Promotion

Ronald Brownstein has been with the Los Angeles Times since 1989, primarily in its Washington Bureau as a reporter and analyst. He has been promoted to the op-ed page, and today marks his first column in this new role. I think it is an auspicious beginning.

Through six tumultuous years in the White House, President Bush has demonstrated repeatedly that he responds to force, not argument. If he has the power to implement his ideas, he will, whether or not he has established a consensus for his course.

Think of Bush's initial decision to overthrow Saddam Hussein even after failing to win a second resolution from the United Nations explicitly authorizing the invasion. Or his move earlier this year to increase the American troop presence in Iraq despite opposition from the public, almost all congressional Democrats, a measurable minority of congressional Republicans, the bi-partisan Iraq Study Group and portions of the Pentagon. In each case, because Bush could move, he did move.

That backdrop is critical for understanding the escalating confrontation between Bush and the Democratic congressional majority over Iraq. An array of critics -- including this newspaper's editorial page -- have questioned whether the Democratic proposals to set a timeline for the withdrawal of American troops or establish performance benchmarks for the Iraqi government offer a realistic blueprint for ending American participation in the war.

That's an interesting academic discussion. But it obscures the real stakes in the continuing legislative struggle over the war, which will resume today when Senate Democrats attempt to force consideration of a binding resolution that seeks to remove most American combat troops from Iraq by March 2008. It is a mistake to judge these Democratic proposals as a potential compass for Bush. They are better understood as a two-by-four to catch the attention of a president who usually negotiates only when he's left with no other choice -- and he sometimes resists even then.

While Mr. Brownstein hasn't provided a particularly blinding insight into the current activities in the nation's capital, he has articulated a necessary "given" in just how the current administration operates. By doing so, he is able to show just what kind of battle the Democratically led Congress faces and what tactics are available to it.

Senior Democrats have already signaled they intend to force repeated votes on Bush's direction and possible alternatives in Iraq. "We should keep at it and at it and at it," Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said last week.

Even if Bush and congressional Republicans can prevent the Democratic proposals from becoming binding law, the price could grow very high. The president will be increasingly isolated. Republican legislators will be stamped even more indelibly as the defenders of an unpopular war. The country will face months of incendiary but inconclusive partisan confrontation -- a sure recipe for frustration, alienation and widening division.

If Democrats can build support for alternative approaches -- and maintain political pressure on congressional Republicans vulnerable in 2008 -- they might eventually compel Bush to start negotiating a path forward in Iraq with broader support than his current direction. That's the real value of the Democratic proposals.

I think that analysis rather interesting. I also tend to believe it pretty accurate. Make no mistake, Mr. Brownstein is himself a Washington insider. His many appearances on Sunday morning talk shows is evidence of that. Still, I find it refreshing to find someone with that status capable of a clear sighted view of just what is going on right now. It also doesn't hurt that he has managed to insert a nice jibe at his bosses on the editorial page in his opening column.

Congratulations on your new job, Mr. Browstein. More like this, please.