Bush is your soft drink: republicans 'distance' themselves at their peril.

GEORGE W. BUSH'S sagging approval ratings have been accompanied, not coincidentally, by an increasing amount of criticism from his allies in Congress. But while some Republicans have decided that it's time to declare independence from the White House, other party strategists have a warning: If Bush sinks too deep into lame-duck territory now, we will see a large flock of GOP dead ducks in the upcoming election season.

Bush's poll numbers are undeniably poor. In a mid-March Pew Research Center survey, only 33 percent of respondents approved of the president's job performance, down from 50 percent a year ago. Bush's ratings on the handling of specific issues have also declined significantly, with only 42 percent now approving of the way Bush is handling the threat of terrorism. That's down 11 percent from mid-February. The poll also reports that negative descriptions of the president now outnumber positive ones, with "incompetent" topping the list at 29 percent, and "honest" slipping to 14 percent. Even more alarmingly, much of the erosion of Bush's support has come from his political base. In the last year, his approval among conservative Republicans has dropped by 16 points. Among people who voted for him in 2004, it has fallen by 24 points.

Many congressional Republicans are among the disenchanted. "Arrogant" and "insular" lead the list of adjectives that Republicans in Congress volunteer when asked to describe what ails the White House. They recount the sluggish response to Hurricane Katrina, the doomed nomination of Harriet Miers, the backbiting following the Cheney shooting incident, and the defiant, tone-deaf response to congressional objections over the Dubai ports deal.

A common criticism holds that the Bush administration has become more insular over time as departing officials have been replaced by less experienced junior staffers. One congressional critic echoes a common criticism of the White House's hiring policy. "Unless you get in on the ground floor, you can't get on the elevator. You can't penetrate the White House unless you have been there from the very beginning." An administration ally adds, "There are only so many times you can promote the deputy's deputy without paying a price in competency."

Like a troubled marriage, the latest spat between the White House and congressional Republicans reflects longstanding, unresolved problems. ASenate leadership aide says that when the president himself deals with Republican senators, they often "come out of the meeting ready to eat out of his hand." But this personal charm is quickly dispelled by other administration officials, who regularly come off as patronizing and highhanded. The Senate aide summarizes the message that these officials convey: "You can come to the White House mess and kiss the ring and tell us what you can do for us." This alienates Republican staffers on Capitol Hill, who decry the imperious attitude that they get from the White House: "This is what the president wants. You need to get with the program."

One veteran House aide puts it succinctly: "The Republicans are so over this White House."

In the Daily News, Tom DeFrank argues that this attitude is good politics. "Distancing themselves from a polarizing President whose job-approval rating hits 40% on a good day is shrewd electoral positioning," he writes. David Keene, chairman of the American Conservative Union, similarly advises Republicans in The Hill newspaper that they need to "get their act together." What does he have in mind? "The president's approval rating seems to have tanked," he writes, "but why would Republican voters take their frustration with him out on their congressman or senator when most of them are doing just about all they can do to put just a little distance between themselves and the White House?" As Tim Russert reports, "Congressional Republicans are panicked and petrified.... They are going to separate themselves from the president on a regular basis if it helps them politically."

Yet while Republicans are undeniably at odds with the administration, it remains a big "if" as to whether abandoning their president will actually boost their electoral prospects in the fall. When the president took an unpopular stand in support of the Dubai ports deal, congressional Republicans revolted along with the majority of the American public. A CBS poll showed that 70 percent of Americans opposed the president's stance, while the Pew poll found that 58 percent of Americans approved of the way that Congress was standing up to the president. But this instance of congressional defiance did little to boost Congress's overall standing with the public.

A CBS poll has found that only 28 percent of the public now approves of the job Congress is doing--even lower than the 34 percent approval for President Bush. In fact, that's the lowest congressional approval rating in a decade. And while 22 percent of Republican voters disapprove of the president's job performance, 59 percent of them disapprove of the way Congress is handling its job. The public has an equally low opinion of congressional Democrats, but, according to an NBC survey, more people now prefer Democratic control of Congress by a margin of 50 to 37 percent.

RNC chairman Ken Mehlman, a veteran House aide and former White House political director, reminds Republicans that over the past six years their fortunes have been closely tied to Bush's. He cites a chart of their approval ratings since the beginning of the president's first term showing two lines rising and falling in tandem, with Bush's consistently higher. Mehlman explains that President Bush is the inescapable symbol of the Republican party. "More Diet Coke won't be sold if the public decides Coke is a bad product--more Pepsi will be sold," he points out.

Dave Sackett, a veteran GOP pollster at the Tarrance Group, echoes this point in a recent strategy memo to the RNC: "The notion that an individual incumbent or candidate can 'insulate' themselves from generic backlash against the Administration or the Congressional leadership by adopting a fundamental image development strategy that focuses on these differences is false."

Democratic strategist Mark Mellman believes that '06 "will be a great year for Democrats" if present trends continue. He acknowledges that improved presidential ratings would spell trouble for Democratic candidates, saying, "The difference between going into an election with 34 percent and 48 percent is real."

Experts agree that turnout will determine the outcome in the upcoming elections, and Republican turnout in congressional elections has always been intimately connected to the general level of party enthusiasm that Republicans have felt on Election Day. The biggest difference between the best years (1994 and 2002) and the worst years (1974 and 1982) for GOP congressional candidates is the number of Republicans who turned up at the polls. Vin Weber recalls that, in 1982, pollster Richard Wirthlin was emphatically telling Republican candidates, "The only thing that matters to you is Ronald Reagan's approval rating." "And he was right," Weber adds.

No matter how valid or strongly felt their criticisms of Bush, the challenge for Republican congressional candidates is to energize a unified base. To do this, they must first realize that the key to their success --strong Republican voter turnout--is bound up with Bush's popularity. On this basis, experience teaches that only a rising tide of approval for President Bush will lift all GOP boats.

Kate O'Beirne is NR's Washington editor, and the author of Women Who Make the World Worse, and How Their Radical Feminist Assault Is Ruining Our Schools, Families, Military, and Sports.