As the Bush presidency winds down, it’s maybe time to be charitable. What good things has he done?
Many agree, I guess, that his initial reaction (after ‘My Pet Goat’ but before the diversion into invading Iraq) to 9/11 was as good as could have been expected of any president.
I don’t know that the removal of Hussein counts. That seems to have been more of a side–effect of a pre-conceived plan to secure resources and influence for the US in the Middle East. Even if regime change had been the main purpose of the Iraq invasion, it would have been illegal, and the choice of invasion as the method was wrong; it has proved a catastrophically blunt instrument, creating bloody chaos.
Many criticize Bush’s energy proposals, as not going far enough or favouring Big Business, but I think this might be an example of a good thing. At least he’s talking about the forthcoming oil shortage, and to a tough audience too. I don’t recall the long-term future of energy being pushed by party leaders as an important topic in the UK general election, for example, or in Canadian politics.
Any other ideas? What good things has George done? **************************************************************** 05-29-05, 07:53 PM DorianGreyed I agree that his reaction, after the initial one, to 9/11 was good. He really did provide what a leader should provide in the horrible few days after that. I also agree that Iraq is not a plus for Bush. Not only were the people misled as to the justification, but the poorly planned occupation further damaged the standing of the US in many parts of the world. Bush is not the first president to address the energy problem, but more is being done on a large scale than before, although the alternative fuel cars have been on paper for a few decades. At least the problem is being discussed I also give Bush credit for addressing the Social Security issue. His ideas will make things much worse, but, again, at least the problem is being discussed. **************************************************************** 05-30-05, 09:45 AM frankvan Somehow, I don't expect this to be a very long list. Wink Giving him credit for talking about the growing oil shortage and the problems in Social Security's future seems a bit of a stretch. Who hasn't recognized that there are problems to be addressed? Think Jimmy Carter on oil! Is privatization a solution to Social Security, drilling for oil in Alaska a solution to the energy problem? His environmental and economic record is only slightly less abysmal than his military accomplishments.IMHO. **************************************************************** 05-30-05, 01:54 PM aminator2002 He did fire John Ashcroft. **************************************************************** 05-30-05, 10:09 PM newnickname Aschcroft’s resignation letter provides some talking points. This bit; ”Corporate integrity has been restored with the work of your corporate Fraud Task Force. As a result United States Markets have reinforced their position as the trusted allocators of the world’s capital resources.” must be some kind of ironic in-joke that we’re not privy to.
Governments of developed countries all over the world have claimed credit for violent crime rates hitting record lows, too. But it’s more a question of demographics; fewer young men, less violent crime.
Those aren’t achievements, really, but what about this: ”Americans have been spared the violence and savaging of terrorist attack on our soil since September 11, 2001.”
The Homeland Security program has seemed haphazard, with gaping holes, and also may be unconstitutional in parts, but what else would you expect of trying to terror-proof a nation the size of the US? There’s no denying, either, that there have been no US citizens killed, on US soil, since 9/11.
Does that count? **************************************************************** 05-30-05, 10:12 PM coldfuse He sure has stirred up a lot of thought and debate! **************************************************************** 05-31-05, 02:46 AM FredPuli He has, by deed and word, united the Muslim world. They all agree on one thing now, anyway, which they could not have done without his being President Wink
He can also say that he has encouraged those who want democracy. Hitherto the USA was seen as ignoring oppressive or non-democratic regimes unless those regimes posed a threat to the interests of the USA. He has seen to the overthrow of at least one regime that presented no threat to the USA at all. It may be that his rhetoric will encourage those in other countries to think that the USA will not be friendly or accommodating to their regimes too. **************************************************************** 05-31-05, 04:20 AM clarebear Abortion & Traditional Values
1. Banned Partial Birth Abortion — by far the most significant roll-back of abortion on demand since Roe v. Wade. 2. Reversed Clinton's move to strike Reagan's anti-abortion Mexico Policy. 3. By Executive Order (EO), reversed Clinton's policy of not requiring parental consent for abortions under the Medical Privacy Act. 4. By EO, prohibited federal funds for international family planning groups that provide abortions and related services. 5. Upheld the ban on abortions at military hospitals. 6. Made $33 million available for abstinence education programs in 2004. 7. Supports the Defense of Marriage Act — and a Constitutional amendment saying marriage is between one man and one woman. 8. Requires states to conduct criminal background checks on prospective foster and adoptive parents. 9. Requires districts to let students transfer out of dangerous schools. 10. Requires schools to have a zero-tolerance policy for classroom disruption (reintroducing discipline into classrooms). 11. Signed the Teacher Protection Act, which protects teachers from lawsuits related to student discipline. 12. Expanded the role of faith-based and community organizations in after-school programs.
