• Political Insider • Political Insider Live • Live: "Free Media" • Subscribe to the OnPolitics e-mail update • Talk: OnPolitics message boards • Live Online Transcripts

Political Insider Live
With Charles Babington
Staff Writer and Chief Political Correspondent for washingtonpost.com
Friday, Aug. 17, 2001; 1 p.m. EDT

Bush and Congress may be on vacation, but we aren't.

Charles Babington, chief political correspondent for washingtonpost.com, will be online every Friday at 1 p.m. EDT to discuss political news from past week.

The transcript follows.

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.

Charles Babington: Hello, and welcome. I have no opening remarks. Let's get started.

Springfield, Va.: I read in the New York Times (sorry) that Mike Lynch, Chief of Staff for Congressman Condit, is still on the job defending his boss and saying that the issue is Chandra's disappearance, not any relationship. I'm curious why Mr. Lynch is still working for a boss who lied to him, and then sent him out to repeat those lies to both the press and public -- why not do the honorable thing an quit? Can you offer any insight? Is it that tough to get a job on the Hill?

Charles Babington: I don't know Mr. Lynch, and can't speak for him. I'll note for the record, however, that similar questions were asked of president Clinton's aides after he lied to them about the extent of his relationship with Monica Lewinsky and allowed them to repeat the lie in public.

Sparta, N.J.: What's the diagnosis on the Faith Based Initiative? Dead, dying, on life support, or ready to be resurrected?

Charles Babington: Not dead or dying, but still facing substantial congressional resistance to some of its details. In fact, the Bush administration is exploring ways to use its executive powers to steer more contracts to organizations with religious ties. (For more on that, see Post story cited below).

washingtonpost.com: 'Faith-Based' Backup Plan (Washington Post, Aug. 17, 2001)

Gullsgate, Minn.: Now that Delulio has resigned from his position as chief of Bush's faith-based initiative he has essentially lost his faith in the whole debacle, it seems.

Is Bush's state/religion duo-imperative, losing its credibility if the 'players' cannot even agree on the methods of implementation? May "faith-based' be fate-based? It is but careless abuse of the separation of church and state.

washingtonpost.com: Faith-Based Initiative Head Leaves (washingtonpost.com, Aug. 17, 2001)

Charles Babington: Some of you may have missed today's news that John DiIulio is resigning. The White House says it was his plan all along. But DiIulio clearly had run into some difficulties, as the story cited here, by my colleague Dana Milbank, explains.

Marlton, N.J.: How will Floyd Spence's seat be filled?

washingtonpost.com: Floyd Spence Dies; Congressman Backed Pentagon Funding (Washington Post, Aug. 17, 2001)

Charles Babington: Unlike the Senate, all House vacancies must be filled by special elections, not by gubernatorial appointments. I don't think a special election has been announced yet in S.C., but look for it possibly this fall.... The district is likely to replace Mr. Spence with another Republican.

South Bend, Ind.: The current Republican leadership in both the House and Senate -- DeLay, Armey, and Lott -- gained power in connection with the "Contract with America" after the 1994 election. Today the "contract" seems about as relevant as Benedict Arnold's scheme to sell West Point to the British.

Is it a mistake to underestimate the continued influence of the Republican far right? And do you expect any changes in congressional leadership before the '02 election?

Charles Babington: It's true that the Contract has largely been forgotten. But it played a big role in 20th century politics, helping the GOP get control of the House after decades of Democratic rule. It's not surprising that conservatives such as Armey, DeLay and Lott have continued rising through the ranks even though the Contract itself is largely a relic.
I don't anticipate changes in congressional leaders before the 2002 elections. If one party suffers badly (i.e. fails to win a majority in either house), there might be a leadership change soon after the election.

Mt. Rainier, Md.: 'Faith-based' initiatives apparently looked really good to the conservatives in its original foggy form. Until they got down to brass tacks and realized that good green money might be going to people like Farakhan (lots of prison outreach) and the Moonies. Not to mention those dreadful liberal social-activist tree-hugging Episcopals and Lutherans. Geez.

Charles Babington: Now, now, let's not start on the Lutherans.

Lexington, Ky.: Why don't the American people revolt against George W. Bush for his lack of concern on gun violence? This man does not care on how many lives that are lost and destroyed by guns. A two-year-old boy this week was able to shoot and kill his grandfather with a .45 caliber pistol. Bush, John Ashcroft and most of the other Republicans don't give a damn about the lives that are lost and destroyed with guns.
Fidel Castro Is God's Angel compared to Bush!

