China Breach

By DAN GOODGAME

Fit and sassy after a nine-week recess in such sunny spots as Bermuda and Hawaii, congressional Democrats got a wet-blanket welcome when they returned to Washington last week. The capital's skies spat and drizzled. The public- approval rate of President George Bush had climbed to nearly 80%. And the early victory the Democrats had planned against Bush over his unpopular China policy proved a washout. In the process, both Congress and the White House made it clear that the uneasy partnership they attempted last year will give way to the partisan bickering of an election year.

The Democrats had chosen what they believed was a winning issue: they were determined to override the President's veto of a bill that would have allowed 40,000 Chinese students to remain in the U.S. rather than face possible persecution in their homeland in the wake of the June massacre of pro- democracy demonstrators. Last November, after that legislation passed both houses of Congress without dissent, Bush blocked it. He argued that he could extend the students' visas on his own authority but would not sign legislation that could anger China's rulers.

Early last week his advisers told Bush that his veto could not be sustained in Congress. Adamant, Bush and his combative chief of staff, John Sununu, insisted the White House must prevail if Bush were to convert his passive public approval to tangible political clout. In an interview with TIME on the eve of the China vote, Bush urged that Congress not "just seek confrontation in an election year." He warned, "I won't be any pushover."

He wasn't. Focusing on the Senate, Bush made the issue a test of personal and party loyalty. He called Senators to a White House breakfast and followed up with personal notes and phone calls. He publicly promised that "no student will be forced to leave the U.S. against his will." (One Chinese student, however, sharply reminded a Senator that Bush broke an earlier promise: "He promised no high-level contacts with China" but within a month secretly dispatched National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft to Beijing.)

Last week Scowcroft and Secretary of State James Baker joined Bush's lobbying campaign by phone, while G.O.P. Chairman Lee Atwater and Vice President Dan Quayle prowled for votes in the corridors and cloakrooms of the Capitol. Even Richard Nixon phoned wavering Senators to say that Sino-American relations would suffer if Bush was defeated.

As expected, the House crushed the veto, 390 to 25. But 37 Senate Republicans were more receptive to Bush's blandishments, and the 62 votes to override fell four short of the required two-thirds.

At a news conference later, the President denied any intention to "gloat" or "crow" yet could scarcely restrain himself. Said he: "I do think ((the victory is)) going to be helpful in reaching accommodation in the House and Senate on some of our objectives." Added Mary Matalin, Republican Party chief of staff: "It's just another case where people underestimated the tenacity of George Bush. When he gets pushed up against the wall on something that he knows and cares about, he does whatever is necessary to win."

And he will do more. Skirmishes will multiply as the few efforts at bipartisan cooperation of the recent past recede from Washington's memory. For one thing, the Democrats are plainly frustrated. In a fit of complaisance early last year, the White House and Democrats agreed to set aside differences on policy toward Nicaragua, collaborated on a plan to bail out the savings and loan industry and settled on the outlines of the federal budget. But the budget accord unraveled, largely over Bush's insistence on a capital-gains tax cut that would mainly benefit taxpayers earning $200,000 or more a year. Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell blocked that measure, promising that he would make no more budget deals with the White House and observing sourly that "for them, bipartisanship is a one-way street."

A senior Administration official concedes, "It is not unreasonable for Democrats to feel that we define bipartisanship as their doing what we want them to do. Being cooperative did not get them much last year." This official would prefer to trade favors and make deals -- to allow the Democrats "to be the winners sometimes to get what we want." But Sununu and others, adds the official, "have a real desire to inflict pain for its own sake."

In that respect, Sununu is a useful "bad cop" to Bush's "good cop." The President emphasized to TIME that he will renew his offer of cooperation with Congress this week in his first State of the Union address. But he warned half-jokingly, as he rolled his eyes in the direction of a smiling Sununu, "You've got some ((people)) sitting around here that aren't quite as kind and gentle." Never a patient sort, Sununu has grown exasperated with Congress's failure to act on the Administration's agenda and has persuaded Bush to depict the Democrats as a band of tax-happy do-nothings.

Bush may also be more willing than ever to veto legislation. That power is essentially negative: it can stymie the Democrats, but it can seldom accomplish anything positive. Similarly, the Democrats, who lack a two-thirds majority in either house, cannot override Bush's veto without Republican support. Their strategy, according to one of their number, will be to send the President legislation on popular issues that bears a strong Democratic imprint, and dare him to veto it. Among the most divisive of those upcoming issues:

TAXES. New York's Democratic Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan wants to roll back Social Security taxes that have become burdensome for most middle- and lower-income wage earners. Bush opposes any cut in Social Security taxes as too expensive and claims that it would threaten future retirement benefits. At the same time, the President will continue to press for cuts in capital-gains taxes.

THE BUDGET. Bush has warned Congress against spending any "peace dividend" from a reduced defense budget. He will propose to cut only about $10 billion in defense for the next fiscal year, and insists that those savings are needed to reduce the budget deficit. When Congress demands deeper cuts, the Administration will challenge members to cut in their own districts by eliminating unneeded military bases.

CLEAN AIR. Congress is intent on passing clean-air legislation that is more stringent, more expensive and less market oriented than the proposal Bush submitted last year. Asked whether he can afford in an election year to veto any clean-air bill, the President told TIME, "Yes, because I'll be talking about jobs and a person's right to make a living ((as well as)) my commitment to clean air."

CHILD CARE. Republicans prefer a child-care program that would work through tax incentives and grants to states. Democrats favor creating a new federal bureaucracy and federal regulations.

CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM. If a bi-partisan House task force does not submit a bill by early March, Oklahoma Democrat David Boren will introduce his own in the Senate. Democrats generally favor campaign-spending limits and use of public funds in campaigns; Republicans oppose both.

FOREIGN AID. Bush endorses the efforts of Senate Republican leader Robert Dole to give the President and State Department more flexibility in apportioning aid to the emerging democracies of Eastern Europe and Latin America. Democrats, along with many Republicans, defend the current system, under which Congress earmarks the greatest aid to five recipients: Israel, Egypt, Pakistan, Turkey and the Philippines.

This is a heavy legislative load, and with elections ahead the temptations will be greater than usual to posture and obstruct, to veto and delay. But if the current Washington gridlock continues, the voters may eventually see to it that incumbents of both parties get a much longer vacation than they wanted.

With reporting by Hays Gorey/Washington