Sunday, April 25, 2004

Once again, Bob Woodward is in the news with yet another best-selling book, “Plan of Attack,” which covers the Iraq war from inside the White House.

Although the Bush people profess to be pleased with the how president is portrayed — it is even recommended on his campaign Web site — liberals have found much in the book to support their view the war was launched recklessly.

Many conservatives are scratching their heads, wondering why a Republican White House would open itself up to someone like Mr. Woodward, who, after all, became famous for bringing down a Republican president. Rush Limbaugh spoke for many when he wrote in the Wall Street Journal, “Frankly, I don’t understand why the president or anyone else in the administration who supports the war against Iraq would give Mr. Woodward the time of day.”

I have a little bit of insight on this issue because Mr. Woodward spent a good deal of time around the Treasury Department in late 1992. He was planning a book about the elder President Bush’s economic policy, and I was deputy assistant secretary for economic policy at Treasury.

I didn’t have any direct contact with Mr. Woodward, but I had a lot of concerns about what would come of cooperating with him. I talked to those who were working with him, both to raise red flags and to understand why they did it. The best answer I got was Mr. Woodward gets paid the big bucks for a reason. He is the very best there is at what he does. Those who talked to Mr. Woodward for this earlier book all reported he is extremely charming and it flattered their egos to think he was interested in their views. He made all of the Treasury people feel he was genuinely their friend, and so they opened up to him.

Keep in mind also that when Bob Woodward comes to call, he is not just an author of best-selling books. He is also assistant managing editor of The Washington Post. That gives him access in many cases that would be denied to him if he were merely a writer of books.

Moreover, when someone like Mr. Woodward comes to you for an interview, you really don’t have much choice except to talk to him. He will write whatever he is going to write with you or without you. At least if you talk to him directly, he can hear your side of the story directly. And if you are lucky, perhaps you can even convince him to put you in a favorable light.

In the case of the Treasury people I worked with, they all knew Richard Darman, director of the Office of Management and Budget, was working closely with Mr. Woodward for his book. Since Treasury was institutionally at war with OMB on a variety of issues, we feared looking like the bad guys on everything if Mr. Darman were Mr. Woodward’s only source.

A Woodward trick to get people to open up was to tell them he was working on a book that would not appear until well after the election. Hence, they thought nothing they said would affect the election. Many also thought they would be long gone from the administration when Mr. Woodward’s book appeared.

But Mr. Woodward never promised he wouldn’t use any of his research before the election. People simply took him at his word when he said he was only interested in doing a book.

Unfortunately, Mr. Woodward changed his mind, perhaps because Mr. Bush started to look like he would lose in 1992, and gave up on the book project. But rather than waste his research, he wrote it all up in The Post. In a long, four-part series Oct. 4-7, 1992, Mr. Woodward essentially double-crossed everyone he interviewed. They all looked bad except Mr. Darman, and the series confirmed Bill Clinton’s claim the first Bush administration was out of touch on economic policy.

In his book, “White House Daze” (1993), Bush White House official Charles Kolb said the Woodward series had a “devastating impact” on the Bush campaign. But as former White House speechwriter John Podhoretz said in his book, “Hell of a Ride” (1993), most of the anger was directed at Mr. Darman, as the principal source, rather than at Mr. Woodward.

As a reward, Bill Clinton granted Bob Woodward intimate White House access for his book, “The Agenda” (1994), which focused on Mr. Clinton’s economic policy. In comparison to the portrayal of fecklessness by the Bush people in his series in The Post, Clinton people like Rob Rubin came across as statesmen concerned only with doing what was right.

Bruce Bartlett is senior fellow with the National Center for Policy Analysis and a nationally syndicated columnist.

Copyright © 2022 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

Please read our comment policy before commenting.

Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide