Broder on Politics

Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter and Washington Post columnist David S. Broder was online Friday, June 2, at noon ET to answer your questions about the world of politics, from the latest maneuverings on Capitol Hill to developments in the White House.

Broder has written extensively about primaries, elections, special interests and the business of politics. His books include "Democracy Derailed: The Initiative Movement & the Power of Money," "Behind the Front Page: A Candid Look at How the News Is Made" and "The System: The American Way of Politics at the Breaking Point."

The transcript follows.

____________________

Virginia Beach, Va.: Good morning, Mr. Broder. I always enjoy your commentary. What did you think of Peter Beinart's op-ed re: liberalism and the war on terror? Did you read the chat he had about it? Very interesting. Do you think that the Democratic party is honing in on this at all or are they continuing on their feckless way? I really loved his points about the bogus way the Republican party has hijacked President Truman's words and deeds.

washingtonpost.com: Opinion: Bush is No Harry Truman (Live Online, June 1)

David S. Broder: Thank you for your message. I read Peter Beinart's article, but not the following discussion. I think he articulates the position of one set of Democrats very well, and it speaks to a tradition that I respect and share. But there are many other Democrats who have become much more skeptical about the use of military forces and interventions abroad. That issue will have to be fought out in the choice of the next Democratic nominee.

_______________________

Oxford, Miss.: I moved from Capitol Hill to Mississippi on September 1, 2001. My folks weren't too happy about the move at first but, as you can imagine, they were thrilled about it ten days later.

Now that DHS has declared D.C. safe and other more rural states as big al Qaeda targets, do I have to move back? And just as I've perfected my southern accent!

David S. Broder: You would be welcomed back to Washington, with or without your Mississippi accent. But I would not assume that the city is safe from attack. Secretary Chertoff has a lot of explaining to do, but the allocation of grant money is always subject to political tugs. Nothing new about that.

_______________________

Anonymous: What do you think of U.N. Ambassador Bolton's statement on one of the news channels that it is time for Iran to "put up or shut up"? Can this comment be taken as an indication that we are on our way to a pre-emptive strike on Iran?

David S. Broder: The only conclusion I can draw from the recent statements and actions on Iran is that the Bush administration and its allies have decided to bring the Iran nuclear program to a head--sooner rather than later. No one expects Iran to accept the terms we laid out for the start of direct negotiations, so the path will then be open for UN sanctions. We have seen this sequence before, with Iraq, and we know where that led. I am not certain that President Bush wants a second (or third, counting Afghanistan) war, but it could be a prelude to some sort of preemptive strike against Iran.

_______________________

Sims, N.C.: When can we expect an article from you on the marriages and divorces of the top Republican contenders for the presidential race of '08?

David S. Broder: Why would I write such an article? I know of no occasion for that.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: Mr. Broder,

After reading Joel Achenbach's article on global warming in the magazine section, I was further convinced that the Republicans are rather out of the loop when it comes to this issue. It strikes me odd that say 97 percent of climate scientists believe there is human-caused global warming, but only say 50 percent of our legislators (who do not generally have science degrees)? My guess is that the Republican party is being strongly influenced by the oil and coal industries. Would you concur? Or are they just becoming hostile to Science in general (the people that brought us evolution and a 6000-year-old Earth)?

washingtonpost.com: The Tempest (Post Magazine, May 28)

David S. Broder: The reluctance of Congress and the administration to move strongly on the global warming issue has many roots. A major one is their philosophical opposition to meddling in the market. But that happens to coincide with the interests of some of their major financial supporters--not a coincidence.

_______________________

Beaumont, Tex.: It seems that the Senate and House will be unable to work out a compromise, and Bush just made some remarks about "holding employers accountable." Do you think a concentration on enforcing the existing immigration laws will ultimately win out? Or will status quo (i.e., doing nothing) prevail? Many thanks for the chat.

David S. Broder: The likelihood of a stalemate between the House and Senate on immigration legislation will put more pressure on the administration to enforce current laws on employers and on illegal residents. The problem will not go away, and that means the issue is likely to come up again in the next Congress.

