DEBATE
Bush Can Run, But He Can't Hide
In tonight's third and final debate, President Bush will have to reckon with a
sobering domestic record: 800,000 jobs lost; a $422 billion deficit
(http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=202873) ; underfunded
domestic programs; increased poverty
(http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2004-08-26-census-poverty_x.htm) for
three straight years. Bush campaign aides admit the president will attempt to "
broaden the faceoff
(http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-debate13oct13,1,4841731.story?coll=la-home-politics)
," skirting discussions of specifics -- "such as healthcare or education" -- in
favor of larger, ideological issues, but that choice only underscores the
administration's failure to improve the lives of ordinary Americans. Hopefully,
debate moderator Bob Schieffer won't allow Bush to run away from his record --
below are some questions we'd like to see him ask the president.
QUESTION: Why have you prioritized tax cuts for the wealthy over programs
helping middle-class families? President Bush will say his tax relief has
helped the middle class
(http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/03/20040325-8.html) , but domestic
programs vital to the middle class have been rolled back to pay for the cuts,
the benefits of which have gone overwhelmingly to the wealthiest 1 percent of
Americans (http://online.wsj.com/article_print/0,,SB109235864738290655,00.html)
. Bush's tax cuts (http://www.faireconomy.org/press/2004/ShiftyTaxCuts_pr.html)
for the richest 1 percent of Americans this year alone will cost $148 billion.
"That is twice as much
(http://www.detnews.com/2004/specialreport/0409/26/a01-284666.htm) as the
government will spend on job training, $6.2 billion; college Pell grants, $12
billion; public housing, $6.3 billion; low-income rental subsidies, $19 billion;
child care, $4.8 billion; insurance for low-income children, $5.2 billion;
low-income energy assistance, $1.8 billion; meals for shut-ins, $180 million;
and welfare, $16.9 billion." (One Treasury economist
(http://www.americanprogressaction.org/site/lookup.asp?c=klLWJcP7H&b=218748)
with an insider's perspective on President Bush's stewardship gives the
president a failing D-.)
QUESTION: Will you veto Congress's "sprawling" corporate tax bill? President
Bush has said, " we've got to be wise about how we spend our money in Washington
(http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/09/20040906-4.html) ," but in four
years he has not vetoed a single spending bill, running up the biggest deficit
in American history. Now, he is expected to sign
(http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/13/business/13corptax.html?hp&ex=1097726400&en=0d6532cdc299c69a&ei=5094&partner=homepage)
a "sprawling corporate tax bill" which will "shower corporations and farmers in
politically sensitive states with about $145 billion worth" of subsidies and "
pet tax breaks
(http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/13/business/13corptax.html?hp&ex=1097726400&en=0d6532cdc299c69a&ei=5094&partner=homepage)
." The bill includes a $10 billion buyout for tobacco farmers, $27.9 billion for
corporations that earn profits abroad
(http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/07/business/07corptax.html?oref=login) , $101
million for Nascar race track owners
(http://www.americanprogressaction.org/site/pp.asp?c=klLWJcP7H&b=207691) , and
$44 million for importers of Chinese ceiling fans
(http://www.taxpayer.net/TCS/PressReleases/2004/10-6corporatetaxconference.htm)
. Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) called the bill "a disgrace" and yesterday's
Washington Post remarked, "If Mr. Bush cannot bring himself to veto this
terrible bill, it will be hard to take him seriously
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A25661-2004Oct11.html) ."
QUESTION: How will your "ownership society" help working families? President
Bush will likely tout his " ownership society
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A57466-2004Sep2?language=printer) ,"
but the record shows Bush will continue to burden Americans with increased risk
and responsibility, while reducing the safety net that once protected working
families. To pay for the Bush tax cuts, the Los Angeles Times reports, the
programs Americans have relied upon to buffer them from economic turmoil have
been slashed or killed: " stable jobs, widely available health coverage
(http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/la-fi-riskshift10oct10,1,3174836.story)
, guaranteed pensions, short unemployment spells, long-lasting unemployment
benefits and well-funded job programs" have all been reduced or eliminated.
QUESTION: Why have you jeopardized affordable housing? President Bush says, "For
millions of our citizens, the American Dream starts with owning a home
(http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/10/20041002-7.html) ," but the
White House has made achieving that dream more difficult
(http://csmonitor.com/2004/0512/p14s02-lihc.html) for more than 2 million --
generally "poor, elderly, and disabled" -- Americans. The administration's 2005
budget calls for an $800 million reduction
(http://www.examiner.com/article/index.cfm/i/052004n_section8) in the Housing
Choice Voucher Program, formerly known as Section 8, and the White House has
placed an artificial 1 percent cap on the annual rise in Section 8 grants, even
though rents rise by an average of 5 percent each year
(http://www.motherjones.com/news/dailymojo/2004/05/05_520.html) . It is the
first time since Section 8's inception the government has not promised to pay
for the full cost of the program.
QUESTION: Why should we trust you to reduce the debt in a second term? President
Bush has said, "I believe it is the job of a President to confront problems,
not pass them on
(http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/09/20040909-4.html) to future
Presidents and future generations." But Bush has turned a $5.6 trillion
projected surplus into $5.2 trillion projected deficit in just three years --
the turnaround represents the worst fiscal deterioration in at least the last
half century (http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=202873)
. The Washington Post wants the president to discuss the " selfish, even piggish
behavior (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28382-2004Oct12.html)
today's leaders are showing toward the next generation." |
