Post Politics Hour

washingtonpost.com's Daily Politics Discussion

Don't want to miss out on the latest in politics? Start each day with The Post Politics Hour. Join in each weekday morning at 11 a.m. as a member of The Washington Post's team of White House and Congressional reporters answers questions about the latest in buzz in Washington and The Post's coverage of political news.

Washington Post money and politics reporter John Solomon was online Wednesday, April 18, at 11 a.m. ET to discuss the latest news in politics.

Political analysis from Post reporters and interviews with top newsmakers. Listen live on Washington Post Radio or subscribe to a podcast of the show.

The transcript follows.

____________________

Floris, Va.: The top three Democratic presidential candidates reported twice as many campaign donors as their three Republic counterparts during the first quarter. Is there a corollary that can be used with the 2000 campaign? (I am not using 2004 because there was a sitting president, and thus is not a good comparison.) How concerned is the GOP about this number?

washingtonpost.com: Clinton's Campaign Has Most In Bank (Post, April 16)

John Solomon: We spent a lot of time talking to the famed Bush fund-raising "pioneers" and "rangers" last week and many of them have decided to stay on the sidelines for now. This is likely the single biggest reason the GOP numbers were low in the first quarter. These fund-raisers gave lots of reasons for not jumping in. Some said they were apathetic about the current field. Christian conservatives said they hadn't found a candidate yet that they felt most comfortable with. Some said their loyalties were to Bush only. And many said they were simply being pragmatic and were waiting for the field to winnow. Pioneer Kenneth Kies summed up the dynamic this way: "What everyone is looking for is somebody who can win, somebody who would be effective in the job and policy positions consistent with things I feel are important, such as keeping a reign on the growth of government."

_______________________

New York, NY: Why is this even a discussion about gun control? This psychotic just as easily would have plunged a knife into someone, or driven a car into a crowd. Is it not obnoxiously vile to take this enormous tragedy to push one's pet political causes, such as gun control? With all the millions of guns in America just like the one the shooter used, why is there not more killings?

washingtonpost.com: Democrats Wary Of Tightening Laws (Post, April 18)

John Solomon: Tragic mass shootings like Virginia Teach almost always revive the debate about gun control. Even President Bush, a major supporter of Second Amendment gun ownership rights, said he expected to have a renewed discussion about the issue. Bush said, though, he wanted to let more facts come out first so policymakers would know exactly what happened. Interestingly, though, leaders in both parties have urged restraint to avoid a knee-jerk reaction. Most of the lawmakers and congressional aides I talked with yesterday said they expected the debate eventually to focus narrowly on two issues: gun ownership by alien residents and whether there can be any added protections to keep guns out of the hands of those already being treated for suicidal or homicidal tendencies. It will be interesting to see where the debate ends up.

_______________________

Woonsocket, R.I.: Am I mistaken, or is the White House's claim of an overriding "executive interest" in the RNC e-mails a huge step towards a constitutional crisis? And would it be cynical of me to wonder if the White House used the media furor over the latest shooting spree to "Friday night" this story?

John Solomon: I think it is too early to say where this will end up. Dan Eggen and I at the Post were the first to notice the RNC e-mail accounts and to write about them. It turns out both Democrats and Republicans since the 1990s have set up separate accounts for their political staffs at the White House to avoid Hatch Act violations. So this issue isn't unique to the Bush administration. And the Rove account and its retention issues we believed first came up in 2005 during the CIA leak case. If the e-mails that weren't archived are simply lost, there won't be any constitutional issues. You can't fight over emails that can't be retrieved. For the emails that do exist, or can be retrieved, the White House will have to decide whether to invoke executive privilege or turn them over. That decision will be the tipping point, and we don't know yet how that will shake out. There are also some middle ground solutions that could emerge ... like allowing Congress to read or review the emails in private but not keep copies and make them public.

