The State of the Union
by Tom Maertens
George W. Bush had a Schwarzenegger moment Tuesday, switching horses completely on several policies, now looking like a Democrat on health care, global warming, energy conservation and immigration.
By grabbing off Democratic positions, Bush hopes both to change the subject away from Iraq and show that he has a legislative program, that he is not a lame duck.
If this were Bush's first SOTU speech, the Democrats and the public would be looking forward to a golden age of bipartisanship, tackling the big issues of the day.
Unfortunately, his credibility is so low that the experienced are unlikely to take his proposals at face value. Everyone who cares now knows that this is a hard-right ideologue who employs partisanship, deception and divisiveness as governing tactics.
His energy plan is unpersuasive. He has talked about alternative energy and our addiction to oil so often without taking action that it's more likely a red herring and sop to public opinion. Bush's laundry list about wind, solar and hybrids sound like boilerplate, and even his headline proposal on cutting gas usage looks like a conversion of convenience, not conviction. Whether he actually takes action after six years of doing very little on things like CAFE mileage standards for SUVs is open to skepticism.
The issues at stake are important enough that Democrats will look to see if there is a pony under all that horsepuckey. By taking the initiative on health insurance, Bush might be able to drag along enough elephants to help pass a bipartisan bill much closer to what the donkeys could otherwise pass on their own. Bush's jiggering with taxes isn't likely to be the final approach, however. Medical liability reform got a round of applause from Republicans, but it's not going anywhere.
On immigration, Bush's plan has always been more acceptable to Dems than to his own party. His temporary worker program will not be popular with his base, although business is always willing to go along with cheap labor.
As for Bush's contention that we need to balance the budget, the problem is entirely of his making and will require sacrificing at least some of his tax giveaways to the wealthy. Similarly, his newfound religion on earmarks sounds hollow. He never vetoed a single one of the Republican pork-laden budgets with the 12,000 earmarks.
Bush suggested fixing the three big entitlement programs, but his approach is not likely to find widespread Democratic support. The fact that Sen. Kent Conrad held hearings on the subject suggests there might be Democratic interest in making some modifications to the programs.
The plea to reauthorize NCLB got only polite applause, perhaps because everybody knows it is an unfunded mandate and are cautious about ginning up another fight with the states over funding.
Meanwhile, on the most important issue to Congress and to the American people, Bush continued to push his story about the war in Iraq equating to the war on terror. He reportedly went through 30 drafts of his speech, but it would take more than clever phrasemaking to make a silk purse out of this sow's ear. However cleverly he segues between terrorism and Iraq, the public has heard it all before, and they recognize the sleight of hand.
His new strategy in Iraq is not new at all, but a continuation of a failed policy with more troops at risk. He has now admitted that his Iraq adventure is a generational war, as Condi Rice once acknowledged, which is probably an admission that he plans to hand the entire mess on to his successor ... run out the clock until 2009.
Sen. Jim Webb responded for the Democrats with a strong condemnation of Bush's reckless action in taking us to war, despite senior-level advice not to do so.
The text of his speech, much shorter than Bush's SOTU, is at MyDD
George W. Bush had a Schwarzenegger moment Tuesday, switching horses completely on several policies, now looking like a Democrat on health care, global warming, energy conservation and immigration.
By grabbing off Democratic positions, Bush hopes both to change the subject away from Iraq and show that he has a legislative program, that he is not a lame duck.
If this were Bush's first SOTU speech, the Democrats and the public would be looking forward to a golden age of bipartisanship, tackling the big issues of the day.
Unfortunately, his credibility is so low that the experienced are unlikely to take his proposals at face value. Everyone who cares now knows that this is a hard-right ideologue who employs partisanship, deception and divisiveness as governing tactics.
His energy plan is unpersuasive. He has talked about alternative energy and our addiction to oil so often without taking action that it's more likely a red herring and sop to public opinion. Bush's laundry list about wind, solar and hybrids sound like boilerplate, and even his headline proposal on cutting gas usage looks like a conversion of convenience, not conviction. Whether he actually takes action after six years of doing very little on things like CAFE mileage standards for SUVs is open to skepticism.
The issues at stake are important enough that Democrats will look to see if there is a pony under all that horsepuckey. By taking the initiative on health insurance, Bush might be able to drag along enough elephants to help pass a bipartisan bill much closer to what the donkeys could otherwise pass on their own. Bush's jiggering with taxes isn't likely to be the final approach, however. Medical liability reform got a round of applause from Republicans, but it's not going anywhere.
On immigration, Bush's plan has always been more acceptable to Dems than to his own party. His temporary worker program will not be popular with his base, although business is always willing to go along with cheap labor.
As for Bush's contention that we need to balance the budget, the problem is entirely of his making and will require sacrificing at least some of his tax giveaways to the wealthy. Similarly, his newfound religion on earmarks sounds hollow. He never vetoed a single one of the Republican pork-laden budgets with the 12,000 earmarks.
Bush suggested fixing the three big entitlement programs, but his approach is not likely to find widespread Democratic support. The fact that Sen. Kent Conrad held hearings on the subject suggests there might be Democratic interest in making some modifications to the programs.
The plea to reauthorize NCLB got only polite applause, perhaps because everybody knows it is an unfunded mandate and are cautious about ginning up another fight with the states over funding.
Meanwhile, on the most important issue to Congress and to the American people, Bush continued to push his story about the war in Iraq equating to the war on terror. He reportedly went through 30 drafts of his speech, but it would take more than clever phrasemaking to make a silk purse out of this sow's ear. However cleverly he segues between terrorism and Iraq, the public has heard it all before, and they recognize the sleight of hand.
His new strategy in Iraq is not new at all, but a continuation of a failed policy with more troops at risk. He has now admitted that his Iraq adventure is a generational war, as Condi Rice once acknowledged, which is probably an admission that he plans to hand the entire mess on to his successor ... run out the clock until 2009.
Sen. Jim Webb responded for the Democrats with a strong condemnation of Bush's reckless action in taking us to war, despite senior-level advice not to do so.
The text of his speech, much shorter than Bush's SOTU, is at MyDD
Powered by Blogger
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home