On Bolton, The Nuclear Option and The Perception Of Power - Part III

As in the first two parts of this rather rambling essay, I am trying to make the point that the Bolton fight has little to do with Bolton and everything to do with power, from the Republican perspective (Democrats have no power and despise everything Bolton stands for, so 'new revelations' add little to the already considerable Dem angst; said revelations become a tool to defeat the Bush Administration, not merely a source of more moral outrage).

Previously, I have cited the work of Steve Clemons, who has been all over this story. He now has a UPI article he's crafted that sums up all the good themes:

The battle over John Bolton, President Bush's pick for U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, is not a competition between Senate Democrats and Republicans. It's actually a brewing civil war inside the Republican foreign-policy establishment. None of the dramatic events of the four public hearings to date on Bolton's nomination would have been possible without the active complicity of a large swath of the GOP establishment...

The White House too is making this battle over Bolton not about him and not really about the United Nations. Once Bolton's opponents (including TheWashingtonNote.com) pre-empted the State Department from having his hearings fast-tracked before the Easter congressional recess -- and then the testimony of Carl Ford and victimized intelligence analyst Christian Westermann made their way into the second day of hearings -- the White House made this a war over executive-branch power. A loss on this nomination somehow morphed into the question of whether un-bolting from Bolton would trigger the true beginning of a Bush lame-duck presidency.

The White House became stuck on the need to win at all costs...

The more obsessed the White House had become with just winning -- not putting a clear-headed reform agenda on the table and attaching Bolton to it, but just "winning" -- the more it seemed to lose. Perhaps the administration may get Bolton confirmed in the end, though I doubt it, but the costs suffered to achieve that goal make it a net loss. The more the Cheney-Bolton team runs roughshod over the sensibilities of Republican moderates, the more fragile Bush's infallibility becomes and the less likely the White House can engage in such strong-arm tactics of its own again.

That last point, the resultant effect on moderates, is something that brings in the nuclear option (hence the title of this mini-series) but remains hard to predict. We all know that at some point (latest by 2006) Bush becomes a lame duck with decreasing political power. In fact, he's accelerated his inevitable decline by treating the moderates in his party like he treats blue staters and Europeans... pick them off or ignore them (see first comment here summing up a Ron Brownstein article that won't be accessible next week).

As of today, it appears the filibuster battle is joined Wednesday when the Owen (and Brown) nominations get moved to the Senate floor. Final vote is expected by Memorial Day. We at TNH have been speculating that Frist doesn't quite have the votes. (Watch for further Kagro X must-read updates to the ongoing series of what's behind the story).

Dems (and the American people) may win both on Bolton and the filibuster, or lose both, or get a split decision. But any losses of R moderates along the way are undoubtedly due to the heavy-handed Texas-style 'negotiations' with them over issues they clearly do not support. As Clemons points out, the Bush Administration may not support their own position as much as seeing it in their usual black and white 'win-lose' frame. (Sigh. Remember colors and nuance?)

When one adds in the rest of the reality-based world to the mix (think sub base closing in Rob Simmons - R CT-2 district, or Maine's potential loss of the navy base for Snowe or Collins ), moderates have little reason to bless the Administration with more leeway. But what they'll actually do about putting country over party (a la Voinovich) remains to be seen.

Further reading:

The Bolton Nomination: The Field Changes 5/12

The Big Picture: Bolton's Nomination and The Pew Poll 5/12

Compare and Contrast: Why Bolton's Appointment Would Be Counterproductive 5/02

Why Bolton's role directly threatens the guys who are supposed to approve him 5/01

Why Bolton Will Be Confirmed 4/30

Comments

[Kagro X]

I believe Frist will get the votes, I just haven't said so here. Or at least I don't think I have. I think the moderates will disappoint us, and they may get 51-49 and not even need Cheney.

I also think there will be no nuclear option next week, but that's only because Frist is waiting for me to go on vacation, the week following. The country and the Constitution are nice and all, but we're talking Hatteras here. I don't miss that for nothin'.

[DemFromCT]

I believe Frist will get the votes

Same logic behind why I think Bolton will squeak through, I suppose, though I meant to say Frist doesn't currently have the votes, else we'd have seen the vote already.

CW says Bush wins both, but at a huge price. The possibility remains, however, for any other combo.

[DemFromCT]

P.S. this AP story's for the head counters:

link

[Incertus]

I wonder if the moderates realize that this is their only chance to stand up to the crazies in the administration? If they cave here, they're screwed--they'll be shoved out of the way for whatever the crazies want to do. I don't want to trivialize battered spouses by making this comparison, but that's really what the moderates resemble right now. If they don't stand up for themselves this time, there won't be a next time.