Budget, Taxes & Economy
1. Signed two income tax cuts, one of which was the largest dollar-value tax cut in world history. 2. Supports permanent elimination of the death tax. 3. Turned around an inherited economy that was in recession, and deeply shocked as a result of the 9/11 attacks. 4. Is seeking legislation to amend the Constitution to give the president line-item veto authority. 5. In process of permanently eliminating IRS marriage penalty. 6. Increased small business incentives to expand and to hire new people. 7. Initiated discussion on privatizing Social Security and individual investment accounts. 8. Killed Clinton's "ergonomic" rules that OSHA was about to implement; rules would have shut down every home business in America. 9. Passed tough new laws to hold corporate criminals to account as a result of corporate scandals. 10. Reduced taxes on dividends and capital gains. 11. Signed trade promotion authority. 12. Reduced and is working to ultimately eliminate the estate tax for family farms and ranches. 13. Fight Europe's ban on importing biotech crops from the United States. 14. Exempt food from unilateral trade sanctions and embargoes. 15. Provided $20 million to states to help people with disabilities work from home. 16. Created a fund to encourage technologies that help the disabled. 17. Increased the annual contribution limit on Education IRA's from $500 to $2,000 per child. 18. Make permanent the $5,000 adoption tax credit and provide $1 billion over five years to increase the credit to $10,000. 19. Grant a complete tax exemption for prepaid or college tuition savings plans. 20. Reduced H1B visas from a high of 195,000 per year to 66,000 per year.
Character & Conduct as President
1. Changed the tone in the White House, restoring HONOR and DIGNITY to the presidency. 2. Has reintroduced the mention of God and faith into public discourse. 3. Handled himself with enormous courage, dignity, grace, determination, and leadership in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 hijackings and anthrax attacks. He almost single-handedly held this country together during those searing days:
* Just three days after the attacks, in his address at the National Cathedral, the President reassured the nation when he said: "War has been waged against us by stealth and deceit and murder. This nation is peaceful, but fierce when stirred to anger. This conflict was begun on the timing and terms of others. It will end in a way, and at an hour, of our choosing."
* On Friday, September 14, 2001, President Bush visited Ground Zero. Standing on a crushed and burned fire engine atop the smoldering pile at Ground Zero, he put his arm around a retired firefighter who had volunteered to help, and began speaking to the crowd. Rescue workers shouted that they could not hear him. Someone handed him a small American flag and bullhorn. The President spontaneously shouted: "I can hear you. The rest of the world hears you. And the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon." The crowd roared with cheers and chants of "USA! USA! USA!" Then he raised that American flag and rallied a nation:
Education & Employment Training
1. Signed the No Child Left Behind Act, delivering the most dramatic education reforms in a generation (challenging the soft bigotry of low expectations). The very liberal California Teachers union is currently running radio ads against the accountability provisions of this Act. 2. Announced "Jobs for the 21st Century," a comprehensive plan to better prepare workers for jobs in the new millennium by strengthening post-secondary education and job training, and by improving high school education. 3. Is working to provide vouchers to low-income students in persistently failing schools to help with costs of attending private schools. (Blocked in the Senate.) 4. Requires annual reading and math tests in grades three through eight. 5. Requires states to participate in the National Assessment of Education Progress, or an equivalent program, to establish a national benchmark for academic performance. 6. Requires school-by-school accountability report cards. 7. Established a $2.4 billion fund to help states implement teacher accountability systems. 8. Increased funding for the Troops-to-Teachers program, which recruits former military personnel to to become teachers.
