Print This Page Email This Page See Most Sent

Catch up. Plenty of Note archives.

NEWS SUMMARY

So the image some of us had dancing in our heads of a big White House signing ceremony at which the president explained to the world in front of John McCain and a gaggle of clean-money goo-goos exactly why it is that he is making something he finds to be largely both unconstitutional and bad policy into the law of the land seems likely to go unfulfilled.

Sigh.

Many a presidential profile in courage has taken place within the private confines of the Oval Office.

Bill Clinton was — and still is — widely considered to be the best fundraiser in the history of his party — "the Fundraiser in Chief."

But the real all-time champ-een, President George W. Bush, hasn't been given the same moniker, in part because he's had the good sense to leave Motel 1600 and take his anti-terrorism and party cash show on the road.

There's every reason to think the current President would be a big fundraising draw even without the war, given the record sums he pulled in during his campaign, but we bet some number of people showing up with checks in their pockets today in South Carolina and Atlanta, and tomorrow in Texas, will be there to hear from their Commander in Chief.

The president doesn't disappoint, invariably coming from or going to a war-related, quasi-policy event and speaking at the fundraisers about US military efforts abroad and efforts to protect Americans at home.

Two more functions of the president's wartime, magic traveling cloak: 1) it tends to wow the local press, and keep the more cynical traveling press pool from getting too snarky about the political and fundraising aspects of these trips, and 2) it keeps the president's poll numbers high.

Who knows whether George Bush will be a popular wartime president when he himself stands for re-election, but he will have passed several times through every electorally important state AS a politically popular wartime president by the end of this year. And surely there will be some sort of residual, if presently immeasurable effect. And surely it ain't hurting the political standing of those candidates with whom he appears.

All of which is to say that President Bush begins his journey to Texas for the Easter weekend today by stopping in South Carolina and Atlanta, in part ("ostensibly," Democrats and cynics would say) to address emergency workers and keep America focused on the war against terrorism, and in part ("in actuality," Democrats and cynics would say) to raise money for two Republican members of Congress who are running for the Senate.

We don't know at this writing whether any of the money collected today in conjunction with the president's trip would be outlawed in a McCain-Feingold world, although much of it is hard money that would still be legal.

Rep. Lindsey Graham, for whom Bush is expected to raise about $1 million, is running to replace retiring Senator Strom Thurmond, and Rep. Saxby Chambliss, for whom Bush is expected to raise about $1.4 million, is seeking the GOP nomination in a contested primary to take on Senator Max Cleland.

We can't say it often enough: helping Dr./Senator Frist win back control of the Senate is Political Priority Number One for this White House.

Snaps to the Democratic Senate campaign committee for working their spin into some of the local and national coverage today; see if you can spot it …

Mr. Bandy of The State previews the president's visit to South Carolina. "Before the Graham fund-raiser, Bush will promote his proposal to spend $3.5 billion to help firefighters, police and rescue squads respond to domestic terror attacks. He will visit a first-responder unit in Greenville and later deliver remarks to a gathering of emergency personnel." ( http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/politics/2943565.htm )

"The White House added the homeland security stop to Bush's schedule to split the cost of his travel between the taxpayers and Graham's campaign. That drew complaints from Democrats."

"In 1999, Graham voted for a measure to require a candidate's principal campaign committee to reimburse the federal government for all use of government transportation for political purposes."

"Graham said his campaign would pay for part of the Bush visit but didn't say how much."

Check out the classy (if fuzzy) invite to Graham's fundraiser.
( http://www.lindseygraham.com/Events/Events.
cfm?ID=164&c=10&date=3-27-2002 )

The South Carolina House will not meet today out of deference to the president's visit. ( http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/politics/2943569.htm )

And the words "Bob Jones" have barely been uttered on this day of the president's return to the site of one of his most famous campaign appearances.

And the Atlanta Journal-Constitution previews Bush's stop there: "Before stumping for Republican U.S. Rep. Saxby Chambliss, a Senate hopeful, President Bush will watch emergency personnel respond today to a mock chemical attack at Georgia Tech … It takes place shortly before Bush's 3 p.m. address to 1,000 metro Atlanta firefighters, police officers and emergency medical technicians about homeland security and Georgia's role in the fight against terrorism. Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge will accompany Bush to Tech." ( http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/metro/0302/0327bush.html )

And because this is Atlanta, suburban sprawl capital of the world, we're talking about: "the president's motorcade shouldn't significantly delay drivers."