Charles Babington: You, like many people, obviously have very strong opinions about guns. This will continue to be a divisive issue in U.S. politics for years.
The latest push from the centrist Democratic folks (such as the DLC, echoed by a recent op-ed piece by Joe Lockhart) is that Democratic candidates should avoid being tagged simply as anti-gun. Instead, the argument goes, they should respect the millions of American gunowners and put a greater focus on gun safety. The NRA also talks a lot about gun safety, but the DLC'ers believe the NRA can be exposed as really caring about gun rights -- and forms of weapons and ammunition -- that many people will see as extreme.

Woodbridge, Va.: Will President Bush ever have what has come to be known as a formal press conference (where I can get an opportunity to see how well versed is truly is on say a subject like stem cell research, since he worked so hard on the great compromise) or are they a thing of the past?

Charles Babington: It depends on what you mean by a ''formal news conference.'' President Bush has held a couple of sessions in the White House briefing room where he took several questions, on several subjects, from the White House press corps. That room is not as big and elegant as the White House East Room (where you see most big press conferences). But the format was generally the same.
I don't know if President Bush will ever do an East Room press conference, or a prime time press conference.

Thomasville, Ga.: I been following the President pretty closely and I don't care for some of the comments he's making about being out of DC. I know it sells well with some of my Republican friends but to me it promotes an us-against-them attitude.

We are the government and we need good people who are willing to be civil servants. I'm biased because my son's in the military and my daughter is a civil servant. We need young people who are willing to do these things.

I voted for Bush but he should be talking up the virtues of serving not making fun of it. Sorry to sound like I'm preaching but this concerns me a good bit. Anyone care to comment?

Charles Babington: What do you say, folks? Any comments?

Washington, D.C.: Is anyone at The Post looking into the stories floating around the past couple days that Ted Kennedy is suffering from advanced cirrhosis of the liver, potentially even into a terminal stage? Apparently the National Enquirer is set to break the story soon, and ordinarily anything coming from that outlet would be suspect, but let's be fair...they were right before anyone else about the Jesse Jackson mistress/love child story, so they can no longer be dismissed out of hand. And it's not like a senatorial death watch would be anything new, with everybody noting every rise and dip in Strom's appearance.

Charles Babington: I know the Ted Kennedy story was making the rounds on the Internet yesterday (Drudge Report among the sites). I know nothing about the truth or lack thereof.
As for the National Enquirer breaking stories: Yes, it does sometimes. It breaks some of those stories by paying substantial fees to sources (something that mainstream newspapers such as the Post never do). That's what happened in the story regarding Gary Condit and the flight attendant (her roommate got the money and dished the info); and I believe money may have changed hands on the Jackson story, too.

Qualicum Beach British Columbia: As a Canadian I am very upset over the softwood 19 percent surcharge that your Government is going to impose on our lumber. The majority of your developers and contractors find our lumber superior to American lumber. Do you think there is any possibility that the contractors and developers will get this ruling overturned? Thank you, From beautiful downtown Qualicum Bob R.

Charles Babington: Thanks for writing from lovely Qualicum, but I'm afraid I'm not familiar with the Canadian lumber issue.

Chicago, Ill.: Is it true that our $300 or $600 tax rebate is an advance on our next year's tax return? Do we have to subtract whatever we receive in the mail this summer from what we would get back next year?

Charles Babington: Yes and no. Yes, the $300 or $600 folks are now receiving is an advance refund on your 2001 taxes. (These are the taxes for which you'll file a return no later than next April 15). But no, you don't have to subtract it from what you would otherwise get back (assuming you're owed a refund) next year. Under the new tax law, there is a new 10 percent tax bracket (replacing the old 15 percent bracket) that applies to the first $6,000 of taxable income for a single person, and the first $12,000 for couples. That will reduce the single filer's tax obligation by $300; and the couple's by $600. Rather than have you wait until next year to get that benefit -- after you've filed your tax return -- the government is sending it to you now.

washingtonpost.com: Q & A on the tax rebate (Washington Post, June 24, 2001)

Primetime News Conference in the East Room... Why?: Who would watch it? Political Junkies. Would the networks cover it? My vote is No. A news conference would take 45 minutes to an hour. Last week, NBC and CBS instantly went back to their primetime programming after 11 minutes, and this is August, the slowest TV time of the year!

I think those who are demanding President Bush have a news conference are those who think he's not up to the job and want a high profile way to demonstrate their theory. Why would the President open himself up to that?