_______________________

Houston, Tex.: Mr. Broder, do you find irony in Rice's comment Iran needs to be transparent?

David S. Broder: If you are suggesting a parallel to the Bush administration, I would say that the differences are greater than the similarities. There is no free press in Iran and I doubt that whistle blowers have much chance of surviving in that regime.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: Secretary Chertoff, regardless of the wisdom of any particular decision, seems to have a tin ear for politics that's very bad. This is not only the terror grants but how he responded during Katrina. This is interesting because the White House managed to badmouth the perfectly innocuous John Snow at Treasury for not having the ability to articulate policies politically.

David S. Broder: I would have to agree with your comment about Secretary Chertoff's political skills. As for Secretary Snow, when I watched him at congressional hearings and news conferences, it was not an impressive or persuasive performance.

_______________________

New Hampshire: Thanks Mr. Broder for taking my question!

Yesterday an article was published in Rolling Stone written by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. It documents a chilling and very well sourced account of the deliberate machinations of the Republican party in actually stealing the presidential election of 2004. Why is there no coverage of this important and devastating article in the Post this morning? Have you read it?

From the Rolling Stone article:

"Republicans derided anyone who expressed doubts about Bush's victory as nut cases in ''tinfoil hats,'' while the national media, with few exceptions, did little to question the validity of the election. The Washington Post immediately dismissed allegations of fraud as ''conspiracy theories,''(1) and The New York Times declared that ''there is no evidence of vote theft or errors on a large scale.''(2)"

When will the MSM take up this issue as a real one, instead of dismissing it out of hand?

David S. Broder: I have not read the article, but I will do so.

_______________________

Springfield, Va.: At the end of his recess appointment will President Bush renominate Amb. Bolton for the U.N. job? Can he sidestep the Senate with another recess appointment?

David S. Broder: My guess is that he will renominate Ambassador Bolton and my guess is that the Senate would confirm him.

_______________________

Nashville, Tenn.: Really enjoy your commentary Mr. Broder. What is a concerned citizen like me to do? I have grown so tired of the back and forth in Washington. They can't seem to act on anything of any importance and spend so much time developing spin instead of focusing on real issues. Any sign that this is going to change? Will it take mass riots by the American people in order for our elected officials to actually solve problems?

David S. Broder: Your frustration is widely shared among the voters I have met this year in half a dozen states. I certainly hope that it will not take riots to bring political change. I expect a significant turnover in the November election, and if that should occur, those serving in office will have a clear message to shape up. At least that's my hope.

_______________________

Washington : To whose advantage would a deadlocked immigration bill be towards if it lasted until elections this fall? Would conservatives in the House back down if they survived the fall elections? Thanks for your commentary.

David S. Broder: I don't think deadlock on immigration helps either party. The public clearly wants something done, and failure would hurt everyone. You can make the case that one party or the other could exploit such a deadlock, but my guess is that neither can benefit.

_______________________

Yonkers, N.Y. : If its not Jeb, who do you think that the Bush family would like to support for President in 2008?

David S. Broder: I don't know the answer to that question. No one named Bush has whispered in my ear the name of the favored successor.

_______________________

washingtonpost.com: Was the 2004 Election Stolen? (Rolling Stone Magazine)

_______________________

Bethesda, Md.: I'm amazed at what seems to be both incompetence and political pork in the allocation of anti-terrorism funds by DHS Chertoff. New York and D.C. aren't likely terrorist sites? Sec. Chertoff got a pass on Katrina incompetence. Do you think he'll survive this? I think he's on his way out.

David S. Broder: I doubt that this will be a firing event, but I would not be surprised a bit to see DHS having to back down on the allocation of funds. The reaction has been so negative that the plan may not survive.

_______________________

Bethesda, Md.: Mr. Broder, I'm normally a huge fan of yours. I have to say though that I was pretty disappointed with your recent column which covered Senator Clinton's energy policy speech by talking all about her marriage (and clothing choice). You did get around to talking about her proposals in about the eighth paragraph I think, which was nice -- but then seemingly couldn't help jumping obsessively back to the "elephant in the living room" for a finale paragraph.

