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 congressional reporter Jonathan Weisman was online Friday, April 27, 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.

____________________

Los Gatos, Calif.: Good morning. Is there any chance that in next year's budget Congress will not have funding for Afghanistan and Iraq in a supplemental bill, or is this just he way that they have agreed to fund the wars? It seems to me to be a way to conceal the impact of the wars on our entire fiscal picture.

Jonathan Weisman: There's a big debate about whether the war should be funded through supplementals. The last budget included some money, I think $50 billion, for the war, so this $100 billion is on top of that. They will probably do the same thing.

_______________________

Santa Cruz, Calif.: I'm surprised no one (that I've seen anyway) has commented on one aspect of the Attorney General's testimony before the Judiciary Committee, and the president's response. The one thing the AG did was steadfastly "refuse to remember" anything substantive about who initiated the U.S. Attorneys firings. The next day it was reported that the President thought the AG's testimony was "fantastic," or something like that. Isn't it likely that the failure to remember is exactly what the President wanted, and that's why he seemed so over-the-top grateful in praising Gonzales?

washingtonpost.com: Maybe Alberto Gonzales was brilliant yesterday -- and everybody missed it (Slate, April 20)

Jonathan Weisman: I think a lot of people have noticed that. As soon as the issue migrated to the White House, the attorney general's memory grew remarkably blank.

_______________________

Philadelphia: Jonathan ... have you talked to anyone in the Renzi office about his possible resignation from Congress? What are you hearing about him and the investigation of him? How about Rep. Feeney? And, why do you think we are all of a sudden seeing a flurry of activity surrounding investigations and Abramoff-related news? Does it have anything to do with the DOJ being under scrutiny and now not being able to stop some of these investigations?

Jonathan Weisman: Regarding Renzi, the rumors of his resignation were rampant yesterday. I tried to chase them down, but never got beyond the rumor mill. The Phoenix Business Journal wrote them up this morning, but the story seemed to be a repetition of the rumors. Feeney is really taking it on the chin for his Abramoff-funded golf junket to Scotland. Big story in the Orlando Sentinel this morning.

As for the timing, this is the hangover from the days in power. The wheels of justice move slowly, and the hits are really hurting GOP chances of getting off the mat.

_______________________

Pittsburgh: Good morning, Jonathan. I enjoy seeing you on TV and really appreciate your willingness to take questions. How long before we start hearing from Democratic candidates about the failure of "trickle-down economics"? According to The Post article " Economic Growth Slows in First Quarter," GDP grew at an anemic 1.3 percent in the first quarter. During this administration's tenure, the economy has produced just 3.79 million private sector jobs. Contrast that with 17 million jobs produced during the equivalent time frame in the last administration and you really have to question whether big tax cuts, big deficits, and Republican stewardship of the economy does anything for the average wage earner, don't you?

Jonathan Weisman: John Edwards is already reprising his theme of the two Americas, though it doesn't help that he just moved into a gigantic mansion. If the current sluggish growth and problems in the housing and mortgage market remain, this will be a big theme in the campaign, especially after the primaries run their course.

_______________________

Sterling, Va.: In all of the "what comes next" discussions I've heard so far, the assumption is that Congress will modify its proposal after the veto, to produce something with fewer, if any, strings attached. Are they prohibited from continuing to send essentially the same proposal that was vetoed (with maybe cosmetic changes to call it a "new" proposal), until the White House caves in? Regardless of who he "blames," I can't believe that once he runs out of funds to juggle from elsewhere, Bush simply would allow the troops to remain in Iraq without ammo, food, pay, or whatever this money is going for -- wouldn't he ultimately lose the game of chicken and have to pull them out or agree to the stings on the money?

Jonathan Weisman: Good question. There are many Democrats who want to do just what you said, make a few cosmetic changes and try again, each time, thinking the pressure on congressional Republicans will grow. I've spoken to even conservative Democrats who are not ready to compromise much. I can't imagine in the next round, Bush gets anything close to what he wants.

_______________________

Chicago: Mr. Weisman, do you fear being labeled "liberally biased"? In your opinion, what percentage of your fellow reporters in Washington fear such charges from the right? To what extent do you believe reporters' consider, and tacitly reflect in their reporting, the critiques of powerful special interests? In other words, do you think the pressures that reporters face, coupled with their own fears, have impacted negatively on modern journalism?

Jonathan Weisman: We are under constant pressure, but from the left as well as the right. My inbox every day is filled with hate-filled screeds. The right-wingers tend to be more vulgar. The left-wingers tend to be more shrill and self-righteous. Frankly, I think it keeps me on my toes.