Environment & Energy
1. Killed the Kyoto Global Warming Treaty. 2. Submitted a comprehensive Energy Plan (awaits Congressional action). The plan works to develop cleaner technology, produce more natural gas here at home, make America less dependent on foreign sources of energy, improve national grid, etc. 3. Established a $10 million grant program to promote private conservation initiatives. 4. Significantly eased field-testing controls of genetically engineered crops. 5. Changed parts of the Forestry Management Act to allow necessary cleanup of the national forests in order to reduce fire danger. 6. Part of national forests cleanup: Restricted judicial challenges (based on the Endangered Species Act and other challenges), and removed the need for an Environmental Impact Statement before removing fuels/logging to reduce fire danger. 7. Killed Clinton's CO2 rules that were choking off all of the electricity surplus to California. 8. Provided matching grants for state programs that help private landowners protect rare species.
Defense & Foreign Policy
1. Successfully executed two wars in the aftermath of 9/11/01: Afghanistan and Iraq. 50 million people who had lived under tyrannical regimes now live in freedom. 2. Saddam Hussein is now in prison. His two murderous sons are dead. All but a handful of the regime's senior members were killed or captured. 3. Leader by leader and member by member, al Qaida is being hunted down in dozens of countries around the world. Of the senior al Qaida leaders, operational managers, and key facilitators the U.S. Government has been tracking, nearly two-thirds have been taken into custody or killed. The detentions or deaths of senior al Qaida leaders, including Khalid Shaykh Muhammad, the mastermind of 9/11, and Muhammad Atef, Osama bin Laden's second-in-command until his death in late 2001, have been important in the War on Terror. 4. Disarmed Libya of its chemical, nuclear and biological WMD's without bribes or bloodshed. 5. Continues to execute the War On Terror, getting worldwide cooperation to track funds/terrorists. Has cut off much of the terrorists' funding, and captured or killed many key leaders of the al Qaeda network. 6. Initiated a comprehensive review of our military, which was completed just prior to 9/11/01, and which accurately reported that ASYMMETRICAL WARFARE capabilities were critical in the 21st Century. 7. Killed the old US/Soviet Union ABM Treaty that was preventing the U.S. from deploying our ABM defenses. 8. Has been one of the strongest, if not THE strongest friend Israel has ever hand in the U.S. presidency. 9. Part of the coalition for an Israeli/Palestinian "Roadmap to Peace," along with Great Britain, Russia and the EU. 10. Pushed through THREE raises for our military. Increased military pay by more than $1 billion a year. 11. Signed the LARGEST nuclear arms reduction in world history with Russia. 12. Started withdrawing our troops from Bosnia, and has announced withdrawal of our troops from Germany and the Korean DMZ. 13. Prohibited putting U.S. troops under U.N. command. 14. Paid back UN dues only in return for reforms and reduction of U.S. share of the costs. 15. Earmarked at least 20 percent of the Defense procurement budget for next-generation weaponry. 16. Increased defense research and development spending by at least $20 billion from fiscal 2002 to 2006. 17. Ordered a comprehensive review of military weapons and strategy. 18. Ordered a review of overseas deployments. 19. Ordered renovation of military housing. The military has already upgraded about 10 percent of its inventory and expects to modernize 76,000 additional homes this year. 20. Is working to tighten restrictions on military-technology exports. 21. Brought back our EP-3 intel plane and crew from China without any bribes or bloodshed.
