I guess we will watch the Democrats beat a dead horse.
_____________________________________
NEW YORK TIMES
Job Figures Buoy Bush, but Democratic Hopefuls See Room to Attack
By DAVID E. ROSENBAUM and ELISABETH BUMILLER
WASHINGTON, Nov. 7 — The Democratic presidential candidates persisted in pounding President Bush about the economy on Friday, even in the face of new data showing strong growth in jobs last month that the president said was a vindication of his policies.
"Good luck in using statistics to convince working Americans that the Bush administration has their economic interests at heart," Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts said in Salem, N.H., in remarks typical of all the potential challengers. "The deep unfairness of the Bush economy is real to Americans."
Economic matters have long been the Democrats' strong suit. Now, although the jobs numbers suggest that the economic recovery may be genuine and that the issue may not be the sure winner it seemed a few months ago, the party's strategists said the candidates had no choice but to continue to play this hand.
"I still think the race will be run on the economy," said Bruce Reed, president of the Democratic Leadership Council, an organization of moderate Democrats. "But it won't be so much on the recent past as on the outlook for the future."
Another tactician who is not affiliated with any candidate, Howard Wolfson, said the improving jobs picture made "the argument on the economy tougher to make but still not impossible."
Mr. Wolfson added, "What we have to argue is that he bought a short-term uptick in jobs at the expense of structural deficits as far as the eye can see."
Gene Sperling, a top economic adviser in the Clinton White House, encouraged Democratic candidates to use his calculations showing that even if the number of jobs increased every month between now and the election at last month's pace of 126,000 new jobs, it would still be the slowest recovery in terms of job creation since World War II.
In Winston-Salem, N.C., Mr. Bush said the employment figures released Friday were evidence that his policies were working. But with the state having lost more than 150,000 manufacturing jobs since July 2000 and struggling with one of the highest unemployment rates in the nation, he stopped short of triumphant claims of victory.
At a fund-raiser that brought in $1.1 million for his re-election campaign, the president said, "This administration has laid the foundation for greater prosperity and more jobs across America."
"We've had some good news recently about our economy," Mr. Bush added, "but we won't rest until everybody who wants to work can find a job."
Later, on a stage with students and administrators at Forsyth Technical Community College in Winston-Salem, he praised the college's retraining programs and said: "This is the beginning of good news for job seekers. Over the last three months, the economy, the entrepreneurs, the private sector and others have driven the job base up by 285,000 jobs, new jobs, which is good."
White House officials indicated that Mr. Bush's rather cautious tone was driven by the rough economic terrain in North Carolina. Mr. Bush is aware that his father was criticized in 1992 for paying too little respect to people in economic distress.
The Democratic presidential candidates insisted that they welcomed the good news on employment, but they said Mr. Bush's record was unimpressive.
"I hope that the economy will turn around," Gen. Wesley K. Clark said at a forum in Atlanta. But he said the employment increase was meager compared with the three million jobs lost during the Bush presidency.
"The mission's not accomplished on the economy," General Clark said.
Like several other Democrats, Senator John Edwards of North Carolina, campaigning in New Hampshire, focused on the line in the employment report on Friday showing that manufacturing jobs were still being lost. "I don't believe there is a sustained economic recovery happening," Mr. Edwards said.
Another Democratic theme was that Mr. Bush's economic policies were not only ineffective but also unfair. Representative Richard A. Gephardt of Missouri had no public events on Friday, but campaigning in Iowa earlier in the week, he said of the president: "He doesn't have a clue what to do. He has only one thing in his head: tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, that he follows by tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, that he follows by tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans."
Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut also had no public events, but he issued a statement questioning whether the good news would be long-lived. "We have graduated from sinking to treading water," Mr. Lieberman said.
Howard Dean had only one public appearance on Friday. It was early, before the economic news had registered, and the former Vermont governor discussed only his policies for helping military veterans.
In response to a reporter's question, a Dean spokesman, Jay Carson, said: "This administration has compiled the worst economic record of any administration since the Great Depression. It's going to take more than this to take this country out of the mess it has caused."
Not surprisingly, this early in the election campaign, the Democratic candidates do not have fully formed economic platforms.
All of them criticize the three years of Bush tax cuts and say the resulting budget deficit is irresponsible. Mr. Gephardt and Dr. Dean would repeal the tax cuts entirely. Mr. Gephardt would use all the revenue to pay for health insurance for nearly all Americans. Dr. Dean would use some of the money to make health coverage more available and allocate the rest for job creation and domestic security.
The other leading Democratic candidates would repeal the tax cuts for the wealthiest people — in most cases, those with incomes of more than $200,000 a year — but would retain the cuts for everyone else.
All the candidates offer programs they say would create new jobs, but in most cases, their proposals are not developed to the point where the cost has been established and the legislative language written.
nytimes.com |
