Gore's decision not to run gives Dems reason to hope

There's no doubt that the Democratic Party faces an uphill battle in its effort to make President George W. Bush a one-termer in 2004, but the challenge would have been even more insurmountable had former Vice President Al Gore been a candidate for the Democratic nomination. That's because Gore's presence in the primary sweepstakes would have resulted in a rehashing of the 2000 election in which he won the popular vote against Republican George W. Bush but lost in the Electoral College.
Gore's decision not to make another bid in two years -- it's too early to speculate on 2008 -- opens the door to a slew of candidates and will give the Democratic Party faithful the chance to judge them on their grasp of the issues that most concern the American people.
With a popular president -- Bush's approval rating shot up after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and has remained high -- who may well have the country rallying round the flag if America and its allies succeed in ousting Iraq's Saddam Hussein, Democrats must have a primary of substance.
A comment from Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, who has announced his bid for the Democratic nomination, is right in his assessment of what his party needs to do. Dean, who has virtually no national name recognition and is a stranger to many Democratic operatives, insists that a "Bush light" strategy is doomed to failure. (Dean's comment can be found on this page in the "Who Said So?" column.)
Political traction
There are issues with which Democrats can gain political traction, such as the faltering economy. In 2000, the economy was booming and the federal budget was running a historic surplus after eight years of Democrat Bill Clinton's occupancy of the White House. Today, the red ink is flowing and the economy continues to sputter, despite various attempts by the Federal Reserve to trigger a recovery. Bush's replacement of his economic team is a clear indication that the White House is worried and that a war with Iraq might not be enough of a distraction if the voters find themselves worse off in 2004 than they were in 2000.
There are other concerns that demand a national debate, such as the rising cost of health care, in general, and prescription drugs, in particular, a public education crisis in the inner cities and a corporate culture that has resulted in chief executive officers and other high ranking officials pleading guilty to lying to stockholders about the value of their companies.
President Bush's preoccupation with terrorism is justified and can be defended. He set right tone for this nation's response to the killing of 3,000 innocents on 9/11 when he declared that the architects of global terrorism will be tracked down and brought to justice.
But while Bush and the Republicans can be expected to focus on the president's handling of the war on terrorism in 2004, it should not be the only issue. With Gore out of the way, Democrats have an opportunity to expand the debate and spotlight the differences between the two parties.