Globalization & Internationalism
1. Challenged the United Nations to live up to their responsibilities and not become another League of Nations (in other words, showed the UN to be completely irrelevant). 2. Killed U.S. involvement in the International Criminal Court. 3. Told the United Nations we weren't interested in their plans for gun control (i.e., the International Ban on Small Arms Trafficking Treaty).* 4. The only President since the founding of the UN to essentially tell that organization it is irrelevant. He said: "The conduct of the Iraqi regime is a threat to the authority of the United Nations, and a threat to peace. Iraq has answered a decade of UN demands with a decade of defiance. All the world now faces a test, and the United Nations a difficult and defining moment. Are Security Council resolutions to be honored and enforced, or cast aside without consequence? Will the United Nations serve the purpose of its founding, or will it be irrelevant?" We all know the outcome and the answer. 5. Told the Congress and the world, "America will never seek a permission slip to defend the security of our country."
Government Reform
1. Improved government efficiency by putting hundreds of thousands of jobs put up for bid. This weakens public-sector unions and cuts undeserved pay raises. 2. Initiated review of all federal agencies with the goal of eliminating federal jobs (completed September 2003) in an effort to reduce the size of the federal government while increasing private sector jobs. 3. Led the most extensive reorganization the Federal bureaucracy in over 50 years: After 9/11, condensed 20+ overlapping agencies and their intelligence sectors into one agency, the Department of Homeland Security.* 4. Ordered each agency to draft a five-year plan to restructure itself, with fewer managers. 5. Converted federal service contracts to performance-based contracts wherever possible so that the contractor has measurable performance goals.
Health
1. Strengthen the National Health Service Corps to put more physicians in the neediest areas, and make its scholarship funds tax-free. 2. Double the research budget of the National Institutes of Health. 3. Signed Medicare Reform, which includes:
* A 10-year privatization option. * Prescription drug benefits: Prior to this reform, Medicare paid for extended hospital stays for ulcer surgery, for example, at a cost of about $28,000 per patient. Yet Medicare would not pay for the drugs that eliminate the cause of most ulcers, drugs that cost about $500 a year. Now, drug coverage under Medicare will allow seniors to replace more expensive surgeries and hospitalizations with less expensive prescription medicine. * More health care choices: As President Bush stated, "…when seniors have the ability to make choices, health care plans within Medicare will have to compete for their business by offering higher quality service [at lower cost]. For the seniors of America, more choices and more control will mean better health care. These are the kinds of health care options we give to the members of Congress and federal employees. What's good for members of Congress is also good for seniors. * New Health Savings Accounts: Effective January 1, 2004, Americans can set aside up to $4,500 every year, tax free, to save for medical expenses. Depending on your tax bracket, that means you'll save between 10 to 35 percent on any costs covered by money in your account. Every year, the money not spent would stay in the account and gain interest tax-free, just like an IRA. These accounts will be good for small business owners, and employees. More businesses can focus on covering workers for major medical problems, such as hospitalization for an injury or illness. At the same time, employees and their families will use these accounts to cover doctors visits, or lab tests, or other smaller costs. Some employers will contribute to employee health accounts. This will help more American families get the health care they need at the price they can afford.