Frankly it wasn't worthy of the Post's fine reputation. So far it seems like the party line at the Post is: "we are focusing on Mrs. Clinton's marriage in our coverage of her because it is likely to be a main focus in the media's coverage of her". The tautological nature of this chicken-or-egg rationalization should be painfully obvious. Please try to leave this kind of commentary to Soap Opera Digest in the future. Many thanks, and I look forward to enjoying your future columns.

David S. Broder: Thank you for your message. I received a lot of criticism for the column on Senator Clinton, and I take the criticism seriously. As a general rule, I would shy away from discussions about the personal life of a public figure. But the Clintons have presented themselves to the public as a couple--beginning with his statement as a candidate, "Buy One. Get one free." They are deeply involved in each other's public life, as witness his role at the New York Democratic convention that just nominated her for a second term.

It is a fact of political life--as reflected in the New York Times story--that political people contemplating the possibility of her presidential candidacy are concerned about the role he would play in the campaign and in the administration. That concern is heightened by the history of the Clintons' marriage, which I do not have to rehearse here. But I cannot pretend that the concern does not exist when, in fact, it is a major topic of discussion.

As for Senator Clinton's policy views, they are not being neglected by the Post. My colleague Dan Balz wrote an exhaustive piece about her policy views just a day or two after my column.

_______________________

Chicago, Ill.: What is your take on the wannabe scandal of Senator Reid accepting tickets to a boxing match? Have there been any retractions that you know of when it was found out he couldn't have paid for the tickets and that the commissioner tried to refund John McCain's money? I know that even the hint of scandal means big news, but shouldn't the facts be clear first?

David S. Broder: Of course, the facts should be first. But Senator Reid has said that he would change his policy about attending boxing matches, so he must have felt uncomfortable with his past practice.

_______________________

Houston, Tex.: For years, the economy down here has been dependent on immigrants -- legal and undocumented. This has been true on the farms and ranches, in the oil fields, and more recently the service industries. No that the president has taken on businesses' obligations, has anyone looked at the background of his employees as a rancher, oilman, and owner of a baseball team?

David S. Broder: I am aware pf any such examination as you suggest.

_______________________

Annapolis, Md.: Who do you see as the conservative favorite for the 2008 Republican nomination? There are still a lot of conservatives who don't like John McCain. Mitt Romney's not quite their kind of guy either. Forget about Rudy Giuliani.

David S. Broder: Several other Republicans have indicated an interest in the 2008 nomination, among them Sen. George Allen of Virginia, Sam Brownback of Kansas, Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts and Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas. There may be others as well, so I don't think Republicans, conservative or otherwise, will lack for choices.

_______________________

Madison, Wisc.: Wisconsin Representative Sennsenbrenner (pardon my spelling) recently echoed the president's comments about enforcing current law as it regards employers hiring undocumented workers. Perhaps a bridge is being build between the House and Senate on this issue. The remaining question is: Would a Republican administration actually fine or imprison employers for violating the immigration/hiring laws?

David S. Broder: You raise a very good question. The reason that existing regulations on hiring illegal immigrants have not been enforced is the understandable reluctance of any government to crack down on hundreds of businesses, many of them small firms owned and operated by individual families. The reality is that this labor force has been built into our economy, and the president, I think, is right in saying it's time to make it a legal force by having a regulated guest worker program, and then trying to eliminate the hiring of illegals.

_______________________

Silver Spring, Md.: In your estimation, have the wide variety of voter suppression techniques used in the past two presidential elections been primarily used by Republicans, Democrats, or both? If voter suppression and systematic disenfranchisement is going on in the U.S., do you think that it is an important issue?

David S. Broder: I have not looked at this issue enough to warrant any conclusion. That does not mean it's not important. You have given me a nudge to do something I have not done.

