REPUBS DISTANCE THEMSELVES FROM BUSH AS ELECTION YEAR STARTS

Analysis by Jim Lobe

(IPS) WASHINGTON -- As President Bush's standing in public opinion polls plumbs new depths, his fellow Republicans are finding it ever more difficult to maintain their unity on key hot-button issues, such as foreign policy, immigration and civil liberties.

Intra-party differences that were successfully muted by the party's rallying behind the president and his image as a strong, decisive leader after 9/11 have re-emerged -- some, such as those between "Wall Street" and "Main Street Republicans" over port security, with considerable fireworks -- since Congress reconvened early last month.

The imminence of next November's midterm Congressional elections is contributing to the party's growing incoherence.

With Democrats recruiting an unusually large number of viable candidates to contest competitive seats, many incumbent Republicans must decide whether to remain tied to the mast of Bush's seemingly sinking ship, or to break loose in order to reassure increasingly pessimistic voters that they, too, have grave reservations about where Bush has been sailing.

A Democratic takeover of either house of Congress, let alone both, is still considered a long shot. But the prospect is being taken increasingly seriously by political analysts here, particularly amid recent polls that show an unexpected erosion of support for Bush -- due in major part to the growing perception that he is incompetent -- among bedrock Republicans, as well as independents.

"Competence is not a partisan issue," wrote Alan Abramowitz, a political scientist at Emory University in Atlanta, in Sunday's Washington Post. "(T)here is growing concern among Republicans that they could lose their grip on both chambers if the midterm election turns into a referendum on a president with approval ratings in the thirties or worse."

Like Democrats, who also suffer from serious internal divisions, Republicans have long consisted of different ideological factions that represent different interests.

Wall Street Republicans, who generally represent the interests -- such as "free trade -- of large multinational corporations, for example, often find themselves at odds with Main Street Republicans who have generally favoured a more populist and nationalist agenda.

Similarly, the Christian Right, which in recent years has become the single most important Republican constituency, has clashed with "moderate" and libertarian Republicans who are both secular and abhor the former's attempts to legislate or otherwise impose its morality on the nation.

As in the proverb, "Nothing succeeds like success," Bush's extraordinary post-9/11 popularity -- and his ability to translate it into legislative and electoral victories -- generally kept all major factions satisfied.

Still, some, like the Wall Street crowd, fretted about the impact of his foreign policy unilateralism on a multilateral system from which multinational corporations derived substantial benefits, and others about the impact of his huge tax cuts on the federal deficit.

With his 2004 re-election campaign out of the way, however, that unity began to fade, largely due to the steadily growing impression that, despite the administration's repeated assurances, the Iraq war was not going well at all and that Bush had no viable "exit strategy."

As that impression took hold, Bush's ratings slipped steadily south, reaching their previous nadir shortly after Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans, exposing a level of incompetence and lack of preparation on the part of the administration that few had imagined.

It was at this point that older Republican ideological divides began to re-emerge -- first, in the debate over Bush's calls for a "Marshall Plan" to rebuild the city. Deficit hawks and anti-tax groups, who had remained faithfully by his side despite the steady accumulation of unprecedented federal deficits, accused the president of FDR-like profligacy that threatened to drive the country to ruin.

Bush's economic policies have since become a major source of contention within the party, especially since the publication last month by a heavyweight Republican economist, Bruce Bartlett, of a blistering and already best-selling critique entitled "Imposter: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy."

One month later, a second breach -- this time with the Christian Right -- opened up with Bush's nomination of White House Counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court. Lacking assurances that she was a trusted follower of their creed on the bench, the movement assailed Bush for picking a "crony" with dubious credentials and eventually forced her to withdraw her name, to the unease of the moderate wing of the party.

In the last two months, however, internal tensions have become clearer than ever.

The growing pessimism about the Iraq war has driven a growing number of influential conservatives, such as the outgoing chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on International Relations, Henry Hyde, to publicly question the wisdom of Bush's efforts to "transform" the Middle East, particularly in the wake of Islamist victories in elections in Iraq, Egypt, and the Palestinian territories.

Republican "realists," such as former National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft, and "paleo-conservatives," such as Patrick Buchanan, have long spoken out against the Iraq war and the administration's efforts to "democratize" the region.

However, Hyde's attack last month, echoed by former neo-conservative Francis Fukuyama and National Review founder William F. Buckley, on the administration's ambitions as unrealistic and potentially dangerous marked a major defection that offers political cover for other discontented Republicans in the run-up to the November elections.

Even more spectacularly, controversy over the proposed takeover by Dubai's DP World of U.S. port terminals -- and Bush's threat to veto legislation that would prevent the takeover from taking place -- has created a deep split between Main Street Republicans who believe that the sale threatens national security and Wall Street Republicans who argue that banning it would jeopardise critical sources of foreign investment in the U.S. and undermine the global trade and investment regime.

Even neo-conservatives, who have historically supported free trade, are deeply divided on the ports issue, which, according to the latest polls, has done serious damage to Bush's standing.

A similar split is also taking place over immigration, which some analysts believe will rise to the top of the political agenda in the November elections.

While the populist and paleo-conservative wings of the party favour tough legislation designed to bolster border security and punish illegal immigrants, including those who have lived here for many years, the business wing, backed by Bush, has repeatedly called for a liberal guest-worker program.

As with the ports, the issue has also divided the ranks of neo-conservatives, traditionally strong supporters of liberal immigration measures, and the Christian Right.