USA

Wednesday January 20, 1999

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Wednesday January 20, 1999

Clinton lays out raft of initiatives: Paves the way for Gore in 2000

He may be facing removal from office, he may be unable to get his legislation through Congress, and he may be only two years away from the end of his term in any case, but President Bill

Clinton last night gave notice that he has not given up.

In the State of the Union address that Clinton delivered to both houses of Congress, he laid out a vast array of policy projects. But behind the facade, much of what Clinton announced had less to do with his own ambitions than the presidential aspirations of Vice-President Al Gore.

The policy details seem designed to set out an agenda for Gore, and to guard his weaker flanks against attack from the Republicans. It is a manifesto for the baby-boom generation at the century’s end.

The mainstay of the speech was the growing budget surplus, expected to be a cumulative $2.7 trillion over the next 15 years. There is no consensus in Washington about what to do with the windfall — spend it, save it or use for tax cuts.

Clinton said last night that he wants the vast majority of the surpluses — about 62 per cent — to be devoted to bolstering social security, the American pension system. Of this, between a fifth and a quarter would be invested through the stock market. The U.S. population is aging, and the baby boom generation fears that there will not be enough paid into it to keep their pensions. The initiative would keep the pension system solvent until 2055.

Another 15 per cent would go to preserving the Medicare system for the elderly, and 11 per cent would be used for new “universal savings accounts” for individuals to invest for their retirement

The Republicans preferred to devote the surplus to tax cuts, but Clinton’s proposals — which have overtones of careful economy, while reassuring people in their 30s and 40s that there will be a pension waiting for them — will command considerable political support, especially among the less well-off.

The rest of the surplus,  Clinton proposed spending. Firstly, he called for considerable investment in education, reinforcing discipline and scho ol standards. Clinton also proposed using some of the cash to boost military spending, part of a multi-year package that would devote an extra $112 billion to the Pentagon. This is the first increase in spending since the 1991 Gulf War. Clinton and Gore are both vulnerable on defence, where the administration is regarded as weak.

A new round of global trade talks, to reform the World Trade Organization and reduce trade barriers, was another of Clinton’s proposals. This will appeal to the free-trade constituencies, unions and environmental groups.

By putting down markers in so many areas, and in particular by appealing to the middle-of-the-road, middle-aged and middle class, Clinton has given a boost to Gore’s early prospects. (Hamilton Spectator, B2, 1/20/1999)

 

Saturday November 7, 1998

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Saturday November 7, 1998

Gingrich bows to party pressure: Failure to tame Democrats forces Speaker to step down

The dizzying turnaround in Bill Clinton’s fortunes was dramatically underscored yesterday when Newt Gingrich, who led the forces to impeach the U.S. president, decided to resign.

Gingrich’s decision came with stunning swiftness on the heels of an open declaration by frustrated Republicans to dump him as their leader.

“I will not be a candidate for speaker of the 106th Congress, ” Gingrich said in a statement. “The Republican conference needs to be unified and it is time for me to move forward, where I believe I still have a significant role to play for our country and our party.”

Republicans have been in an uproar since Tuesday when they failed to score electoral points despite a last-minute advertising blitz attacking Clinton’s relationship with Monica Lewinsky.

That failure launched a widespread movement to topple Gingrich and his lieutenants. But no one expected Gingrich to abandon a powerful post that effectively made him the president of the U.S. Congress.

“The one thing about Newt Gingrich is that he’s not a quitter, ” said shocked Republican pollster Frank Luntz. “That’s why this is so surprising.”

Gingrich, who had been considering a run for the presidency in 2000, was widely credited with wresting control of Congress from Clinton’s Democrats for the first time in four decades in what became known as the Republican Revolution in 1994.

“The reality is that we would not be in position of controlling the House if it weren’t for Newt Gingrich, ” said Republican congressman Peter King, who supported the movement to oust Gingrich. “But the reality was he became an ineffective leader.”

Gingrich’s consistently low approval ratings made him an ineffective stump campaigner for the Republicans. But few expected his resignation in a year that saw them come close to toppling Clinton.

Although Republicans still control the House and the Senate, the Democratic gain of five seats marked the first time since 1934 that the party in power in the White House added seats in the House in a mid-term election. That failure has been laid at Gingrich’s feet.

