Barnes' piece for the Wall Street Journal:
Bill Bradley for Treasury Secretary
He could help Bush cut taxes.
BY FRED BARNES
Monday, December 18, 2000 12:01 a.m. EST
President-elect Bush is looking in the wrong places--Wall Street, corporate America, the Federal Reserve--for a Treasury secretary. The ideal candidate is a former senator and presidential candidate: Bill Bradley.
Mr. Bradley is a conventional liberal on many issues, but not when it comes to taxes, trade, international economics or the role of Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan. Mr. Bradley is also a prominent Democrat who would provide bipartisan gloss to the Bush administration. Far from being mere window dressing, he would have influence on Capitol Hill, where he is still regarded as a policy heavyweight and where Mr. Bush will need all the help he can get.
Mr. Bradley is the sort of Democrat Mr. Bush worked with successfully as Texas governor. The former New Jersey senator is more issue-oriented and independent-minded than partisan. He worked closely with Ronald Reagan in 1986 to achieve tax reform and supported trade agreements--the North American Free Trade Agreement and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade--that most Democrats opposed. In short, putting Mr. Bradley at Treasury would neither jeopardize Mr. Bush's ties to conservative allies nor force him to jettison the free-market proposals he made during the campaign.
The potential graveyard of the Bush agenda is the Senate, now divided 50-50. Republicans control the House only narrowly, but by holding most Republicans and peeling away a few Democrats, the GOP will be able to pass most conservative bills, including tax cuts. The Senate is trickier: Because of the filibuster, passing legislation will require 60 votes. Mr. Bradley could be pivotal in generating Democratic allies. He's no backslapper, but he was an influential member of the Finance Committee for years. And unlike Al Gore, he has friends in the Senate among both Democrats and Republicans.
When he challenged Mr. Gore in the primaries this year, Mr. Bradley did not call for a tax cut. But he's often argued in the past for tax cuts accompanied by the elimination of tax shelters. Would Mr. Bush be willing to craft a proposal along these lines? Since his own tax cut has little chance of passage at the moment, I suspect the answer is yes.
As a senator, Mr. Bradley was the crucial Democratic player in enacting the Tax Reform Act of 1986. It reduced the top rate on individual income to 28% from 50%. By pushing early and often for tax reform, Mr. Bradley gave liberal Democrats enough cover to back a tax plan dramatically slashing the top rate on personal income. His Democratic partner in tax reform, Rep. Richard Gephardt, couldn't stand the heat. He faded from the scene when the tax measure was negotiated with the Reagan administration. Mr. Bradley stayed, insuring that it would be a bipartisan project and sail through Congress.
Mr. Bradley would strengthen the new Bush administration in at least three urgent areas--dealing with the Group of Seven industrialized nations, reining in Mr. Greenspan, and neutralizing the New York City crowd. Bill Clinton's former Treasury secretary, Robert Rubin, had his successes, but preserving the G-7 as a significant force under U.S. leadership was not one of them. These days, when finance ministers from the seven industrial democracies gather, markets don't listen.
Mr. Bradley would change that. Ask finance ministers or leaders of state banks around the world which current or former member of Congress they respect, and you're likely to hear only one name: Bill Bradley. He would have their ear in coordinating policies to arrest the economic slowdown and on matters from trade to debt relief.
Then, there's the Fed chairman, Mr. Greenspan. Clinton officials have all but given him carte blanche to treat the economy as his personal responsibility. Mr. Bradley wouldn't. He's not a Greenspan opponent, but he is a skeptic. After voting against Mr. Greenspan's confirmation, he has generally praised the Fed chief's performance. But he's hardly become a fawning acolyte. Wall Street sources who've talked recently to Mr. Bradley say he now believes Mr. Greenspan has overshot in raising interest rates. In the weekly meetings between Mr. Greenspan and the Treasury secretary, Mr. Bradley would no doubt press for quickly trimming rates.
Finally, there's New York. To say that the city (or at least its financial leaders and communications industry) is hostile to Mr. Bush is an understatement. The New York Times, both editorially and in its news pages, lashes out at him daily. But what if he installed Mr. Bradley? The former New York Knicks basketball player was heavily favored by the rich and powerful in the city over Mr. Gore for the Democratic nomination. Indeed, they provided a large portion of his campaign funds. Next to Mr. Rubin, he remains Wall Street's favorite Democrat. His appointment would carry weight in New York, signaling that Mr. Bush's victory doesn't herald the arrival of Texas yahoos to Washington.
The time for picking Mr. Bradley as Treasury secretary could not be better. Democrats are angry at the way Mr. Bush won the election, but they're also mad at Mr. Gore for losing. They feel the vice president lost a race he should have won easily, and wonder if his primary opponent, Mr. Bradley, wouldn't have won easily. Mr. Bradley's reputation is about to soar. For Mr. Bush, the biggest question should be whether he would even take the job. If Mr. Bush is as good at winning friends and wooing foes as he's supposed to be, Mr. Bradley just might agree.
