The Political Universe 02.06.07
Posted by Jason Easley on 02.06.2007
Today I ask the question, what happened to the John McCain who won the hearts of many independent voters with his maverick style? His latest criticism of those who don't support the Iraq war will win him the approval of the White House, but could it cost him the 2008 presidential election? Plus, President Bush unveiled his 2007 budget, which cuts domestic spending, increases military spending, and calls for huge tax cuts. I'll tell you why this budget looks doomed. All this and more is waiting for you in the Tuesday edition of this column.
McCain blasts war critics again
Remember the independent maverick John McCain who used to stand up for his own views even if doing this meant bucking the Republican establishment? Well that man is dead, and has been replaced by Pod McCain, a creature that has the physical form of John McCain, but the thoughts and views of the Bush administration. The latest Pod sighting occurred on Sunday morning on the ABC program This Week. Pod McCain stated that the non binding Senate resolution which voices opposition the troop buildup in Iraq amounted to a vote of no confidence in the U.S. military. He said that the measure criticizes the administration, but does not offer any concrete alternatives. McCain has proposed a resolution of his own that expresses support for the troop surge, and sets benchmark goals for the Iraqi government.
"I don't think it's appropriate to say that you disapprove of a mission and you don't want to fund it and you don't want it to go, but yet you don't take the action necessary to prevent it," said McCain, a 2008 presidential candidate. There will be a vote on Monday about a non binding resolution proposed by GOP Sen. John Warner. Warner's resolution is the same as the Democrats' but adds a provision that protects funds for troops already in combat. This drew the anger of some Democrats who see the compromise Warner resolution as endorsing the status quo. They want to use the current non-binding resolution as a first step towards a binding resolution that would cap troop levels, then force a new vote to authorize the war, or bring the troops home.
McCain said proponents of the Democratic resolution are being intellectually dishonest. This comment drew a response from fellow GOP Sen. Chuck Hegel. Also appearing on This Week, he called McCain's proposal meaningless because it offers benchmarks but does not spell out what the U.S. government will do if the Iraqi officials fail to meet them. "What are the consequences? Are we then going to pull out?" Hagel asked. "Are we going to cut funding? Now, that falls more in the intellectually dishonest category."
McCain's pro administration and pro war stances have already cost him heavily with the Independent voters who adored him during the 2000 campaign. The latest Rasmussen Reports survey has found that McCain still defeats Hillary Clinton in the general election, but he loses in match ups with both Obama and Edwards. The survey also found that his stance on Iraq is almost the polar opposite of what respondents want done in Iraq, and that Iraq is the issue costing McCain the greatest amount of support. 94% of those surveyed disagreed with McCain's support of the administration on Iraq. His stance on the war is certain to cost him a great deal of support with Independents in the general election.
Parroting Bush administration views might be good enough to get McCain the nomination, but this same strategy will cost him the general election. If I can see this, why can't he? With each step farther to the right, he is costing himself votes everywhere else. He doesn't seem to see the difference between supporting the troops and supporting the administration's policy. I believe that he yearns for the presidency, but this strategy is not the way to get it. He is methodically stripping away what made him popular in 2000, and replacing it with a bland mainstream conservative persona. Where have you gone John McCain? America could use a credible independent voice such as yours, instead of the administration puppet that you have become.
Bush unveils 2007 budget
If the budget unveiled by President Bush on Monday had a title it would probably be something like, "The Federal Budget: Spending less at Home, so that we can Spend More on War." The $2.9 trillion budget gives the Pentagon an 11% increase, which does not include spending on Iraq and Afghanistan, but it cuts, or holds the line on many domestic programs including health research, Amtrak, and the LIHEAP program, which provides heating subsidies for the poor. After seeing the Bush budget, the Democrats accused him of cutting domestic programs while using smoke and mirrors to try and balance, and ignoring tax threats to the middle class.
