Shays-Meehan: "While some Republicans are crafting strategies to defeat the controversial Shays-Meehan bill, which would ban political parties from raising and spending soft money, some opponents of the measure are actually pushing for its swift passage and enactment, arguing that it will put Democrats at a distinct disadvantage in this year's elections." ( http://www.rollcall.com/pages/news/00/2002/01/news0131a.html )

"Majority Whip Tom DeLay (Texas), who is spearheading the issue for the GOP, indicated in an interview after Tuesday's State of the Union speech that making sure the legislation becomes effective this year should only be a fallback option to defeating it."

"The Shays-Meehan bill goes into effect 30 days after being enacted, meaning that within a month of the President signing the bill party committees could no longer solicit or receive soft-money contributions. The bill allows party committees another 90 days after the bill is enacted to dispose of the soft money they have already acquired."

ABC 2004: The Invisible Primary

As we told some of you yesterday, the former Vice President will be announcing, via press release, the formation of his PAC today — which has been the worst-kept secret in Washington for the past several weeks. Gore will make a live, in-person announcement on Saturday at a Tennessee Democratic party event in Nashville; the PAC will file with the Federal Election Commission tomorrow.

The fully loaded staff will include, among others (learn these names), executive director Janice Griffin, political director Mona Mohib, communications director Jano Cabrera, finance director Josh Cherwin. It also will have a Tennessee state director.

This has been a busy week for the FVPOTUS, who spent Tuesday driving solo around his home state prior to the State of the Union, much as he did recently in Iowa and New Hampshire.

George Will takes on the notion of Dick Gephardt in 2004. Aside from an obvious disdain for Gephardt's evolved populism, he makes this point, which we still think is maybe right and maybe wrong: "Accelerating the process favors candidates who are well-known, and well-regarded by those who dispense organized labor's money and manpower. And this is not the only way the 2004 process might favor Gephardt." Oh, and recall that Gephardt won the Iowa caucuses in 1988. (He wasn't the eventual nominee, of course). ( http://www.townhall.com/columnists/georgewill/gw20020131.shtml )

Politics

Things ramped up gradually not that long after September 11, but you should know that if you are like us, and are on the e-mail lists of political parties and organizations, the partisan, zingy, often immature e-mailed press releases aimed at gaining political advantage in Washington and in November, are flying fast and furious.

The Washington Post gets a tiny bit scoop out of the House Republicans' retreat: "In a private briefing … National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Thomas M. Davis III (Va.) predicted the party had an opportunity to expand its 6-vote majority in the fall election … Since 1862, the president's party has picked up congressional seats in mid-term elections only three times. Several factors, Davis said, exist to counter that trend. Traditionally the president's party loses seats because members who came in on the president's coattails are swept out of office; voters see the election as a way to divide government; voter intensity among the opposition is higher; and the balloting serves as a presidential proxy. None of these trends is evident this year, he argued, since President Bush had almost no coattails, Congress is already divided, and Americans are so supportive of the president."( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A66-2002Jan30.html )

Current polls certainly look promising for Republicans, but we'd caution that there's no guarantee that President Bush's soaring popularity will hold up, or that, after several months of legislating, it will transfer to Republicans in November.

New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D) will host a fundraiser on February 26 in Washington for Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack (D). "One symptom of presidential fever is when a national politician starts throwing fund-raisers for Iowans in Washington" ( http://desmoinesregister.com/news/stories/c5917686/17173859.html )

The New York Times checks in on some Yucca Mountain hearings in Nevada, with (once again) suggestions that some scientists agree with the state's political leaders that the there are some lingering (and, some say, unsolvable) safety problems here: "The Energy Department plans to ask permission to dispose of nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain before it has finished designing the repository, and it hopes to begin burying the waste long before it knows how to seal the tunnels, department officials said in testimony here before an independent science advisory panel."( http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/31/national/31YUCC.html )

We ask with genuine curiosity: when is the President's next trip to the great state of Nevada? And we say with genuine empathy: the President is quite lucky that the state does not have a competitive Senate or gubernatorial race this year, to draw him in.

We'll say it again: don't underestimate the importance to power central of political Washington of those up-for-grabs 2002 Senate seats. Whether Republicans keep control of the House or not, control of the Senate — and the President's agenda for 2003-2005 — hangs in the balance on a handful of Senate seats.

In two of the more closely watched: Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin has raised more than $2.2 million so far, the most he's ever raised by this point in a campaign. His likely Republican challenger, Rep. Greg Ganske, will release his totals today. ( http://desmoinesregister.com/news/stories/c4789004/17192592.html )

And the Manchester Union-Leader's DiStaso's crusade to make New Hampshire Gov. Jeanne Shaheen admit that she's running for Senate is comparable in fierceness to the GOP's campaign to get Tom Daschle to say he does/doesn't want to be president. Her Senate exploratory committee "raised $1,055,293 through the end of December, spent $208,422 and has $929,586 cash on hand. That makes her statement last week that she hasn't decided if she'll run all the more unbelievable." ( http://www.theunionleader.com/articles_show.html )?article=8508

Along this same line, Roll Call looks at how interest groups sympathetic to Democrats seem to be focusing more on winning Senate races than on winning back the House. ( http://www.rollcall.com/pages/politics/00/2002/01/pol0131a.html )

On several levels, we HATE ourselves for including here the fact that Page Six is all a-twitter today over former President Clinton's recent Israeli photo opportunities with young women, but we have regular readers who would consider our leaving it out an abdication of our goal to live up to their conception of What the Note Means to Them. So here it is. ( http://nypost.com/gossip/pagesix.htm )

