(3 of 3)
More damaging was that Clinton, who in his brief time as President has shown a willingness to compromise with ranchers, miners or almost anyone else to win converts to his cause, refused to heed warnings from moderate Democrats that the package needed tinkering. Clinton balked at a proposal by David Boren of Oklahoma and John Breaux of Louisiana to shrink the plan by 25% to win moderate Republican votes such as Jeffords' and avoid a filibuster. When Robert Byrd, the imperious Appropriations Committee chairman, used esoteric rules to block even moderate Republicans from offering similar amendments, a long-divided G.O.P. unified instantly. "When Jim Jeffords and Jesse Helms are locked arm in arm," chortled conservative Bill Bennett later, "something interesting is happening." A filibuster ensued, and Senate Democrats thrice failed to break it before adjourning for spring recess.
Last week Clinton mounted a half-hearted campaign to win the 60 votes he , needed. His aides faxed press releases to media outlets in the states of 13 swing Republicans, explaining, for example, how Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter could "break the gridlock in the Senate, support this initiative and put 25,000 of his constituents back to work." The campaign had hardly begun when White House officials admitted privately that it was futile. "We're trying to put pressure on Republicans at home," said one. "We have to peel off votes. And I don't think we can." Late last week Clinton capitulated, reluctantly agreeing on Friday to cut the package 25%, preserving funds for summer jobs, immunizations, unemployment and highway projects.
The victory energized long-divided Republicans, who were beginning to get used to the idea of rolling over for the Clinton juggernaut. Public support both for Clinton and his package is weakening. Few Presidents have attempted so much so soon, but Clinton's approval rating is already at record lows for a President three months into his term. And as Americans learn more about the specifics of Clinton's program, asserts Republican national chairman Haley Barbour, support declines rapidly. A poll of more than 1,000 Americans by Richard Wirthlin two weeks ago turned up support for Clinton's plan, 54% to 33%. But after Wirthlin explained Clinton's tax plan in detail, opponents outnumbered proponents 49% to 46%. "What the stimulus fight showed people is that Clinton's economic plan is a gigantic new spending program paid for by taxes," Barbour asserted last week. "It confirms people's worst suspicions that the Democrats will take the money and spend it again."
For Clinton, the stimulus fight also exposes a lost opportunity. In the last days of the Clinton transition, top political aides boasted privately that, just as only a diehard anticommunist like Richard Nixon could have visited China, Clinton was preparing to strike at the spending programs dear to Democrats. But in the biggest miscalculation of his presidency to date, Clinton underestimated the public's appetite for change in the form of spending cuts. One senior official acknowledged last week that the unexpected success of Clinton's Feb. 17 speech -- and the public demand for real sacrifice it spawned -- caught the White House by surprise. "There was," he said, "an unanticipated snowball effect." Last week the snowball caught up with Clinton.