1. *See Government Reform above. Under President Bush's leadership, America has made an unprecedented commitment to homeland security. 2. Has CONSTRUCTION in process on the first 10 ABM silos in Alaska so that America will have a defense against North Korean nukes. Has ordered national and theater ballistic missile defenses to be deployed by 2004. 3. Announced a 9.7% increase in government-wide homeland security funding in his FY 2005 budget, nearly tripling the FY 2001 levels (excluding the Department of Defense and Project BioShield). 4. Before DHS was created, there were inspectors from three different agencies of the Federal Government and Border Patrol officers protecting our borders. Through DHS, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) now consolidates all border activities into a single agency to create "one face at the border." This not only better secures the borders of the United States, but it also eliminates many of the inefficiencies that occurred under the old system. With over 18,000 CBP inspectors and 11,000 Border Patrol agents, CBP has 29,000 uniformed officers on our borders. 5. The Border Patrol is continuing installation of monitoring devices along the borders to detect illegal activity. 6. Launched Operation Tarmac to investigate businesses and workers in the secure areas of domestic airports and ensure immigration law compliance. Since 9/11, DHS has audited 3,640 businesses, examined 259,037 employee records, arrested 1,030 unauthorized workers, and participated in the criminal indictment of 774 individuals. 7. Since September 11, 2001, the Coast Guard has conducted more than 124,000 port security patrols, 13,000 air patrols, boarded more than 92,000 vessels, interdicted over 14,000 individuals attempting to enter the United States illegally, and created and maintained more than 90 Maritime Security Zones. 8. Announced the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS), an internet-based system that is improving America's ability to track and monitor foreign students and exchange visitors. Over 870,000 students are registered in SEVIS. Of 285 completed field investigations, 71 aliens were arrested. 9. This week, the US-VISIT program began to digitally collect biometric identifiers to record the entry and exit of aliens who travel into the U.S on a visa. Together with the standard information, this new program will confirm compliance with visa and immigration policies. 10. Eliminated INS bureaucratic redundancies and lack of accountability. 11. Split the Immigration and Naturalization Service into two agencies: one to protect the border and interior, the other to deal with naturalization. 12. Signed the workplace verification bill to prevent hiring of illegal aliens. 13. Established a six-month deadline for processing immigration applications. 14. Information regarding nearly 100% of all containerized cargo is carefully screened by DHS before it arrives in the United States. Higher risk shipments are physically inspected for terrorist weapons and contraband prior to being released from the port of entry. Advanced technologies are being deployed to identify warning signs of chemical, biological, or radiological attacks. Since September 11, 2001, hundreds of thousands of first responders across America have been trained to recognize and respond to the effects of a WMD attack.
Judiciary & Tort Reform
1. Is urging federal liability reform to eliminate frivolous lawsuits. 2. Killed the liberal ABA's unconstitutional role in vetting federal judges. The Senate is supposed to advise and consent, not the ABA. 3. Is nominating strong, conservative judges to the judiciary. 4. Supports class action reform bill which limits lawyer fees so that more settlement money goes to victims.
Politics
1. His leadership resulted in Republican gains in the House and Senate, solidifying Republican control of both houses of Congress and the presidency. 2. Signed an EO enforcing the Supreme Court's Beck decision regarding union dues being used for political campaigns against individual's wishes.
Second Amendment
1. Ordered Attorney General Ashcroft to formally notify the Supreme Court that the OFFICIAL U.S. government position on the 2nd Amendment is that it supports INDIVIDUAL rights to own firearms, and is NOT a Leftist-imagined "collective" right. 2. Signed TWO bills into law that arm our pilots with handguns in the cockpit. 3. Currently pushing for full immunity from lawsuits for our national gun manufacturers. 4. *See Globalization & Internationalism.