Another Roll Call story reports, "President Bush's decision to invite Teamsters' President James Hoffa to the State of the Union address came on the heels of a lavish reception the union threw for Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and some 30 Republicans at its headquarters last week." Republicans wants Teamsters support for oil drilling in Alaska; Hoffa wants the Labor and Justice Departments to drop their oversight of the union's activities. "Teamsters sources claim Bush recently has moved closer to advocating that the Justice Department remove the federal oversight."( http://www.rollcall.com/pages/news/00/2002/01/news0131c.html )

The Democratic National Committee will unveil its new interactive website this week, designed to help build the party's donor and grassroots bases. Terry McAuliffe says it's better than the Republican National Committee's; the RNC says they have the same capacity. Whoever you believe, the upshot is that the Democrats are getting more high-tech — and will need all the help they can get to raise hard money if campaign finance reform passes. ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59-2002Jan30.html ) AND ( http://usatoday.com/news/washdc/2002/01/31/usat-politech.htm )

Idaho's legislature has become the first to repeal state and local term limits; the Governor is expected to veto the repeal, but there appear to be enough votes to override it. ( http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-000007900jan31.story?coll=la%2Dnews%2Da%5Fsection )

New York Gov. George Pataki was endorsed by three Democrats yesterday, including the somewhat influential former Mayor of New York City, Ed Koch. ( http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/40294.htm )

Bush Administration Strategy/Personality

Although Bill Clinton has been out of office for over a year, he and his former aides — who dominated Washington for eight years, after Democrats had been shut out of the executive branch for 12 — still hold sway within the strategic and tactical columns of Washington and the Democratic party.

And much of the return to partisan rhetoric lately has been fueled by Clinton Democrats feeling aggrieved at the frequent double standards and revisionist history they see. Just this week, Clintonistas have pointed out: 1) Republicans' new-found enthusiasm for national service, protecting national monuments in Utah, and human rights-inspired nation building. 2) The blithe way President Bush announced that the nation would run a deficit for awhile, without anyone flinching. 3) That they don't remember Dick Cheney ever arguing publicly for the importance of a strong executive branch being protected from having to turn over documents to Congress during THEIR Administration. 4) President Bush's apparent exaggerations in SOTU about the terrorists access to nuclear facility plans and the number of terrorists.

Balz and Woodward, Part Five, promoted in textbook fashion on NBC News last night (how many times did Brokaw tout the paper's website?) and Imus this morning:( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64802-2002Jan30.html ).

We checked the date — it is not April 1. Thus we can only conclude that either 1) New York Times columnist Bob Herbert has been kidnapped; or, 2) New York Times columnist Bob Herbert's body has been taken over by an alien force.

How else to explain a column appearing under his (alleged) byline today in the paper? Normally to the left of the DNC talking points, today it says this: "It will take a lot more than Dick Gephardt's tepid address on Tuesday night to interfere with the bond that is developing between President Bush and the American people."( http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/31/opinion/31HERB.html )

"The Democrats are faced with the simple fact that most Americans like their president, and are rooting for him."

"Mr. Bush, in turn, has exhibited a sense of command and a comfort level with the presidency that was lacking before Sept. 11."

The kidnapper (or the pod alien) was smart enough to include some stuff in their about the economy, unemployment, etc., but that didn't fool us. Right after we finish the Note, we are going down to 43rd Street to look into this.

And most Republicans' least favorite Republican, Kevin Phillips, has an op-ed on the same page, with a watered-down version of his usual populist pitch that the President needs to show the same moral fervor over the big-money politics personified by Enron that he is showing over the war. But we like the Keillorian Goshen, Connecticut dateline.( http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/31/opinion/31PHIL.html )

We repeat ourselves, but it's headlines like this that attract the eye of voters who live in the vicinity of a presidential visit: "President Wows Partisan Crowd in Daytona Beach Visit."( http://www.n-jcenter.com/2002/Jan/31/BUSH1.htm )

And it's also at these visits where sifting goes on — which politicians and big-wigs get to sit where, and which don't even get to sit anywhere. ( http://www.n-jcenter.com/2002/Jan/31/BUSH5.htm )

The Orlando Sentinel leads with the President's call for volunteerism, and notes this bit of local symbolism: Teresa Earnhardt, widow of racing legend Dale Earnhardt, escorted the President into the packed airport hangar where Wednesday evening's rally was held just miles from the racetrack where her husband died nearly a year ago in the Daytona 500. ( http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/orl-asecbush31013102jan31.column?coll=orl%2Dhome%2Dheadlines )

Incidentally, Florida Gov. Jeb Bush will visit his brother this morning before the POTUS road show breaks camp and heads to Atlanta.

"In a rebuke to Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft, the nation's immigration judges are asking Congress to remove their courts from control of the Justice Department," the Los Angeles Times reports. "The judges are particularly concerned about complaints that America's 'core legal values' have been compromised since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, according to a 20-page report sent to Congress by the union representing the judges."( http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-000007877jan31.story?coll=la%2Dheadlines%2Dnation )

Homeland Security

The Washington Post offers: between the World Economic Forum, the Super Bowl, and the Olympics, the nation's homeland security resources are being s … t … r … e … t … c … h … e … d pretty thin.( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64627-2002Jan30.html )

Civil Liberties

Civil liberties hobbyist Ruth Bader Ginsberg is the latest US Supreme Court Justice to talk to high school students in front of C-SPAN cameras. When all the legislation being passed and considered winds it way to the Court, Ginsberg may have something to say. "'If we gave up our freedom as the price of security,' she said, 'we would no longer be the great nation that we are.'" ( http://usatoday.com/news/washdc/2002/01/31/usat-ginsburg.htm

The War Over There

The Washington Post reports on federal investigators' frustrated efforts to figure out exactly what Zacarias Moussaoui was up to in the days leading up to September 11, and how they considered deporting him to France to get help from French intelligence.( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64701-2002Jan30.html )