The Boston Globe , looking at the fundraising tour overall, notes, "In the months ahead, Bush is unlikely to bring huge infusions of cash to candidates — especially in places like Greenville, S.C., where he is scheduled to attend a fund-raising luncheon for US Representative Lindsey Graham this afternoon. Conservatives in the state were already likely to donate to Graham; the ability to get promotional photographs of Graham with the president, however, is the most valuable asset, his campaign spokesman said." ( http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/086
/nation/Fund_raising_moves_up_on_Bush_agenda+.shtml )

In other adventures in fundraising, also in South Carolina today, Karl Rove will headline a fundraiser for Rep. Joe Wilson. Check out a photo of Mr. Wilson here with Mr. Rove's friend Mr. Norquist. ( http://www.joewilsonforcongress.com/ )

And House Minority Leader Gephardt will be in Texas, raising money for former Texas Secretary of State and House candidate Henry Cuellar (D).

Because the documents were so numerous and were released so late on Monday, today brings a round of more in-depth, second-day stories on the Energy Department/energy task force records. Of these, the hardest-hitting piece with the most interesting thematic — that, um, the administration fudged at best, and wasn't totally honest (dare we say, Clinton-like in the inevitable parsing we'll now see) at worst — comes courtesy of the Washington Post 's Milbank and Allen.

"President Bush's energy task force moved to include a chapter on environmental matters only late in last year's deliberations, despite administration officials' assertions that the panel weighed conservation and production equally as it assembled a national energy policy." ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A22511-2002Mar26.html )

"'This is the environment chapter,' wrote Margot Anderson, a deputy assistant secretary, in an e-mail sent to Energy Department colleagues March 23, 2001. 'I am unclear about the process on this one. I do know the topic was added in late.'"

"The e-mail was consistent with environmental groups' claims that they received a sudden flurry of inquiries from the task force in late March, two months after the task force was created and as the panel was preparing interim drafts."

The administration is creating a red herring that may spoil on them down the road in saying that Energy Secretary Abraham met with a lot of energy execs, because they haven't yet clarified (largely because they've refused to release the Cheney records) just how they balanced the input from enviro groups with the obviously vast input from industry execs.

Still, it's really not too surprising that an Administration staffed by conservatives — and not by liberal environmentalists — wouldn't bother to consult all that much with liberal environmentalists. Whether they should have is a matter of politics and policy, but it's not a prima facie case for influence-peddling.

In fact, there's no substantive case for that at all, really. Common Cause wrote parts of the campaign finance legislation that passed; why it is it inappropriate for the allies of the president to contribute specific policy proposals for his energy plans?

Access, though — well, access is another issue, and neither party has figured out how to deal with the substance and appearance of that. Why DIDN'T the administration consult more with environmental groups in formulating its energy plan?

We have some guesses, but we haven't really heard the White House explain it in a way we find any more convincing than Greg Brady's explanation in episode #89 about why he almost had a car accident. Exact words, Ari. ( http://www.angelfire.com/retro/progoddess/brady.html )

The Pentagon will make Army Secretary Thomas White and his Enron dealings available to a select group of reporters this morning. The Washington Post follows up on its own earlier story, creating another bump in the road for him: "White, the defense official said, was serving his rotation between March 1 and March 4, when he and his wife, Susan, flew to Colorado in an Army jet. During that time, The Washington Post reported Saturday, the Whites signed documents related to the sale of a house they owned in Aspen for $6.5 million. In an interview with The Post , White's spokesman had declined to disclose the purpose of his trip other than to say it was official business." ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A22428-2002Mar26.html )

We'll continue to maintain that conservatives have nowhere else to go, but the more vocal their dissent with the White House, the bigger the bullseye for Democrats aiming to plaster Bush as too beholden to the right.