_______________________

Katy, Texas: Can you give a scenario in which the second tier candidates get the nomination? Is the primary system set up to produce no clear winner?

Jonathan Weisman: It's hard to see how the second-tier candidates break through, but there is a lot of discontent with the top tier, especially on the Republican side. If the war continues to go badly for McCain and Giuliani implodes in some sort of pyrotechnic rage, there could well be an opening for second-tier Republicans.

_______________________

Princeton, N.J.: Jonathan, when you come on I like to ask economic questions. I am a mathematician and I have looked at the projections of the Social Security Administration which everyone seems to regard as gospel. In my opinion they are no more certain than reading the entrails of a goat. There are the demographics, but they are not decisive. If you increase the estimate of the average growth in the GDP for the next 75 years from their 1.78 percent to 2.7 percent and leave everything else including the horrible demographics alone, then the projection says that the Trust Fund does not go to zero in the next 75 years, all promised benefits can be paid, and at the end of the period there will a surplus in the trillions. And there is no way to estimate accurately the growth rate because it is event-driven -- look what happened to predictions made in 2000 in just five years. What do you think?

Jonathan Weisman: I've been harping on that for years. The growth rates they use are remarkably pessimistic. They assume that with a smaller work force, we are doomed to stagnation for decades to come. But the U.S. economy has proven to be very resilient and resourceful. I agree with you. The situation is not nearly as dire as they say. Washington just seems to need an official scorekeeper, and the trustees at Social Security and Medicare have been anointed.

_______________________

New York: After the Bush veto, there will be no money for the war and he will be forced to withdraw the troops on an even earlier timetable, right? Isn't his only other option to negotiate with Dems to get more money? Of course ,if he continues to refuse to negotiate, Bush will continue to berate Dems for cutting off funding and hector them to pass a spending bill, but how likely is it that Dems will capitulate to this type of bullying?

Jonathan Weisman: The Congressional Research Service says that with some creative account juggling, the Pentagon can keep the war going into July. Democrats are looking at June 1 as the drop dead deadline for getting a bill to the president that he can sign. I just don't think you will see a funding cutoff by attrition. Some Democrats do fear that Bush will marshal the Pentagon day by day to show just how strained the budget is after the veto, but so far, the president is only losing ground in public opinion.

That said, the war does need money. Democrats have to realize they can't sit on this forever.

_______________________

Wilmington, N.C.: Regarding "what a candidate will do if elected," do you think the press divines that well? I'm thinking of the only two significant policy actions of the Bush admin's second term -- social security and Iraq -- and their 2004 campaign coverage. Did the voters have good information on which to base our votes? If so, how did the Social Security push fail so miserably, and why are we all so surprised Bush shows no inclination to change course in Iraq, after he won the election?

Jonathan Weisman: I must confess, when I was at the Baltimore Sun covering the 2000 campaign, I wrote a piece on how the election did not really matter much from a policy perspective. Gore was a conservative Democrat. Bush was a moderate Republican. They would govern pretty much the same way.

How wrong that turned out to be. So no, I don't think you can really tell how somebody will govern from the campaign he or she runs.

_______________________

New York: Jonathan: With the ongoing U.S. Attorneys scandal, do you know if the Senate Judiciary Committee has been holding any hearings/votes on judicial nominees? It seems to me that if they want to get more White House/Department of Justice cooperation, they could simply slow all judicial nominees down to a crawl or halt them completely.

Jonathan Weisman: No, that process has pretty much stopped in its tracks. The president may continue to do the nominations, mostly as a statement that he still is relevant, but the committee has shown no interest in the issue.

_______________________

Plano, Texas: Speaking of second-tier candidates breaking through, isn't that made even harder by generic "debates" like the one last night in S.C.? I can't believe they wasted even a second of their limited time with so many candidates talking about John Edwards' haircuts or Joe Biden's propensity towards verbal gaffes (especially when the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. has shown that gaffes are apparently part of the job description).

Jonathan Weisman: I agree. I hate the formats of these big cattle calls. They're less than useless on policy matters. I think they should do a series of round robin debates with no more than three contestants. Two on two would be even better.

_______________________

Madison, Wis.: Do you think the Democratic Party is heading more to the center on the issue of abortion?