"The president has simply offered more of the same, proposing a budget that cuts ... from Medicare and Medicaid, while sending $240 billion more in American taxpayer dollars to Iraq," said Rep. Rahm Emmanuel (D-IL). "This is not a tradeoff the American people want." The budget proposal has already been criticized by health care providers because it would cut federal reimbursement rates for Medicare and Medicaid patients over the next five years.
Another program facing cuts is the Children's Health Insurance Program. The Bush budget authorizes $4.2 billion in funding over the next five years. The current cost of the program is $5 billion per year, but that cost could rise to $15 billion to provide the same level of coverage over the next five years to 6 million kids. The Bush budget also cuts homeland security grants to the states by more than half, from the current $525 million to a proposed $250 million that all 50 states would share. Amtrak would see its budget cut from a current $1.3 billion to $800 million. Amtrak officials have already said that the current system can not run on the proposed amount.
Most of the agencies within the department of Health and Human Services are going to have to get by with the same level of funding that they had last year. The Center for Disease Control has $50 million cut from its budget, and the National Institutes of Health is only getting a 2% increase under the president's plan. "This is not a budget that the nationwide cancer community was hoping for after the president's visit to NIH last month to tout an historic decline in cancer deaths," said Daniel E. Smith of the American Cancer Society.
The biggest source of controversy will be the president's request to make the tax cuts of his first term permanent. Bush wants $1.9 trillion in tax cuts over the next 10 years. $1.6 trillion of this amount would come directly from making permanent the tax cuts of 2001 and 2003. Some of the tax cuts, like the one offered for research and development are popular, but many others, such as his plan to change employer offered health insurance, are not.
The president also did not propose a fix for the alternative minimum tax problem. Originally the alternative minimum tax was designed to catch wealthy tax cheats, but more and more middle class people are being forced to pay the tax. The tax was paid by 4 million people last year, but without a change in the law, it is estimated that 25 million people will have to pay the tax next year. Democrats have pointed to this as evidence that President Bush is ignoring middle class families.
Before anyone gets too bent out of shape about this budget, you have got to remember that the version that Congress will pass probably will be much different from what President Bush wants. I would expect Democrats to restore most of the domestic spending that the president wants to cut, and evaluate his tax cuts on an individual basis. This budget does provide a bit of insight into this administration's priorities, which appear to be the war and tax cuts. I don't understand how a nation can afford to spend a trillion dollars war, while at the same cut taxes by $2 trillion dollars. It's a poor policy that doesn't make sense, and I think that it is going to catch up with us later.
Be sure to check out…
The Rivett Report features Joe commenting on Bush joining the Democrats' retreat and a few other cool things. Don't you get the feeling that Old W. has been kicked out of the GOP clubhouse, and he is now reduced to playing with the neighborhood kids that he wouldn't even normally speak to?
After I emailed Matt and said please don't quit doing TWM, I didn't hear from him, so I was under the impression that he was still quitting. Matt emailed me back and we came up with a schedule that works better for him, thus the D.S. version of The Weekly Monitor will live on.
Dan Martin has written another excellent column. His latest column offers a lesson about learning to listen to history. This is a lesson that we all can benefit from.
The end is near, at least for this column. Come on back on Friday when I will have more political news and views for you. Until then, if you live in one of the many parts of our nation that is in a deep freeze right now, stay warm.
"Just hours after announcing he's running for president, Joe Biden made what may be considered inappropriate comments about Barack Obama. In fact, Joe Biden was forced to fire his campaign manager, Michael Richards, today. ... Biden is making the Democrats long for the comedy routines of John Kerry." --Jay Leno
"Former Clinton adviser Dick Morris said, 'Hillary Clinton will be the next president, but she'll be the worst president we've ever seen.' After hearing this, President Bush said, 'Wait a minute, I'm not finished yet.'" --Conan O'Brien
"This weekend, the President of the United States went on National Public Radio to explain that he knows [Vice President Dick] Cheney. Cheney is not delusional, just optimistic [on screen: Bush saying Cheney reflects a 'half-glass-full' mentality]. ... How twisted is your administration when this guy is your Pollyanna?" --Jon Stewart
STAY CURRENT