The Washington Times reports today, "President Bush's about-face on trade tariffs, stricter campaign finance regulations and other deviations from Republican doctrine is beginning to anger his conservative foot soldiers but does not seem to be cutting into his overall popularity — yet." ( http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020327-44869120.htm )

"Mr. Bush has made several decisions in recent weeks that have infuriated conservative leaders here and out in the grass roots. He is pushing for amnesty to illegal immigrants in the border-security bill in an attempt to appeal to Hispanic voters. He imposed higher tariffs on imported steel sought by the industry in West Virginia and Pennsylvania. He said he would sign the campaign finance reform bill that he opposed in his campaign. And he wants a 50 percent increase in foreign aid, a program that conservatives have been fighting for decades."

"Mr. Bush's increasing pressure on Israel to make further concessions to the Palestinians also has triggered growing criticism from conservative commentators."

"Conservatives say that up to now they have been giving Mr. Bush a pass on some issues such as his education bill, which has put the government more deeply into state and local school policy than ever before. But the cumulative impact of his more recent moves has many of them raising their voices in protest for the first time."

Along some of these same lines, David Broder writes in from what he says is an unhappy Europe. "The immediate irritant is steel. The looming and larger point of conflict is Iraq. And the underlying complaint is that the Bush administration, whose leader has gained significantly in standing since my last transatlantic visit 11 months ago, has reverted to an earlier and unsettling pattern of behavior. From the European perspective, Washington looks unpredictable, erratic and impulsive — all the things that jar the allies' nerves." ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A22830-2002Mar26.html )

If 1,000 Broder clones went to 1,000 conferences in 1,000 European capitals, of course, the same things would be said.

From the ABCNEWS London Bureau: The Arab summit to discuss a Saudi peace plan for the Middle East has begun in Beirut, with the Palestinian, Egyptian and Jordanian leaders all staying away. Arafat planned to address the conference by satellite from his West Bank headquarters in Ramallah.

The number of people killed in the earthquake disaster in northern Afghanistan has risen sharply after fresh aftershocks hit the region this morning. Government officials have talked of about 2,000 deaths from a series of earthquakes which flattened the market town of Nahrin and affected 40 nearby villages in the remote province of Baghlan. Afghan interim leader Hamid Karzai, visiting the area this morning, told survivors in the devastated town of Nahrin that everything possible is being done to help them.

Energy Task Force

The New York Times does the Energy Department document release, Part II, upping the number of meetings Secretary Abraham had with energy industry officials while working on the task force plan. ( http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/27/business/27ENER.html )

Process freaks that we are, we hope the federal judge assigned to deal with the redacted (or "whited out," as they say on TV) documents goes page by page to evaluate whether the cited exemptions actually apply.

The The Wall Street Journal 's second-day account says White House Communications Director Dan Bartlett is "perplexed" by the world's reaction to the released documents, and we should say for the record that it takes quite a bit to perplex the canny Mr. Bartlett.

And it's another great web-version headline, out pacing the actual story: "Energy Records Haunt White House."

The Washington Times reports it this way: "The Bush administration sought the advice of environmental groups in drafting its energy plan, but several declined to participate or suggested that Bush officials check their Web sites for information, just-released documents show."

Democrats have tried hard to get the scandal industrial complex to creak to life, and investigative reporters like nothing better than a document dump, the reading through of which involves an exponential drop-off in care from page 1 through page 11,000.

Still, the bar for a "smoking gun" has been set pretty high by the invisible hand of the Chattering Class, and with the exception of the Washington Post story, the read-throughs of the documents released so far have not produced much to alter the previously known story line.

But there are more documents to come, for sure.

Economy

Page A2 of the The Wall Street Journal features about as bullish a headline and lead as we have seen — "Confidence in Economy Surges, Boosting Outlook: Consumer confidence is surging, and so are the odds the U.S. will enjoy a broad economic recovery." The Conference Board on Tuesday said its measure of consumer confidence soared in March to its highest level since September's terrorist attacks, posting the sharpest monthly gain since the last nationwide recession more than a decade ago."

Still, the administration won't be happy substantively or politically until a full recovery kicks in: "In remarks to the National Association for Business Economics in Washington, D.C., Tuesday, a top Commerce Department official warned that lingering economic pessimism by business executives could result in a 'jobless recovery' marked by slow rates of hiring and corporate investment. 'If the job picture fails to brighten, confidence could be dampened,' said Kathleen Cooper, the department's undersecretary for economic affairs. She noted that unemployment continued to worsen for several months after recessions in 1969-70 and 1990-91 ended."