Traditional Values, Compassion & Volunteerism
1. Endorses and promotes "The Responsibility Era." President Bush often speaks of the necessity of personal responsibility and civic volunteerism. He said, "In a compassionate society, people respect one another and take responsibility for the decisions they make in life. My hope is to change the culture from one that has said, if it feels good, do it; if you've got a problem, blame somebody else — to one in which every single American understands that he or she is responsible for the decisions that you make; you're responsible for loving your children with all your heart and all your soul; you're responsible for being involved with the quality of the education of your children; you're responsible for making sure the community in which you live is safe; you're responsible for loving your neighbor, just like you would like to be loved yourself." 2. Started the USA Freedom Corps, the most comprehensive clearinghouse of volunteer opportunities ever offered. For the first time in history, Americans can enter geographic information about where they want to get involved, such as state or zip code, as well as areas of interest ranging from education to the environment, and they can access volunteer opportunities offered by more than 50,000 organizations across the country and around the world. 3. Established the The White House Office and the Centers for the Faith-Based and Community Initiative — located in seven Federal agencies. The faith-based initiative supports the essential work of these important organizations. The goal is to make sure that grassroots leaders can compete on an equal footing for federal dollars, receive greater private support, and face fewer bureaucratic barriers. Work focuses on at-risk youth, ex-offenders, the homeless and hungry, substance abusers, those with HIV/AIDS, and welfare-to-work families. 4. The White House released a guidebook fully describing the Administration's belief that faith-based groups have a Constitutionally-protected right to maintain their religious identity through hiring — even when Federal funds are involved. 5. Issued an EO implementing the Supreme Court's Olmstead ruling, which requires moving disabled people from institutions to community-based facilities when possible. 6. Increased funding for low-interest loan programs to help people with disabilities purchase devices to assist them. 7. Revised the Department of Housing and Urban Development's Section 8 rent subsidies to disabled people, permitting them to use up to a year's worth of vouchers to finance down payments on homes. HUD has started pilot programs in 11 states. 8. Committed US funds to purchase medicine for millions of men, women and children now suffering with AIDS in Africa. 9. Heeding the words of our own Declaration of Independence, the president laid out the non-negotiable demands of human dignity for all people everywhere. On January 29, 2002, he said, "No nation owns these aspirations, and no nation is exempt from them. We have no intention of imposing our culture. But America will always stand firm for the non-negotiable demands of human dignity." As stated by the President, they are a virtual manifesto of conservative principles:
* Equal Justice * Freedom of Speech * Limited Government Power * Private Property Rights * Religious Tolerance * Respect for Women * Rule of Law
*Disclaimer: The views here are not necessarily those of the AP staff and/or of clarebear. This thread just made me curious and I looked up some good things that Bush has done. Smile **************************************************************** 05-31-05, 09:34 AM newnickname I think we need to filter the list a little.
Some are undoubtedly good things (Requires states to conduct criminal background checks on prospective foster and adoptive parents). This wasn't done already?
But others are contentious (Killed the Kyoto Global Warming Treaty or Is nominating strong, conservative judges to the judiciary). Some are bad things dressed up in doublespeak (Changed parts of the Forestry Management Act to allow necessary cleanup of the national forests in order to reduce fire danger [='allowed more logging']).
Many are debatable or subjective (Changed the tone in the White House, restoring HONOR and DIGNITY to the presidency.)
Some seem to be just business as usual (Since September 11, 2001, the Coast Guard has conducted more than 124,000 port security patrols, 13,000 air patrols, boarded more than 92,000 vessels, interdicted over 14,000 individuals...).
I like Issued an EO implementing the Supreme Court's Olmstead ruling, which requires moving disabled people from institutions to community-based facilities when possible.. About time, isn't it?
I don't think much of Heeding the words of our own Declaration of Independence, the president laid out the non-negotiable demands of human dignity for all people everywhere.. Tell that to the people at Guantanamo and other US prisons.
Still, it's an interesting list, Clarebear, thanks. **************************************************************** 05-31-05, 09:55 AM coldfuse
quote: Originally posted by newnickname: Some are undoubtedly good things (Requires states to conduct criminal background checks on prospective foster and adoptive parents). This wasn't done already?...
The Adoption and Safe Families Act was passed in 1997.
However, HR 4504 "eliminates the ability of states to opt out from the background checks for prospective adoptive and foster parents." **************************************************************** 05-31-05, 10:13 AM newnickname Hmmm...
