Prof. Harbour ok, we are ready to begin. We have two classes left this semester, today and then after thanksgiving. I want to welcome cspan and remind you, in terms of what we have been doing this semester, that, thus far, we have proceeded in a topical way of different aspects of the american presidency. In the first half of each class. In the second half of each class we have had individual case studies. This will be different because we are simply focusing on case studies. Today, we are going to talk about bill clinton and george w. Bush and time we will talk about barack obama and donald. There will be so little to talk about when it comes to donald trump, i worry about the silence. W. H bill clinton and george on the docket today, there were a few things that warranted some talking at the start. Some older folks like us to acclimate our psyches to realize that, to you all, bill clinton genuinely is a figure of history. None of you have an active recollection, or even a childhood recollection of bill clinton in office. Which actually is kind of amazing. Even w is kind of a hazy figure to you. None of you all were older than probably was anybody older than 10 when w left office . No. Even w is kind of a childhood figure to all. That just in itself just gives a sense of, especially for us, how quickly history can move. And how things pass from current day to historical. A dimension of that that i have been thinking about too is, in the midst of this moment of generational angst and change ok boomer is prevalent in the culture. Himself, barely a boomer himself. Prof. Harbour i remember truman. Pres. Reverley the thing that is so striking to me about that, is that bill clinton, in 1992 the transition from bush 41 to bill clinton, was much kind of like this generational moment that we are in now with millennials and boomers. This moment when the baton really changed hands. Bill clinton kind of an archetypal boomer. Clinton and w born just a month apart in 1946. 41, archetypal member of the greatest generation. At the time, it felt like this burst of energy and momentum, and change, very selfconsciously for clinton. It was a lot like 1960 when jfk takes office. The first president born the century after eisenhower, 1960, in its own way, not unlike 1901, when teddy roosevelt, much younger than william mckinley, takes over and there is this burst of energy, enthusiasm, momentum. And then the thing that is also difficult in the category of musings for you all to capture in your minds, is how different the world was in 1992. The cold war has ended. In the midst of a small recession, but not a grievous one. There was this general atmospheric sense of optimism, almost easy optimism in a way that is very hard for us to quite calibrate in our minds right now. Just given the state of the world. That prevailed all during clintons presidency, in part because of him, and in part because of things that were going on. Certainly the climate that w inhabited when he was elected, that is white 9 11 was such a shock to the country. It was such a shock to him. He thought he was going to be a domestic president that got to just focus on an era of easy progress. Obviously, that has changed so much. That was what the world felt probably, in 1992, when bill clinton came along. So, remarkable to think that for us, this is a figure of history. Interesting to reflect on the generational change that was afoot right then. That we are at the tail end right now, so strange to think about how different the world felt, and how much more optimistic once upon a time. Lets talk about bill clinton growing up. What we have tried to do with each president in each case study is talk about their background a little bit. We are always interested to find out what you think about what they are growing up, how it mightve impacted their presidency in some way. What sends out to you . His work ethic. Just always having that feeling of when to become president , always working his way through school from georgetown, to going to oxford in england, then yale. I definitely see him like ambition. Health care and other stuff like that. Another thing worth mentioning is that he grew up in a middleclass family. Both of his parents were traveling salesman. When he was growing up, there were still some segregation. We were transpiring into an era that united the country. Both his parents, despite racial tensions in america, [inaudible] also he went to Catholic School , as a young kid. He went to Catholic School but perhaps did not absorb all the teachings. Anything else . We have seen other president s have difficult relationships with their fathers. We talked about Richard Nixon and lyndon johnson, for instance. For clinton, what he saw in his home growing up. The kind of views and arguments. That had to have some impact on him. His attempt as a young person to try and negotiate the differences between the adults in his life, to try to handle that. I think if you read some of the literature of children who grew up in alcoholic homes, some of them develop a certain attitude about how to try to mediate conflicts. To think historically too, to think about growing up in 1946, like clinton and w, he grew up completely under the shadow of the modern presidency. The presidency is this incredibly powerful office. Just an ever present reality in the life of clinton and george bush when they were growing up, which is different than prior president s. I could see how that transpires because he was more of a centric candidate. He always tried to negotiate with republicans and he actually was the first president since 1969 to get a budget passed. That kind of also transpired to the presidency. Anything else about clintons growing up in arkansas . [indiscernible] it kind of pushed him to find that more moderate sense and be the new democrat. What about his political career . I think he modernized the