And a separate Journal front-pager writes about the pain of an unemployed mother-daughter team.

"Economists say the latest data show a strengthening U.S. economy, and they are now debating whether what happened last year even qualifies as a recession. But for Dana and Janeen Said and the more than 2.3 million other Americans rendered jobless since October 2000, there is no question that the economy has been unkind."

"Now, even as the unemployment rate declines, to 5.5% in February from a peak of 5.8% in December, the lives of millions are forever altered. People have been forced to move. Friends and relatives are separated. Living conditions have deteriorated. And relationships have frayed … ."

ABC 2004: The Invisible Primary

USA Today snarkily calls it his first clear majority; we'll simply term it as his first clearly positive press in recent memory. The latest USA Today /Gallup poll shows "Six of 10 people in a new poll say the Democrats' 2000 presidential nominee did the right thing in shaving off his beard." ( http://www.usatoday.com/news/washdc/2002/03/27/usat-poll.htm )

"In a USA TODAY /CNN/Gallup Poll over the weekend, 62% said the former vice president looks better without the beard. That's four times as many as the 15% who said he looks better with it. And 23% had no opinion."

"Asked who should be the Democratic presidential nominee in 2004, 26% of Democrats named Gore, and 19% chose Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York. Clinton has said she is not running. Gore says he has not made up his mind. Other Democratic prospects were in single digits, led by Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle at 8%; House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt and Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman, Gore's 2000 running mate, at 7%; and Massachusetts Senator John Kerry at 6%. North Carolina Senator John Edwards, who is actively exploring a race, was at 2%."

Can any Gore supporter reading this argue that 26 percent is a "good enough" number at this point?

A Boston Globe columnist wonders, "Does US Senator John Forbes Kerry have a realistic shot at the Oval Office? Certainly the talent is there. Frightfully bright and fiercely ambitious, a focused Kerry is the match of most any politician in America. He's more compelling at this point in his career than another Massachusetts senator with like ambitions and identical initials was when he launched his presidential bid back in 1960." ( http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/086/
oped/Kerry_s_uphill_battle+.shtml )

But, "we've sent three local champions off to battle in the last two decades — and each has come back stretched upon his shield. Why won't Kerry be the fourth?"

"Kerry and his camp argue he can't be seen as a typical Massachusetts liberal — and cite as evidence Bill Weld's unsuccessful 1996 effort to portray him that way in their Senate contest. But that, of course, was within the confines of Massachusetts."

"Still, here's the bottom line. For all his talents, Kerry will be running steeply uphill against a recent history that suggests this reality: Any figure elected by Massachusetts will have a difficult time selling himself to the rest of the country."

And maybe they are underestimating him, or playing possum, but, boy, the president's political advisers sure don't seem to fear running against John Kerry.

The Norwich Bulletin asked Senator Chris Dodd: "Are you running for president?"

"Dodd: No. I was thinking about it, but I wouldn't go any further than just that, I'm just giving it some thought. Part of the difficulty is that I like what I do too much. But I kid Joe (Lieberman) about it." ( http://www.norwichbulletin.com/news/stories/20020327/localnews/10733.html )

Remember those computers donated to the Iowa and New Hampshire Democratic parties by Senator Edwards? Well, a letter to the Greensboro (NC) News & Record (which of course could have been written by any number of Republican or Democratic Edwards critics) says this: "I'm confused. I didn't know that we elected John Edwards to be a fund-raiser for the national Democratic Party. For some reason I thought we elected a North Carolina senator to represent North Carolina in Washington. I'll bet that the computers that John Edwards sent to the Democratic parties in Iowa and New Hampshire would have been welcomed by teachers and students in his home state. Mr. Edwards, when you get back from Colorado, how about taking some time to travel in North Carolina. You might just see a need, particularly in North Carolina's rural areas."

Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, after a scheduled speech at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh today, will head to Iowa to campaign for House candidate John Norris in Des Moines.