Jonathan Weisman: I think the Democratic Party is looking for a way around the issue, a way to talk about life without really talking about abortion. The "partial birth" debate has really burned them. The pro-life forces found a perfect issue that would have strong majority support, and the Democrats took the bait, making this fairly rare procedure into a donnybrook of sorts. Now they have to deal with defeat.

_______________________

Helena, Mont.: During the 2004 debates, Kerry at one time talked about the Iraq war costing the Americans around $400 billion and Bush said he was exaggerating. How much has Iraq cost to date? Why does no one question Bush about his lack of knowledge of what the costs would be?

Jonathan Weisman: Actually, Kerry talked about $200 billion and he was correct at the time, if you looked at the amount already obligated to the war, but not yet spent. If and when Bush signs this latest installment, the cost will be around $450 billion, and well over a half trillion in Afghanistan is factored in. Hard to be exact because the administration likes to lump the wars together in the "GWOT -- Global War on Terror" -- in their budget submissions.

_______________________

Anonymous: Today Gore is viewed as a liberal Democrat and Bush is viewed as a conservative Republican. Did they change or did the view of them change?

Jonathan Weisman: I think they changed. George Bush made a decision when he got here, to align with the House Republicans and forget all that bipartisan stuff he talked about. Gore has drifted leftward, as an early and outspoken critic of Bush's wars.

_______________________

Berkeley, Calif.: Re: The question on social security, it's important to pay attention to what scientists and policy people are saying about climate change. The Stern Review says we should take a minimum 1 percent cut in the GDP forever or face a 5 percent to 20 percent or larger cut in GDP, to permanent depression levels, forever. For all years. For the remainder of humans' time on Earth. Rumors have it that the Summary for Policy Makers on policies on climate change, due out early in May, will be recommending larger portions of our GDP be devoted to mitigating greenhouse gas emissions. So why are so many fussing over social security compared to the numbers fussing over the effects of climate change now and later?

Jonathan Weisman: I would say both projections are pretty darned rough. But on balance, I'd be a lot more worried about the climate in 50 years than my Social Security check, which, in the worst case scenario, would be cut by 25 percent.

_______________________

Sewickley, Pa.: Regarding Sterling's comment that he or she cannot believe "Bush simply would allow the troops to remain in Iraq without ammo, food, pay..." My husband was deployed to Baghdad in 2003. Many articles have appeared over the years that detail shortages of food, water, ammo and armor. At home the administration has been willing to leave wounded vets in limbo without pay, benefits or decent living conditions -- Building 18 at Walter Reed is just one example. Up to now the conduct of the war has been exclusively the responsibility of the Republican administration. In the current situation, doesn't the president have the advantage of being able to blame the Democrats for future logistical problems and tactical set-backs?

Jonathan Weisman: Thanks for writing, and yes, the politics do shift a bit. That's why at the beginning of this debate on war funding, some Democrats just wanted Congress to stay out of the way. This is Bush's war, they said. Why put our fingerprints on it and take part of the blame, a la the latter days of Vietnam? Alas, the voters wouldn't let the Democratic leadership off that easy.

_______________________

San Diego: Jonathan, thank you for your comment on the 2000 Bush/Gore election, i.e. that there was little difference between the two and there would be little difference in how the two would govern. I smugly believed the same and have been humbled ever since.

Jonathan Weisman: I'm glad I'm not alone.

_______________________

Re: Left vs Right: Pat Buchanan was an early and outspoken, sometimes scathing, critic of the Bush's Iraq war. Does that make him a liberal?

Jonathan Weisman: No, but is he also a proponent of "carbon-neutral living arrangements?"

_______________________

San Jose, Calif.: What are the latest poll numbers for the Democratic and Republican candidates individually and in hypothetical matchups?

Jonathan Weisman: For now, almost every Democrat beats almost every Republican, by a slim margin, but that will likely change as the election season ripens and people see the Republicans for anything but stand-ins for the president.

_______________________

New York: Forget haircuts -- the press should cover the real issue: coloring! At least Edwards has a decent dye job. Romney on the other hand needs more bleach; it looks like he has been doing it himself.

Jonathan Weisman: $400 does wonders for your head.

_______________________

Sunnyvale, Calf.: How seriously should we take Obama's statement that he would not accept the VP slot? It seems like it would be the perfect chance for him to learn the ropes and get the additional experience he needs.

Jonathan Weisman: I don't take it seriously at all, but of course he's going to say it. He's in spitting distance of the frontrunner.

Guys and ladies, I'm really sorry to cut this a tad short today, but I'm Mr. Mom today and I have to pick up my daughter from preschool!

_______________________

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.