_______________________

New York: In your article yesterday (bylined with Matthew Mosk) you mention "Clinton fatigue" as a reason why some of Hillary Clinton's supporters are supporting other candidates financially. Another Post article from yesterday also claimed: "Among Democrats, a sense of 'Clinton fatigue' has led some major fundraisers to reassess with whom they want to align." So I guess it's now one of those "Official Media Talking Points" (if not a chronic political disease that causes a lot of inopportune napping and embarrassing snoring). But I guess I simply don't get why somebody would just switch political horses just because they were "fatigued" by fundraising for the Clintons. My question is this: Isn't this really just an old stand-by media theme from 2000 dusted off and used again -- but this time it's Hillary getting the treatment, rather than poor old kick-him-around-some-more Al Gore?

washingtonpost.com: New Loyalties for Old Fundraising Networks (Post, April 17)

John Solomon: The fatigue issue wasn't raised by us. It was offered by several of the fund-raisers and donors we talked with over the last two weeks. And the fatigue these money players cited isn't an exhaustion from fund-raising in general. Rather, it is a dynamic that occurs when the same known quantity has been asking for money for years. One donor put it this way. He said Democrats still like the Clintons very much. But they are like a well-worn and reliable family car, he said. If a shiny new sports car comes along, it's easier to get donors to pony up $2,300 for something new and different rather than to put the same amount of money into the reliable family wagon, the donor said.

_______________________

Germantown, Md.: I'm confused here. Either the stuff on the RNC systems is political and not subject to presidential privilege, or it isn't and it's on there as a violation of the Presidential Records Act and would be evidentiary material of such violation. Either way, it should be subject to congressional subpoena. This seems to be pure cheek on the part of the RNC to delay responding until the Bush administration has had a chance to review each and every e-mail.

John Solomon: The White House has already set up a possible argument for extending executive privilege to some of the emails sent using the RNC accounts. It has acknowledged some aides may have addressed or conducted official business (like the U.S. attorneys firings) while mistakenly using the political email accounts. The issue of whether the presidential records act was violated isn't likely to rise to a constitutional crisis. The issue of whether Congress will be allowed to see documents the White House might consider to be privileged is where a legal battle could unfold. But it is still early. With the subpoena issued, the clock is now ticking and we'll know in the next few weeks how this will play out.

_______________________

Abingdon, Md.: So what kind of response can we expect to hear from the candidates on the Supreme Court ruling on upholding the ban on "partial birth" abortion? Think we'll start hearing about the type of justices each would appoint if elected with the decision today?

John Solomon: There's no doubt this ruling will have reverberations on the campaign trail, particularly on the GOP side where rivals may try to highlight Rudy Giuliani's pro-choice stance to the religious conservative base. But I suspect the debate will be even larger than that. What makes today's ruling particularly significant is that it marks the first time the justices have decided how - and not whether - to perform an abortion.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: Wouldn't the best strategy for the Bush administration be to stonewall every single request from the Democrats? They can keep things tied up in courts until well after the Bush presidency ends. Why would they choose to cooperate on even the smallest of matters?

John Solomon: Stonewalling comes with its own political consequences. While the courts might take time to methodically decide issues, the public's patience with getting answers it might demand from an administration is finite. The Bush administration folks I've talked with say they want to pick their battles carefully. They need to cooperate with Congress where they can in hopes of achieving some legislation accomplishments in its final two years. All-out stonewalling would run contrary to that goal. I expect the administration will continue to propose solutions somewhere in the middle _ like the one they offered to allow Congress to interview Karl Rove and Harriet Miers in private with no transcripts. Such solutions also might undercut some legal confrontations. If Congress has been given a way to get information it needs, the courts will likely weigh those compromises in any fights over executive privilege.

_______________________

Reston, Va.: Hi, John -- thanks for your time. I know I'm running late for the chat, but I hope you can take this question anyway. Did anything ever come from the President's conference on school violence? Was any action taken, recommendations made, legislation drafted or passed? Thanks again.

John Solomon: The conference on school violence last fall brought lots of experts together to generate fresh ideas for communities to chew on. Bush did not propose any new programs or federal spending afterwards. Rather, the administration said the goal of the conference was to stimulate thinking in communities about ways local police, school officials and parents can better identify threats and address them before violence occurs. The ideas that came up that day included better planning between schools and police, more character education, more peer mentoring programs, more parental involvement and more counseling for suicidal children who might also have homicidal tendencies. Many of the experts frowned on adding metal detectors and more security cameras, saying they can create a "lockdown" atmosphere and make the school less hospitable.

_______________________

John Solomon: Thanks so much for all of the great questions. Look forward to chatting again soon.

_______________________

Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.