Politics

One of the tests of Karl Rove's ability to build the nuts and bolts of a new Republican national political machine will be the extent he can get Big Business to turn its wealth into grassroots election day politics that meld with national and state Republican party operations, the way unions and the Democrats work together. The major efforts right now include those of the US Chamber of Commerce and BIPAC, whose projects the AP writes up. ( http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid
=536&u=/ap/20020326/ap_on_re_us/grassroots_politics_1 )

Walter Shapiro excoriates the Republican National Committee's new grassroots website. "Nothing in politics is more inspiring than a party leader reaching for superlatives. Especially because [RNC chairman Marc] Racicot's notion of using the Internet to recruit party activists is a great cutting-edge example of out-of-the-box thinking that recalls the breathless wonders of the dot.com economy." ( http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20020327/3973255s.htm )

The organizational tips on the site "are chump-change benefits compared to the unprecedented opportunity to 'collect GOPoints by completing Action items and redeem them for collateral of your choice, ranging from leather PDA covers to folding chairs.' This is the stuff of genius, a political breakthrough on par with William Jennings Bryan campaigning across the country instead of merely greeting voters from his front porch. Already, Democrats must be reeling from the collateral damage."

Speaking of GOP cyber-projects, this one is likely to be funnier (especially if "duck" means actual ducks, like on Friends): the Republican Senate campaign committee today will roll out a new website "designed to educate New Jersey's voters on Democrat Robert Torricelli's ongoing ethics troubles." The site: www.torricelliduck.com.

All those efforts to try to change the party's image, and this happens. "Republican national committeeman Chuck Yob" of Michigan "said he will not resign after saying women running for statewide elective office are best suited for secretary of state because 'they like that kind of work,'" the AP reports. ( http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la
-000022147mar27.story?coll=la%2Dnews%2Da%5Fsection )

The Michigan papers are covering the brouhaha, too. ( http://www.freep.com/news/politics/gop27_20020327.htm )

The Governor of Indiana signed an election reform bill into law yesterday. "The latest legislation establishes a way for military members serving overseas to fax in their ballots; sets up a provisional voting system; and allows any eligible voter to go to a registrar's office and cast a ballot up to a month before an election." ( http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020327-62702770.htm )

Surely if Bret Schundler had been elected governor of New Jersey last year, we wouldn't be reading this headline in the New York Times about the Garden State's bad budget situation: "Whether It's State or Local, Somebody Has to Raise Taxes." ( http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/27/nyregion/27TAXE.html )

When, exactly, will the apparent economic recovery lead to the improved tax receipts (at current rates) that state budget coffers sorely need? For now, budget shortfalls are defining the politics of almost every state.

California

The New York Post chases its Washington namesake's Condit/grand jury story, adding in details about alleged future appearances by Condit aides. ( http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/44558.htm )

Florida

Al Cardenas, chairman of the Florida Republican Party, is a principle in one of the three law firms competing for the job of suing to recover Florida state resources lost in the Enron collapse. ( http://www.gopbi.com/partners/pbpost/
epaper/editions/wednesday/news_c31a85beb22b02bd004b.html )

It's technically ethical, according to a state commission, but Democrats question whether Gov. Jeb Bush and the two other Republicans who will choose the firm might feel indebted to Mr. Cardenas. Even if his law firm is chosen for its bonafides, it's hard to see how this wouldn't become a Democratic talking point, especially since Jeb Bush himself has some Enron connections.

New York

Another day, another Democrat-leaning endorsement for Governor Pataki, and more mud splattered in the Democratic primary to pick his November opponent, this time courtesy of an incomprehensible New York Post "exclusive" having something to do with Carl McCall, a contributor, and an audit, splashed on page 2. ( http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/44576.htm )

Massachusetts

"Republican Mitt Romney has received his first campaign donation — a $75,000 loan from himself — a clear sign that he intends to dig deep into his own pockets to fund his gubernatorial bid." ( http://www2.bostonherald.com/news/local_regional/romn03272002.htm )

Iowa

The three Republicans who want Tom Vilsack's job as Iowa Governor — Doug Gross, Steve Sukup and Bob Van Der Platts — will debate on May 18. Will Anger rule the debate? Almost certainly, since Paul Anger, the editor of the Des Moines Register , will moderate. ( http://desmoinesregister.com/news/stories/c4789004/17735321.html )

