State of the Union: Juggling Priorities

W A S H I N G T O N, Jan. 29, 2002 -- President Bush will give his first State of the Union address tonight, hoping that the force of his words in the midst of a war will connect the mood of the country to his domestic agenda.

But the president, in laying out his priorities for the coming year, will not present a detailed plan on how to accomplish his goals. And while he will shy away from phrases that irritate Democrats, he won't delve into the debate about how to reconcile a shrinking budget with expanded plans to spend.

Tonight, the president will do what the bully pulpit of the president allows: he will try and set the agenda, set the stage and claim the mantle of leadership. All clichés, but all true, and all because of the importance projected into the State of the Union. The annual address to Congress is just as much about artistic appeals to the public as it is about presenting policy.

The White House said that the address would last approximately 40 to 45 minutes. Officials expect numerous breaks for applause and ovations.

Framed by the events of Sept. 11, expectations are high for a strong performance by the president. This is his third speech to Congress—and his first real State of the Union address.

According to a senior White House official, the president will do a morning and evening practice run for his speech. The same White House official said that during a Saturday practice at Camp David parts of the speech were not reading well and had to be worked on.

Three Halves

This year, according to administration officials, the White House has divided the speech into three parts. First, Bush will emphasize national security. He'll probably begin with a reference to Sept. 11, and then recount the successes of the war in Afghanistan. He will use the narrative to set up the first major theme of his address: the U.S. must devote the necessary resources to defeat terror in all its casts.

And then the president will talk about the homeland. He'll call on Congress to turn attention to the infrastructure of domestic security, mention the heroism and ongoing needs of firefighters, police officers and medical workers.

With the image of sacrifice and the home front in the minds of legislators and the public, the president will move to economic security.

It will arguably be the topic that garners the most attention from the political press because polls show it is the No. 1 issue to voters.

A talking points memo released by the White House Office of Communication states, "The President's economic agenda can be summed up in one word: jobs."

Bush will try to make the case that a conservative economic program, boosted by selected investments in government programs, will create incentives for businesses to hire workers.

Tapping the Budget

He'll be making the argument in an environment where he takes the country into an era of substantial spending.

In announcing historic increases in defense and homeland security last week, the president acknowledged that his initiatives were expensive and would certainly "put a strain on the budget".

That strain, which is estimated by the White House to be close to $80 billion for the 2003 fiscal year, could become the Democrats top issue come the mid-term elections.

Last year, projected surpluses were the focus of much political debate.

This year, the president has said he was comfortable in his decision to return to deficit spending. National security, according to the president, is the most basic responsibility of the government and the country must spend whatever it takes to keep the nation safe.

But income tax cuts, combined with the recession and epic defense expenditures leaves little for domestic programs like prescription drug benefits or social security reform.

Although White House officials say these domestic issues will be addressed in the speech, Democrats know the White House isn't sure where it will get the money to fund them.

As this campaign year opened, several leading Democrats and potential presidential contenders including Tom Daschle, Richard Gephardt and the liberal lion of Massachusetts Edward Kennedy all delivered major speeches of their own, trying to capitalize on the budget vise the president has now found himself in.

As election day 2002 draws closer and the war in Afghanistan winds down Republican congressional candidates are depending in large part on the public's perception of how the president is handling domestic issues. How Bush projects himself in the coming months as he tries to sell his agenda to Congress and the American public will be vital to their chances come November.

Bush will depart Washington on Wednesday to spend the next several weeks pounding the campaign trail, announcing program after program while negotiations begin at home on his budget. But with polls showing Americans ability to separate the president's sky high approval of his handling of the war from judgments on how the economy is being managed he clearly will have his work cut out for him.

The State of the Union

The story of the speech's provenance is familiar: The Constitution requires only that the president transmit a message of the state of the union to Congress each year.

In 1790, George Washington began the first State of the Union speech with these words. "I embrace with great satisfaction the opportunity, which now presents itself, of congratulating you on the present favorable prospects of our public affairs." And indeed, despite its youth, the nation — as an actual nation, now — had much to celebrate. Presidents traditionally begin their speeches with a variant of what Washington said. The most common phrase today is, "The state of our union is strong."

Not all presidents actually gave the nation's status report in person. Thomas Jefferson allegedly felt the practice elevated the president of the United States to a throne not befitting a Democratic nation so he simply discontinued the tradition of talking to Congress in person.

In reality, as his biographers have demonstrated, Jefferson wasn't a confident speaker. He was as much afraid of his comments losing their rhetorical force, as he was concerned about the principle he expressed.

Woodrow Wilson revived the State of the Union address in 1913.

War has been a topic to discuss even during peacetime. Washington spoke of war. He devoted his speech to urging a policy course that prepared for it. He said that a successful nation would preserve the peace only by readying for its opposite.

In peacetime and wartime, presidents have used war, or war as a metaphor, to speak what they viewed as larger truths about the American condition.

Former president Warren Harding had this warning for his generation: "Let's get out of the fevered delirium of war, with the hallucination that all the money in the world is to be made in the madness of war and the wildness of its aftermath."

In January 1965, as the word "mire" began to be applied to the Vietnam conflict, the president Lyndon Johnson tried to capture the conflicted feelings he himself experienced. "Why are we there?" Johnson asked. His answer, a little while later: "What is at stake is the cause of freedom and in that cause America will never be found wanting." A phrase empty of content, unless you were trying to justify an unpopular war.

As troops fought in the sands of the Persian Gulf region, The 41st president George Bush took to the lectern on Jan. 29, 1991. He said this, "What is at stake is more than one small country; it is a big idea: a new world order, where diverse nations are drawn together in common cause to achieve the universal aspirations of mankind — peace and security, freedom, and the rule of law. Such is a world worthy of our struggle and worthy of our children's future."

"The community of nations has resolutely gathered to condemn and repel lawless aggression. Saddam Hussein's unprovoked invasion — his ruthless, systematic rape of a peaceful neighbor — violated everything the community of nations holds dear. The world has said this aggression would not stand, and it will not stand. Together, we have resisted the trap of appeasement, cynicism, and isolation that gives temptation to tyrants. The world has answered Saddam's invasion with 12 United Nations resolutions, starting with a demand for Iraq's immediate and unconditional withdrawal, and backed up by forces from 28 countries of six continents. With few exceptions, the world now stands as one."

Bush got so much applause that his speech was satirized the next weekend on Saturday Night Live.

His son may be just as lucky.