A little-known New Orleans congressman, Bob Livingston, who described himself as a “dear friend” of Gingrich, took his stealth campaign against the Republican House leader public yesterday. Livingston said he will challenge Gingrich for Speaker of the House of Representatives.

“I don’t do so lightly, I don’t do so cheerfully, but I do so resolutely, ” Livingston said. “No one has been more loyal to him as Speaker.”

Another rebellious Republican, former NFL football star Steve Largent, said he would join Livingston in the post-election revolt by challenging Gingrich loyalist Dick Armey for the post of House majority leader.

“The Republican party hit an iceberg” on election day, Largent said. “I think the question that is before our conference today is whether we retain the crew of the Titanic or we look for some new leadership, ” Largent said.

The warring among Clinton’s foes came a day after Republicans announced a significant retreat in their effort to impeach Clinton, and Paula Jones and her lawyers also appeared to be squabbling among themselves.

“Obviously, Democrats are sitting back and smiling, ” Democratic consultant Chuck

Todd said, referring to the chaos among Republicans.

Less than 48 hours after a five-seat swing to the Democrats, the Republican controlling the judiciary committee, Henry Hyde, annou nced a fast-track impeachment inquiry timetable that would make Ken Starr the only significant witness. (Hamilton Spectator, D6, 11/7/1998)

 

Saturday August 1, 1998

Saturday August 8, 1998

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Saturday August 1, 1998

Clinton pledges to tell complete truth: FBI to test Lewinsky dress stain

An outwardly confident Bill Clinton insisted yesterday he is looking forward to telling his story in the Monica Lewinsky investigation and pledged to testify “completely and truthfully.”

But the U.S. president received ominous reports later in the afternoon that FBI forensic scientists had discovered a “definable stain” visible to the naked eye in a dress Lewinsky has claimed contains a sample of Clinton’s semen.

Television news networks said the FBI determined the discovered stain was sufficient to warrant further testing, which could take another few days, to determine whether it is seminal fluid, and if it can yield definitive DNA evidence.

Earlier, Clinton seemed unconcerned about the investigation that could cut short his presidency. Waving off a cacophony of shouted questions from reporters at a White House event, Clinton smiled broadly while holding up his hands to forestall reporters.

“Wait, wait, wait, wait, ” he said. “No one wants to get this matter behind us more than I do.

“I am looking forward to the opportunity, in the next few days, of testifying. I will do so completely and truthfully. I am anxious to do it.”

The president’s advisers have been apprehensively awaiting any news of the forensic tests ever since Lewinsky turned over the garment to independent prosecutor Kenneth Starr as part of her immunity deal shielding her from prosecution.

And it is likely to renew discussions inside the White House on what the president should say Aug. 17, when he is questioned by Starr on videotape from the White House for showing to the grand jury.

Many political analysts have suggested that the popular president could still survive if he admitted to the affair with the former White House intern and that he lied about it on television and in the Paula Jones sexual harassment civil suit in January.

But if he continues to deny the affair against overwhelming evidence, Clinton risks a perjury charge that could lead to impeachment hearings in Congress.

In his brief statement to reporters yesterday, Clinton refused to answer shouted questions about what version of “the truth” he will testify to.

“I would advise him to tell the truth and let’s get this story behind us, ” said Lanny Davis, a former White House counsel and one of Clinton’s staunchest defenders. Davis did not specify, however, whether the president should admit the affair.

Lewinsky’s soiled dress is potentially the most dangerous evidence against the president because it would elevate the evidence to the realm of science, rather than a test of credibility between the president and Lewinsky.

BLOOD SAMPLE

The latest report of the FBI testing potentially sets the stage for Starr to request a court order compelling the president to submit a blood sample so it can be matched to the months-old stain on the intern’s dress.

While Starr is under no legal obligation to reveal the results of the tests, which could be completed within days, most believe the president will be informed about those results before he gives his testimony.

If the stain turns out not to be the president’s seminal fluid, Lewinsky’s dress will give a boost to Clinton’s story that there was no sexual relations, while further undermining Lewinsky’s credibility.

Should DNA be retrieved from the dress, however, the physical evidence could be catastrophic to the president, who might be forced to admit the affair and ask forgiveness.

The other option is to testify to the grand jury that no affair took place and risk the consequences, including impeachment. (Hamilton Spectator, C3, 8/1/1998)