Legislative Agenda

Robert Pear's New York Times story on the Social Security and Medicare trustees' report that ever-so-slightly extended the fiscal health of the two programs puts on display Pear's brilliant use of understatement when writing about policy and politics: "While President Bush has proposed changes in Social Security and Medicare, he has not put much pressure on Congress to act on his proposals … Republican members of Congress have embraced the concept of individual investment accounts, but mindful of the political risks and technical complexity of such changes, they have not rushed to pass legislation." ( http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/27/politics/27BENE.html )

Enron

To the extent that invoking the Word of Alan Greenspan is still an effective tool in congressional debate and election politics, the Chairman's speech in New York yesterday warning against over-reaction and over-regulation in the wake of Enron is tonic to the ears of Republicans, who already were well-positioned to balance their legislative goals, free market views, supporters interests, consumer needs, and electoral chances.

Campaign Finance Legislation/Election Reform

Robert Samuelson takes the latest crack at explaining why McCain-Feingold might violate the tenets of free speech. ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A22831-2002Mar26.html )

One of Senator McConnell's Dream Teamers, superlawyer Floyd Abrams, has a pretty eloquent op-ed in the The Wall Street Journal in defense of the same.

Steel

The The Wall Street Journal 's news page makes the most definitive non-editorial judgment we've seen so far on the president's steel gambit, and it's not exaggerating much to say the thumbs are as down as if this were a review of "Freddie Got Fingered."

"Mr. Bush's decision to erect a wall of import tariffs around the financially strapped but politically potent U.S. steel industry was supposed to win him congressional support for his larger free-market goals. But the move has provoked other countries to impose their own import tariffs, and jeopardized Mr. Bush's ambitions for international trade pacts. In Congress, meanwhile, little has changed."

Cato and Heritage think-tankers are quoted speaking in apocalyptic terms about things such as lost "moral authority." And we remain impressed at how often trade rep Robert Zoellick goes on the record defending the president's steel decision. And, finally, we love how chatty the web version's headline is: "Bush's Trade Gambit Tanks."

David Broder's aforementioned column joins Brother George Will in saying the steel decision "looks more and more like one of the worst of the Bush presidency." There's a story on A2 of the The Wall Street Journal about supply, demand, and price conditions in the US steel market, which we're pretty sure Don Evans will read closely and understand better than we do.

Bush Administration Strategy/Personality

The announced upcoming return to private life of Mark Weinberger, the Assistant Treasury Secretary for tax policy, should be a reminder to all those Enron-addled investigative reporters who mostly fail to track the lobbying efforts and incredible access enjoyed by Bush associates that a whole new wave of influence peddling is about to start, as turnover starts to pick up the pace as many officials finish their first full year in office. As we have seen, this Administration isn't that into transparency, but that is what the public interest demands.

Mr. Weinberger says his plans aren't set yet, but many officials will surely leave the administration and then go on to use what they have learned and who they have met to make some coin.

Among other papers, the Washington Post reports that President Bush saved the Afghan king's life. "A call from President Bush to the Italian prime minister last week was a major factor in preempting the return home of Afghanistan's exiled monarch. In the call, Bush told Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi that the king, who lives in Rome, would face an attempt on his life in his native country, members of the royal family and Italian officials said [yesterday]." ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A22505-2002Mar26.html )

First-day print and broadcast coverage of the president's looks-like-America choices for surgeon general and head of the NIH is quite boffo.

Still, NIH nominee "Zerhouni must be approved by the Democratic-controlled Senate. Few on Capitol Hill have commented substantively on his nomination, saying they will wait for hearings to learn more about him." ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A22526-2002Mar26.html )

And pro-life groups are somewhat chagrined over Zerhouni, who, as as Dean of Johns Hopkins, was an early and strenuous advocate for the type of stem cell research the president has disavowed.

The Bush Administration and its EPA will have to enforce tough soot and smog standards implemented under Clinton that were challenged by industry in federal court. "Industry officials said they were disappointed but not surprised by the ruling. They said they hope that the Bush administration will take a less intrusive approach to air regulation and that Congress will ultimately reject the new standards." ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21938-2002Mar26.html )

Nine Easton profiles the head of Bush's citizen volunteer corps in the Washington Post Style section. ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A22430-2002Mar26.html )