_______________________

Annapolis, Md.: First I want to say how much I enjoy your online chats. Do you think the administration will reverse the Homeland Security terrorism payouts? Talk about shooting yourself in the foot. I am about 35 minutes (in good traffic) from D.C., and for the life of me why would anyone state that D.C. and New York need less funding. I did not see any other cities hit on 9/11. Granted all the states need to be protected. There are new people in charge at the White House. If the new White House team is in charge then this Homeland Security fiasco falls squarely at their feet.

David S. Broder: As I said in response to an earlier question, I would not be surprised to see the formula changed or the DHS allocation revised.

_______________________

Bethesda, Md.: Liberals (and liberal politicians like Al Gore) have been trying (mostly in vain) for about 15 years now to get this country to listen to the scientific community when formulating policy on scientific matters. The country is finally acknowledging that they were right, and (shockingly) scientists actually know more about scientific phenomena than industry lobbyists. Do you think the public (and our media) has learned its lesson, or will K Street routinely trump scientific reality again in the future?

David S. Broder: I think public opinion on global earning has changed as more and more scientific evidence has been publicized. The reaction in Congress has been less swift, for reasons I discussed a few minutes ago--an ideological reluctance to mess with the marketplace and the influence of important interest groups.

_______________________

New York City: You told Gov. Wilson, in my presence, during the RNC that after the night of Sen. Romney, Sen. Miller, and VP Cheney's speeches that though you were leaning towards Sen. Kerry winning, after that night you were leaving more towards Pres. Bush. How much of your opinion was affected by Sen. Romney, if at all, and is any big-name Republican on the Hill rooting for a Romney nomination?

David S. Broder: I do not recall the incident you describe involving Gov. Romney. But to answer your question, I think there are Republicans on Capitol Hill who are sympathetic to Gov. Romney's candidacy, but it is early in the process, and I do not expect endorsements to flow at this time.

_______________________

RE; Gov. Wilson: To be clear -- you were giving your impression who will win in '04, not your personal choice

David S. Broder: Thanks for clarifying that.

_______________________

Rochester, N.Y.: Over the past few years, it appears that fewer and fewer newsworthy stories are being reported using traditional, time-consuming in-depth research methods. It also appears that more and more, reporters are becoming commentators. If you accept these observations, to what would you attribute the cause? The business of the news department is business?

David S. Broder: In-depth reporting is time-consuming and therefore expensive. Journalism is going through a transition period, as the audience moves from print to Internet, and the economic squeeze is real. Fortunately, some papers, including the Post, are still making the investment it takes to have substantive reporting. All of us wish there were more of it.

_______________________

Rochester, N.Y.: I think that there is a necessary distinction that isn't being made regarding coverage of the Clintons' marriage. You seem to be saying that, given Bill Clinton's stature, Hillary's marriage will inevitably be a topic of discussion since Bill might be likely to influence her policy decisions and so on. But that isn't the same thing as asking personal questions about how much time they spend together and such. Wouldn't you agree there is a distinction? And that the NYT article (which you defended) focused not only on the relevant issues but also on irrelevant personal issues? It came awfully close to asking "do they really love each other"? Wouldn't you agree that that is inappropriate?

washingtonpost.com: The Shadow of a Marriage (Post, May 25)

David S. Broder: I agree that it is the Clintons' business, and no one else's, how they manage their personal lives.

_______________________

Cap Hill Manager: I see that Bush is going to give a speech about the proposed amendment to prevent gay marriage. Is this just a bone to get his right wing failing fan base? I cannot believe that people still care about this issue when we have so many other horrible things happening! Your thoughts sir?

David S. Broder: Yes. The gay marriage amendment is on the agenda because a part of the Republican base cares deeply about the issue. And yes, there are a lot more pressing matters Congress should be working on.

_______________________

Nashville, Tenn.: Where do you see the NSA phone logging issue heading? Will it be kept alive by a lawsuit, like the Paula Jones one that eventually led to Clinton's impeachment?

David S. Broder: Congress seems reluctant to challenge the NSA practices, so it is likely the issue will find its way to the courts.

This has to be my last question for today. I've enjoyed visiting with all of you. Dave Broder

_______________________

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.