Democratic Party. Before, it was a bit more businesslike and he modernized it. It was more like the middle class. Middleclass people came into the Democratic Party. I know he was known in the party as the comeback kid, so we did change it a lot. In that vein, a thing certainly to think about. It is a notable difference between george w. Bush and clinton. One of these phenomenons that we talk about plenty over the course of the fall, is clinton not born into affluence. Born into poverty. W born into tremendous wealth and privilege, and it is just a good reminder of the fact that those who have become president have come from all different types of backgrounds. Your observations about his trying to change the Democratic Party remember what you read about his leadership at the Democratic Leadership Council . Before his election, republicans had won five of six president ial elections in the country. The Democratic Leadership Council tried to move the democratic Leadership Party to the center of the political spectrum. He tried during parts of his presidency to do that. Today, plenty of concern that the Democratic Party of 20192020 has shifted too far to the left. The Republican Party has shifted too far to the right. Similar during the late 70s and 80s as bill clinton was becoming politically active that there was a concern that the party of mcgovern, who lost the 72 election in a landslide, had shifted too far to the left. Clinton, along with especially other southern democrats, worked hard to try to create structures and policy positions that shifted the party more towards the middle. Even today, mayor bloomberg Just Announced his presidency. He is more in the center. There is a shift going back towards that center in the Democratic Party, because they are getting a lot of people concerned. An individual so far to the left like Elizabeth Warren, bernie sanders. I have seen in the debate, they are trying to rally support. We talked about president ial elections in an earlier class. We pretty much covered the 1992 election and the disadvantages George Herbert walker bush had in terms of people being unhappy with his decision to abandon his promise not to raise taxes and the state of the economy. And clinton having some real advantages in that election. Lets talk about bill clintons first two years in office. An interesting factoid about the 1992 election. Think regionally for a minute. Remember, a threeway race. George h. W. Bush, bush 41, bill clinton, ross perot. What part of the country were all three of them from . They were all from the south. Yes, they are all from the south. Think about how striking it would be if we had an election in the next cycle or two where everyone was from one part of the country. Especially from the south. Lets talk about those tough first two years in office for bill clinton. Some of the achievements, some of the shortcomings. Some of the politics coming out of that. One thing with Foreign Policy, we kept having to deal with the massacre in rwanda. The u. S. Not intervening soon enough. Also, the ethnic cleansing in rwanda bosnia. And those countries too. With Foreign Policy, he wasnt that great. I think when you think about the balkans, one of the legacies of the Clinton Presidency is, even though he did not have full congressional authorization, he eventually did take action in the bosnia crisis. And later in the kosovo crisis. In each case, by military and diplomatic intervention, it put an end to ethnic cleansing. We have a dayton accords and everything in his first term. There is some lasting legacies there for his administration. You could say that he had some success with Foreign Policy in north ireland. The good friday agreement, the good friday accord sending mitchell there. That settlement existing to this day. As you read in newspapers, part of the debate in the United Kingdom regarding brexits what to do about the borders there with northern ireland. Even though there was all that burst of energy when clinton was elected, a generational change, the politics of the era are marked, i think, by the pushback against him. For me, people in the Republican Party, for many conservatives in the country, for older americans, particularly for older republicans who had five or six president ial victories, many people did not see the Clinton Presidency as legitimate. They talked about his evading the draft. They talked about marijuana use. Things like that. For many people on the right, there was immediate content for bill clinton, particularly when you look at the rise of talk radio and personalities on talk radio who would unrelentingly go after both bill clinton and Hillary Clinton, leading to stories about people being killed mysteriously, people disappearing mysteriously. You had the very sad suicide of vince foster, a clinton friend. In the first year of his presidency. Accusations on talk radio that somehow the clintons were behind that. Politically, he inherited a Great Movement against him. We have talked at other points about this concept of, the Permanent Campaign. The way that beginning in the 1970s and the 1980s and then reaching a point of perfection of the art in the 1990s. Present incame ever the act of governing. Once upon a time was the case. We talk all the time about some things that are the same ever sense america was founded and some things that have changed with regards to the presidency. The Permanent Campaign would be a great example of something that is different. And had a marked effect on the Clinton Presidency. Certainly his administration participated in it, and very willfully. But the idea that once upon a time, politics was about elections and an election would wouldand politics obviously never completely stop, but i would be a genuine and bona fide effort to try to work across differences and build consensus a little bit outside of the hot glare of the political lights. Of