(4 of 4)
Clinton's cave-in may cost him other allies as well, since those who supported him on the BTU tax were feeling duped. Moderate House Democrats who voted for the tax in late May only to watch the President abandon it without a fight last week, were beginning to liken themselves to Charlie Brown and Clinton to Lucy with the football. "I remember the President telling us specifically that if we went out on a limb over the BTU tax," said Congresswoman Louise Slaughter of New York, "he would be there with us. But now we don't even know where the limb is."
Meanwhile, the assault on Clinton's economic plan has imperiled the timing of his other crucial initiative, health-care reform. Because the President had planned to use the Medicare cuts to help pay for health-care reforms later this summer, Clinton's aides are now debating whether to curtail the scope of the reforms or postpone them until next year, or both. "Just look what happened to the BTU tax," said one official. "When you've got something that entails controversy and hard choices, why put it out there and let it sit there and get pummeled?" At a dinner late last week, Clinton insisted he wanted to unveil the plan this year, but he added, "We just have to get the budget passed and see where we stand."
As the intraparty revolt spread, top House leaders telephoned Clinton and urged him to step back from the budget battle to preserve his leverage for the joint House-Senate conference committee later this summer. It is there, they noted, that the final tax bill will be written; everything until then is mere prelude. Within hours White House officials picked up on the theme. "There's no special magic in the BTU," said a senior official. "What's important is the final product."
But the tactical withdrawal doesn't hand Clinton a win; it just stops the bleeding for now. His decision to throw a central element of his economic program overboard raised old questions about what he stands for. At nearly every appearance last week, Clinton talked about "principles" in the budget fight, but his list is dwindling down to little more than $500 billion in deficit reduction. That's a worthy goal, but it too could fall victim to special-interest pleading unless he stays engaged.
Clinton's decision to let the Senate take the lead for now is risky business. It could prove to be a successful way to put more pressure on legislators to find their own budget cuts -- and use up some of their own political goodwill in the process. If the result is a compromise that comes even close to Clinton's deficit-reduction goal, his strategy will be deemed a success. But if Senators fail to produce anything but gridlock, they won't be the ones to suffer humiliation.