While a State of the Union address is not particularly memorable – few can recall even what Bill Clinton said in any of his addresses just a few years ago – this address has special significance as a launching pad for major change, both home and abroad.
This speech is where President Bush labeled Iran, Iraq and North Korea an “axis of evil” only four years ago. It would be a major understatement to say that some of America’s focus over the last four years has centered on those three countries. Last night’s speech by President Bush is not one for the ages, but a closer look at it provides a glimpse into President Bush’s successes and failures over the last five years.
As a person who voted for President Bush in 2004, I have a responsibility to openly assess whether President Bush is living up to his promises regarding issues both domestic and abroad. There are a couple of areas of last night’s speech where I have particular concern as a conservative going forward.
The first of these concerns is fiscal policy and domestic spending. President Bush has spent his entire presidency building a reputation as a fiscal liberal. He has not vetoed a single bill put before him. It is even joked that President Bush’s plan must be to bankrupt the government to bring about change. Someone who claims conservative values should not have this record.
As a citizen faced with the responsibility of funding this government for the next 45 years, I do not think his recent speech addressed spending enough. There were periodic references to cutting earmarks and eliminating special projects. Last night, President Bush proposed reducing or eliminating 140 underperforming programs. I hope he succeeds in doing so, but I have my doubts.
I have to take exception to President Bush’s excessive use of the words “stronger” and “initiative” in his speech to encourage Americans to support big government. These words are just euphemisms used by politicians to make federal spending more palatable.
An interesting proposal President Bush proposed was the line-item veto. The line-item veto allows a president to discard unsavory aspects of the bills presented to him without having to deny the worthier aspects of those bills. The line-item veto existed for one year during Bill Clinton’s presidency before being struck down by the courts.
I personally support the line-item veto. This would allow for the elimination of many special interest projects that have made politics as corrupt as it is. However, President Bush shouldn’t need the line-item veto as much as he claims he does. He should have vetoed multiple bills that came across his desk, most notably the Medicare Prescription Drug Coverage bill that saddled taxpayers with over a trillion dollars in spending commitments.
There was a profound statement in this speech that may have but should not have escaped notice. President Bush expressed his intention to ensure success in life for American children. Amid his calls for personal responsibility, this statement seemed out of place.
I adamantly oppose this sort of thinking. Of course I would love to see everyone succeed. However, it is not the government’s job to see that everyone succeeds. The government should take action to permit every citizen an opportunity to succeed, but we cannot try to guarantee outcomes.
In other words, Equality of Opportunity, not Equality of Outcome. If we ensure the same outcomes for everyone, there is no incentive to achieve, and America becomes nothing more than a welfare state.
A massive welfare-state program, Social Security started out as a Depression-era initiative to provide for the elderly and infirm. Now, it is overtaking the budget, and it will bring financial ruin to our economy in a matter of years if it is not scaled back or eliminated.
Speaking of Social Security, President Bush spent a brief moment in his speech asking that a bipartisan commission be created to find solutions to Social Security. What are we – the United Nations? The U.N. is where important people with big egos sit around and discuss policy without achieving anything of substance. The United States cannot allow such foolishness to continue. We already have a perfectly acceptable solution to Social Security.
The solution is privatization. Let the people control their money in the form of mutual funds, stocks and other market-driven mechanisms. The idea is not broken, President Bush, so don’t try to fix it. A great product will not come to fruition without excellent salesmanship, and that is the real problem. Our president’s ideas are superior, but people have to hear them repeatedly and forcefully.
There is no reason that people my age should be as adamantly against this solution as they are. They have been misled. Democrats, as on so many other issues from Supreme Court nominations to Iraq, are corrupting the minds of Americans with fear and misinformation. For some reason, no one has told college-age adults that they can own their own retirement money instead of handing it over to the government while praying that they will see it again in 40 years.
With the above doubts in mind, I think President Bush’s speech last night was wildly successful in other important areas, particularly regarding alternative energy, tax cuts, intelligence gathering and oppression by foreign governments.
I was excited to see President Bush push alternative energy sources. We cannot expect to survive forever on oil imports, especially when those imports are in the hands of dictators. President Bush expressed support for hydrogen, wind, solar, nuclear and ethanol options. Nuclear power seems especially promising, since it is clean and efficient while posing little threat to human life.
Yet, America has not built a single nuclear power plant in the last two decades, to the best of my knowledge. This is one of the few areas where we should follow the example of the French.
President Bush boldly requested that the tax cuts passed in 2003 be made permanent so that Americans do not face a tax increase in 2008 when many of the provisions expire. Tax receipts have increased despite the tax cuts because of increased production, and all income levels have benefited from the extra cash and job growth. President Bush rightly understands that this economy cannot continue growing effectively whenever tax rates are suffocating citizens and businesses.
In recent weeks, the Bush Administration has come under fire amid claims that President Bush is breaking the law by permitting wiretaps without court-ordered warrants. I was pleased last night to see President Bush defending his authorization of those wiretaps. He noted a critical point: Two of the hijackers on Sept. 11 placed calls that could have been tapped to help prevent the attacks.
Additionally, Vice President Cheney recently explained in an interview that these wiretaps are not conducted without regard for privacy rights. The calls must involve someone outside the United States and must involve someone with known terrorist connections. Those are significant tests that protect Americans from reckless violations of privacy rights. President Bush has executive authority under the Constitution to conduct such activities.
Congress has still not renewed the Patriot Act, and last night’s speech rightly gave brief mention to it. The Patriot Act works to correct the broken links between agencies that will help to prevent another Sept. 11. The Patriot Act eliminates the infamous “wall of separation” between the FBI and CIA made famous by President Clinton’s Deputy Attorney General. We are greatly exposed to attack when two of our premier national defense organizations cannot share information. This is exactly why the Patriot Act is needed.
Finally, President Bush addressed specific nations that do not allow free elections and peaceful protest. I applaud President Bush for his pointed reminder to Iranians that they deserve freedom. He also demanded that Iran be prevented from acquiring nuclear weapons. He also rightfully mentioned nations such as Syria, Burma, Zimbabwe and North Korea as outposts of tyranny. All of these nations need our attention so that peaceful democratic reform can take place.
President Bush also addressed Hamas and demanded that it recognize Israel’s right to exist and disarm, renouncing terrorism in the process. Although this outcome is unlikely, President Bush correctly set this high mark as his goal so that peace can exist between Israel and Palestine.
As I have been throughout his presidency, I was impressed with President Bush’s hardline approach to terrorists and rogue regimes. Soft talk and inaction do not produce results. As President Bush noted, “history will be written in courage.” There is no room for cowardice in foreign policy.
I hope President Bush will take his courageous approach to foreign policy and apply it to his domestic agenda. He made some significant steps last night by promoting his tax cuts and alternative energy, but he needs to effectively press the Republican-led Congress to drastically cut federal spending before this conservative will take him seriously.
Excellent job on foreign policy in your speech, Mr. President. Your domestic agenda needs some work.
Reed Hanson is a junior electrical engineering major. He may be contacted at [email protected].