differentnt means of communication, quite literally cable tv, it became easier to continue to mount the campaign, even once an election was finished. Himself, and his administration and his political apparatus perfected that art. In the same moment, the republicans were really perfecting the art, as well. They never missed a moment to critique him or find wedge issues that could derail him haveaspirations he may politically and policywise. Similarly, the Clinton White house was working against the Republican Congress in the same way. Earlys talk about some missteps in the first months of his presidency that meant he had no honeymoon period. Do you remember reading about any of those problems early on . Gettment announcements the him bad press . He repealed the ability for lgbtq members to join the military. He got a lot of pushback from congress, and what ended up happening was he tried to negotiate with congress for the dont ask dont tell policy that is a pushback from congress saying, stepping back on the politics. Still transitioning from a very conservative time to more liberal to the liberal aspect of social issues. He didnt actually repeal their ability to serve, he made an announcement that would make it possible for them to officially serve. There was great pushback from the military and key people in congress. He was keeping a campaign promise. He did that early on, and maybe in terms of what you know about attitudes today, seems like 1000 years ago. Public opinion has changed so much on this social issue in this last decade. Very different set of attitudes existed. By doing that so early, you get the pushback and then his decision to adopt something called dont ask, dont tell, which was politically defeating community that wanted an open opportunity to serve, and people opposed to them serving. It turned out to be a disaster for him, politically. What about some appointments that created great embarrassment . This goes back to the issue we talked about one day in terms of president ial transition periods. The importance of clearly vetting people and finding out about the individuals you are appointing. What happened with the appointments to the Attorney Generals Office . Ironically, ties into a controversial issue we have today regarding immigration. Appointments to be attorney general, the individuals appointed had to withdraw when it turned out they had employed as dandies individuals who were employed individuals who were illegal immigrants. Realized there kinks innce to find the armor and embarrass the president early on. It is a similar thing democrats have done to republicans, as well. But in a different era, it may be political appointees have might not cut as much political scrutiny as what was happening in 1993. In terms of the organization of the white house, i think you have read about how early on things were chaotic. Meetings would go on forever. Schedules were constantly messed up. Early on, one democratic member of Congress Talking to another democratic member of congress, if you are unhappy about an announcement from bill clinton today, dont worry about it, he might change his view tomorrow. There was no strong chief of staff at that time, no discipline process, that comes later in his administration. He got a lot of bad press from that. Keep in mind, the historical context. Republicans have been relentlessly holding the white house with just a couple exceptions, since the days of Richard Nixon. It was republicans that really created the concept of the modern chief of staff. Jimmy carter in 1976 had famously pushed back on the idea of the need for a chief of staff, and wanted to try to run things a little bit differently. Ultimately, that did not work out so well for him. He used more of a routine chief of staff model. Bill clinton is the first democrat elected president other than jimmy carter, all the way back to lbj. The chief of staff model that eisenhower had used so well. Really mastered it. It was not quite in the dna of the Democratic Party when they took the white house in 1992. A sequence of embarrassments, some driven by disorganization, eventually prompted prompted clinton to change his mind and start to embrace the strong form chief of staff model and that his what has endured all the way foroday for both parties republicans and democrats, though it is under pressure again with donald trump. Before we get to some of the political defeats of his first two years in office, lets talk about some early policy victories for bill clinton in those first two years. Nafta. That is right. During the readings, what i got was al gore went on larry king and debated ross perot. The arguments they were having got more support from the public. Going back to that new democrat idea that he had of free markets, which goes traditionally against democrats like lyndon b. Johnson and fdr. Washe nafta victory purchased with Great Republic significant democratic opposition. Clinton pursued it and it was an early victory for his administration. Like some things with bill clinton and his administration, at the time and the years quickly after, by and large to most americans, seemed like a good thing. It has subsequently, like free trade in general, begun to be viewed with a much more wary id y the country. Any other policy decisions that were successful . Going back to Foreign Policy. When Saddam Hussein tried to assassinate president bush, he did not act on it, an airstrike on intelligence in iraq. [indiscernible] that incident is one of a series of things that ultimately george bush sr, bush 41, and bill clinton to the point of being genuinely good friends. These two people who were hot political adversaries, losing a president ial election is pretty tough for the soul. They wound up being genuine friends later in life. It was a remarkable thing. And with great democratic managed to get through Congress Something he had pa