A catalogue of disasters has left the President needing a miracle
GEORGE Bush's troubles began a year ago. The economy was in recession
and he failed to do anything about it. He claimed that there was no
recession, that it would correct itself, that it was Congress's fault,
that he would get around to proposing something, some day, later.
There was an election for a Senate seat in Pennsylvania on November 5,
1991, and the Republican candidate, a former governor and former federal
Attorney General, and a close friend of the President's, lost badly. The
result shook Mr Bush: this was a state which he has to win if he wants
to be re-elected.
Two months before, the Republican, Richard Thornborough, had a lead in
the polls of 40% over his obscure Democratic rival Harris Wofford. Mr
Thornborough campaigned on the Bush record, and insisted that there was
light at the end of the economic tunnel. Mr Wofford campaigned lustily
on the theme that the Republicans cared nothing about the state of the
economy and the disintegration of the nation's health care system. He
accused the President of travelling the world instead of staying at home
and minding the shop.
Mr Bush was due to leave for a Nato summit in Rome on the day after
the election. The Democrats sold a T-shirt with the slogan ''George Bush
went to Rome, and all he brought me was this lousy recession''. He also
planned to visit Japan later in the month.
The Democrats carried Pennsylvania by 55%. The President reacted to
the bad news the next morning by announcing, on his way to the airport
bound for Rome, that he would postpone the trip to Japan. That made him
look foolish and indecisive.
What Mr Bush failed to understand was why the country had turned
against him. After Operation Desert Storm, he had an approval rating of
88%. In the summer, his rating was well over 60%. He claimed the credit
for defeating communism as well as Saddam Hussein, and basked in the
glory of all those victory parades.
What is more, the economy was not in desperate shape. This was a
recession, but less severe than the one in 1982, let alone 1929.
During the 1991 election campaign, the White House made much of the
fact that the gross national product had risen at an annual rate of 2.4%
in the third quarter. That meant that the recession was over.
It turned out later that the rise was considerably less, and the rate
of growth declined again in the fourth quarter and in the first half of
1992.
Another ominous sign was the Consumer Confidence Index, which had
dropped from 73% in September to 60% in October. It is now down to
barely 40%. The latest GNP figures were announced a week ago, and the
President is once again boasting of the third quarter growth figure,
2.7% this year. Economists view the figure with deep scepticism.
A couple of weeks after his trip to Rome, the President announced in a
speech in New York that he favoured putting a lid on interest rates
charged by credit card companies. Wall Street dropped 120 points the
next day. He was asked at a press conference what should be done to
revive the economy, and replied ''What's needed? What would help? I'm
trying to sort that through.''
One Republican consultant, Eddie Mahe, remarked: ''It's just causing
distress and dismay among Republicans that's almost like a physical
pain. It's almost schizophrenic, the way the President keeps lunging in
different directions. They have to stop the haemorrhaging with this
disarray, this lack of planning, this lack of thought, this lack of
vision, this lack of coherency. George Bush is hurting himself every
time he opens his mouth.''
In January 1992, Mr Bush finally made his trip to Japan. It had been
planned as a strategic excursion, designed to examine the US-Japanese
role in the post-Cold War world. All that was scrapped in the light of
the economic problems and the Pennsylvania election, and Mr Bush
announced that the purpose of the trip was ''Jobs, jobs, jobs.'' In
other words, he would try to persuade the Japanese to open their market
to American goods.
He took along a group of car company executives, who did not impress
the Japanese. They kept asking their visitors why they paid themselves
several million dollars a year while their companies were losing huge
sums of money. They replied that it was all Japan's fault for not
importing American cars. The Japanese observed that it might help if the
Americans made cars with right-hand drive (Japan drives on the left but
all Japanese cars sent to America have left-hand drive).
John Scully, director of Apple Computers, is supporting Bill Clinton
this year largely because of this incident. He finds it incredible that
Mr Bush should choose leaders of the most backward section of American
industry to confront Japan. Mr Bush took a dozen executives with him,
not one of them from the hi-tech end of the market. There is a footnote:
the most aggressively anti-Japanese of the car executives was the head
of General Motors. The corporation is on the verge of bankruptcy, and he
has just been fired.
Then Mr Bush was taken ill at a state dinner, and threw up all over
the Japanese Prime Minister. All in all, it was a disastrous trip.
The White House promised that the President would reveal his new
economic programme in his state of the union address to Congress at the
end of January. It was a flop. Mr Bush failed utterly to enunciate a
coherent plan: all he could say was that the market would take care of
the situation, and Congress should pass a balanced budget amendment.
He did not say that Congress should pass a balanced budget, nor
propose how to get one. He wants, instead, to amend the Constitution so
that Congress would have to balance the budget -- probably in 1998 or
1999.
In the course of the next few months, Mr Bush had to go through
Republican presidential primaries. His challenger was Pat Buchanan from
the far right. Mr Bush won every contest, but Mr Buchanan won a steady
25%-30% of the Republican vote, and so scared the President that he set
himself to reassure the right wing of the party by agreeing with
everything Mr Buchanan proposed.
So he spent his time denouncing liberals and affirming his antipathy
to abortion, homosexuality, liberals, and the media, and his enthusiasm
for God and country. In the meantime, the recession continued, and still
Mr Bush failed to come to grips with it.
He made two other major speeches, one at the Republican convention in
August, another at an economic club in Detroit in September. Neither of
them was memorable. He has still failed to persuade the country that he
understands people's worries or that he has a coherent plan to deal with
them.
The Houston convention was another disaster. It showed Mr Bush the
prisoner of the right -- and though most of them will vote for him, many
of the conservative disaffected will vote, instead, for Ross Perot.
There is a celebrated poster in Clinton headquarters in Little Rock,
Arkansas. All it says is ''The economy, stupid.'' It means that this is
the only matter that will count in the election. Mr Bush has struggled
throughout the campaign to divert public attention from the state of the
economy by painting Mr Clinton as a weak, unreliable, dishonest clown.
He has had some success: he has cut the Democrat's lead from 20% to
somewhere between 5% and 10%. But unless there is a miracle tomorrow it
will not work. The issue is still the economy, and Mr Bush's failure,
despite all the warnings he had a year ago, to do anything about it --
or even to appear to have an idea of what to do about it.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article