Cover Story

Yes, sir, Mr. President

Issue: "Face Off," Aug. 9, 1997

As Congress raced to sew up the tax-and-budget accord with the White House before the August recess, one issue separated the two sides: education choice. A little-noticed provision would have allowed parents to create tax-free savings accounts for private or religious schooling. At the behest of teachers' unions, the president objected and demanded the provision be removed, setting up a closed-door political face-off. But by the time it was over, GOP leaders were face-down. Bob Jones IV reports on the Republicans' latest cave-in.

The smiles on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue on Tuesday, July 29, were almost as bright as the summer sun that had baked the city for weeks. In front of the White House and on the steps of the Capitol, politicians from both parties gathered to take credit for a tax and budget compromise plan that many pundits described as historic.

The agreement worked out between the White House and congressional conferees was indeed sweeping: a cut in the capital-gains tax, new scholarships for college students, and a $500-per-child tax credit for middle-class families.

We see you’ve been enjoying the content on our exclusive member website. Ready to get unlimited access to all of WORLD’s member content?
Get your risk-free, 30-Day FREE Trial Membership right now.
(Don’t worry. It only takes a sec—and you don’t have to give us payment information right now.)

Get your risk-free, 30-Day FREE Trial Membership right now.

But nothing lit up the faces of conservatives in Congress quite like the little-known Coverdell Amendment, which negotiators had kept in the reconciled tax bill over the strenuous but quiet objections of President Clinton. The brainchild of Sen. Paul Coverdell (R-Ga.), the amendment provided for tax-free IRAs of up to $2,500 per year that parents could apply to almost any type of educational expenses for their children. Because there were no restrictions against using the tax-sheltered income for Christian and parochial schools, conservatives viewed the Coverdell Amendment as a major breakthrough in the protracted debate over school choice.

But as darkness fell on Washington, so did the spirits of school-choice advocates. At 9 p.m. that Tuesday-some eight hours after he had publicly accepted the Republican tax cut plan-the president called Newt Gingrich with a veto threat: The entire, delicate compromise would be scrapped unless the IRA plan were dropped.

Conservatives immediately mobilized to protect their hard-fought gains. Organizations such as the Family Research Council dispatched lobbyists to the Hill and sent urgent faxes across the country trying to muster support. FRC president Gary Bauer personally called Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott urging him to resist presidential pressure. "But alas," Mr. Bauer reported just hours later, "by this morning [Wednesday] Gingrich and Lott had agreed to the president's demand."

Mr. Bauer got the crux of that charge right, but not the chronology. The Republican leadership did indeed withdraw the Coverdell Amendment without a fight, but the agreement to do so was reached days earlier: the cave-in occurred over the weekend, not early Wednesday morning.

Spokesmen for both Sen. Lott and House Majority Leader Dick Armey admitted to WORLD that the fate of the amendment was a done deal. Rather than hold up the budget agreement, Republican leaders had already promised the president that they would quickly pull the plug on the IRA proposal if he would make his objections publicly. That way, the reasoning went, Republicans could clobber him politically.

Not only did that not happen, but the late-night veto call from President Clinton to Newt Gingrich was every bit as much a farce. The president was simply playing the role assigned to him in advance. Besides the call, Mr. Clinton was also required to publicly issue his written veto threat and to publicly meet with three Senate supporters of the measure. That done, the amendment would be pulled without a fight, and the president wouldn't actually have to exercise the threatened veto.

Why would Republicans participate in such a transparent charade? "We agreed not to jam them on something that we would probably have lost on anyway," explained David Hoppe, Sen. Lott's chief of staff. With only 59 votes, the bill's backers were seven votes short of a veto-proof margin in the Senate, and support in the House was completely untested.

To many conservatives, however, such an approach was a sell-out, not a strategy. "Here was a wonderful opportunity to explain to the American people a very big difference between the conservative vision and the liberal vision about who should be making educational choices for our children," said Mr. Bauer. "It's incomprehensible to me that the leadership would miss this opportunity. The chance of losing was almost nil."

Evidently President Clinton viewed the situation in much the same light. Although the Coverdell Amendment had been his top objection to the Republican tax plan for nearly a week, the issue never registered a blip on the national political radar screen because the president voiced his opposition entirely behind the scenes.


You must be a WORLD member to post comments.

    Keep Reading


    Life with Lyme

    For long-term Lyme patients, treatment is a matter of…


    Job-seeker friendly

    Southern California churches reach the unemployed through job fairs