By William T. Archey

March 10, 2006

In David Broder's March 2 column titled ``Who'll Meet the Demand for Unity?'' he notes that governors are quite able to work with the opposition toward actually getting something done. He quotes a governor as noting that in her state both parties have to work together but ``when people look at Washington, they are dismayed. They see a sea of partisanship, but no results.''

We may still see this phenomenon play itself out in Washington. Congress and the Bush administration are on the verge of passing legislation that would substantially improve America's competitiveness in the world marketplace. But then again, they may not. They may send a powerful message to voters that Washington can act on behalf of the country or they may drag the issue through the partisan muck, obsessively jockeying to see who gets credit, and ultimately screw the whole thing up.

A year ago, the debate on competitiveness could have been held in a phone booth. Now there are three sets of bills offered in both houses, and they are quite bipartisan. The Senate PACE (Protecting America's Competitive Edge) bills have nearly 60 co-sponsors, half Republican, half Democrat. The thrust of all of this legislation is to improve the American educational system, particularly K-12; increase federally funded basic research in the physical sciences (money that goes predominantly to our universities); encourage our children to enroll in more math and science classes; and improve math and science teaching throughout the country.

These bills follow the publication of the Democrats' Innovation Agenda in November and the National Summit on Competitiveness in early December, organized by Republicans on the House Science and Appropriations Committees. Most recently, the president introduced his American Competitiveness Initiative in the State of the Union Address. Each of these encourages reforms to enable the United States to attract the best and the brightest in the sciences, math and engineering from throughout the world.

These proposals are remarkable in their commonality. They all defy the reader to identify which party wrote them. It has been a long time since we have seen this intensity of agreement between both parties on a substantive issue. But whether any of the competitiveness proposals becomes law is a function of whether they are funded by the various appropriation committees and subcommittees. That is no sure thing.

The temptation to make this a partisan issue also remains overwhelming. Partisan politics and the emphasis on who gets credit (party politics) could result in no legislation or highly partisan legislation that fails to respond to the competitiveness challenges before our country.

Already both sides have taken shots across the bow. The House minority leader, while lauding the president's initiative, criticized it for the lack of funding. And House Republican leaders have accused Democrats of being incapable of leading on this issue because of past opposition to free trade with Central America, tort reform and other issues.

If this is as contentious as it gets, we may still get something accomplished. But we remind Democrats that three months ago this issue was not even on the White House's radar screen, and now it is one of its major priorities. And we remind Republicans that the Democratic agenda is as ambitious and far-reaching as any proposal out there. As one high-tech executive recently told me, ``It could have been written by Republicans.''

And that's the point. These disagreements are not about the content, per se, but on who gets the credit, or who gets the partisan advantage.

Many congressional members, Republican and Democrat, are astonished at how enthusiastically this competitiveness agenda is being received in their districts. The positive message of investing in the next generation resonates with people who understand that American pre-eminence in the global economy cannot be taken for granted. Unfortunately, this only ratchets up the pressure to try to hoard all the credit.

I have spoken with high-tech executives throughout the country. They are skeptical that the parties will put the country before their party.

They are adamant that competitiveness be advanced in a bipartisan consensus. They see that this is not special pleading for the high-tech industry, but is for the entire country. As business leaders and parents, they intimately understand how this will help their children and grandchildren compete globally and enjoy a high standard of living.

George Lucas, creator of ``Star Wars'' and of numerous innovative companies, recently came to Washington to receive the National Medal of Technology from President Bush. The next day House Democrats hosted him in a town hall meeting.

In comparing the President's Competitiveness Initiative and the Democrats' Innovation Agenda, Lucas said: ``It seems to me like both sides are saying the same thing. Now they need to work together and get it done.''

Exactly right. Congress, get it done.