Charles Babington: Let's see: The president of the United States agrees to take tough questions on any topic for 45 minutes or so... and only "political junkies'' will watch? Look, I know it's not as riveting as Dharma and Greg, but surely a respectable number of "ordinary'' Americans would care to watch.

Falls Church, Va.: The speculation around Senator Lincoln Chaffee seems to have died down quite a bit. Is the current conventional wisdom/speculation that he is not in any danger of bolting the GOP anytime soon?

Charles Babington: Yes, I think that's correct.

Cottage City, Md.: Kicking the federal government around is a popular political sport. Perhaps the President hasn't noticed that he and his followers have BECOME the government?

Charles Babington: thanks for writing in.

Fairfax, Va.: With Virginia always having its gubernatorial elections weirdly in off-off years, only 12 months after the US presidential elections, everybody rightly or wrongly looks to it as a "bellwether" or signal of the governing party's popularity. I expect this year will be no different. The DNC is obviously pouring money into Mark Warner's campaign, can we expect GWB to be spending a lot of time in the Old Dominion this fall? Are the White House staff particularly concerned about this race and how it will be perceived nationally?

Charles Babington: Keep in mind that New Jersey, which is more populous than Virginia, also elects its governor this year. Because it is an off-off election year, yes, both parties will pour a lot of resources into these races; and I expect President Bush will be quite visible in both states.
You can count on the winning party to ballyhoo the result as a bellwether, a referendum, a predictor, etc. etc. But the 2001 elections may have little or nothing to say about where the electorate might be in Nov. 2002. A lot can change in 12 months.

Arlington, Va.: Reluctantly, I must say I agree with the person from Georgia about Bush constantly wanting to be considered a Washington outsider -- and I supported Bush totally in the election (still do except for this). I cringe every time I hear it. My basic question the other day when I heard the latest comments is "Didn't he know if he got elected President, he would be moving to WASHINGTON!" I wish he'd cut it out. It's not very becoming and the media is having a field day with it (unfortunately, rightly so). Thanks for the forum to unload!

Charles Babington: Thanks for unloading.

Rockville, Md.: I just love the way so many politicians talk about wanting to get out of Washington to "meet with the American people". Yeah, right. Seems to me a large percentage of them end up spending a lot of time here once out of office.

Charles Babington: Hmmm, there ARE a lot of former House and Senate members in those K Street offices, aren't there?

A Catholic in Ariz.: I think Bush was correct in his middle ground on the stem cell research issue. I do have a question, however, for the various Church leaders who denounced his decision. Why do they not question Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts , Catholic, and pressing for more than the President is even offering?

Charles Babington: I would imagine that Sen. Kennedy has heard quite a bit from Catholic leaders (and rank-and-file Catholics) over the years.

Beltsville, Md.: I could use some clarification on the new Social Security story about Bush tapping the trust fund.

Isn't our trust fund merely a trillion dollar stack of IOUs? Bush made that charge in the debates. Gore didn't deny it.

My impression is Bush is considering taking the money as the past three presidents did, without writing some of the IOUs. That sounds like MORE honest accounting to me.

Charles Babington: Well, yes, the Social Security trust fund is in a sense a pile of IOUs. It's money collected from current workers (via payroll taxes) to provide benefits for current retirees and other qualified beneficiaries. Anticipating the big baby boom crush of retirees, Social Security now collects more in taxes than it pays out in benefits. The idea is to shore up the federal fiscal picture -- such as keeping debt down -- in order to be better prepared for the boomer retirees in the next 11 to 20 years or so. There's a long precedent of the Congress and White House dipping into this surplus to pay for current government needs. (The notion of locking away the surplus in a "lockbox'' is rather new).
Keep in mind: the federal government has never failed to redeem the bonds it issues, so many people argue that we shouldn't sneer at these so-called "IOUs.'' They say these are IOUs you can count on being paid back, even if it causes fiscal pain to future generations.

Minority Whip: With Bonior running for Governor, who do you think is going to win the Minority Whip race -- Nancy Pelosi or Steny Hoyer?

Charles Babington: My colleague Juliet Eilperin, who covers the House, says the race appears too close to call. These races are notoriously hard to predict because the caucus members vote by secret ballot. It's hardly uncommon for a member to signal his or her support to more than one contender. Who knows what they do with their secret ballot?

Charles Babington: That's all for today. Thanks for joining, and hope to see you next week.