And "While H.R. 4504 requires criminal background checks on all prospective foster and adoptive parents, it only disqualifies those who are convicted from receiving federal Title IV-E payments. A state may choose to use state funds to provide payments to foster or adoptive parents convicted of the specified crimes." and "[H.R.4504] would eliminate the opt out for all states except the nine states that already had opted out, as of September 30, 2004. These nine states are given two additional years to conform fully to the specific criminal record check requirements in Title IV-E. in current law. The nine states are Arizona, California, Idaho, Massachusetts, Nebraska, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Oregon." http://www.cdfactioncouncil.org/childwelfare/HR_4504_ICPC_changes.pdf(PDF)
How significant is this "requires states to conduct criminal background checks"? What's the story behind it? Were states previously handing kids over to biker gangs? Can they still do so, except without federal money? **************************************************************** 05-31-05, 10:01 PM newnickname A little investigation takes some of the sheen off that ”EO implementing the Supreme Court's Olmstead ruling, which requires moving disabled people from institutions to community-based facilities when possible..”
I seems to have been basically a "get on with it" document (actually a demand for recommendations), for something which had bipartisan support anyway. The EO doesn't allocate any new funds, which would have helped. Commmunity care might be cheaper in the long run, but some extra cash is needed to implement the change-over.
'Olmstead' has still not been implemented. Governer Schwarzenegger, for example, is in jeopardy of non-compliance with the Supreme Court’s ruling.
Still, there seem to be some solid achievements in that list. Which are they? **************************************************************** 05-31-05, 10:34 PM AMoore
quote: Originally posted by newnickname: A little investigation takes some of the sheen off that ”EO implementing the Supreme Court's Olmstead ruling, which requires moving disabled people from institutions to community-based facilities when possible..”
I seems to have been basically a "get on with it" document (actually a demand for recommendations), for something which had bipartisan support anyway. The EO doesn't allocate any new funds, which would have helped. Commmunity care might be cheaper in the long run, but some extra cash is needed to implement the change-over.
Still, there seem to be some solid achievements in that list. Which are they?
I'm not surprised if California's being a bit slow to implement this. It sounds a great deal like what happened when Reagan closed our state mental hospitals. We didn't have much of a problem with homelessness until then. There was talk of "halfway houses" but no funding, so the mentally ill all wound up on the streets.
Alan Moore **************************************************************** 06-01-05, 05:19 PM Rakuchild The ones who didn't end up on the streets homeless wound up in prison where they were put back on their meds. The ones that were incarcerated where I worked were very zombie-like. Frown
The only thing I can think of is he's raised voter awareness... **************************************************************** 06-01-05, 09:41 PM GarColga
quote: Originally posted by clarebear:
Defense & Foreign Policy
1. Successfully executed two wars in the aftermath of 9/11/01: Afghanistan and Iraq. 50 million people who had lived under tyrannical regimes now live in freedom.
Is this a joke? Successfully!!?? **************************************************************** 06-01-05, 09:51 PM newnickname Yes, that list does need to be whittled down a little. I'm working on it. **************************************************************** 06-01-05, 10:37 PM AMoore
quote: Originally posted by clarebear: Abortion & Traditional Values Budget, Taxes & Economy Character & Conduct as President Education & Employment Training Environment & Energy Defense & Foreign Policy Globalization & Internationalism Government Reform Health Homeland Security, Border Enforcement & Immigration Judiciary & Tort Reform Politics Second Amendment Traditional Values, Compassion & Volunteerism
I've deleted the specifics for brevity, anyone who cares to can reread the original post.
Abortion and "traditional values." Womens rights have been sharply curtailed in these matters, as has individual freedom generally, a reversal of the historical trend, and hardly a good thing.
Budget, taxes and the economy. Bush has gone from almost unprecedented surplusses to absolutely unprecedented deficits. His tax cuts have benefitted none but the wealthy, who have not used their gains to put ordinary people back to work. Eventually, either taxes will increase or government services will be reduced, as more and more of the governments income goes to debt service. This is a good thing only if you own a large slice of the debt, and don't benefit from government services.
Character and conduct as president. Knowingly deluded the American people about the decision to invade Iraq, presenting false evidence and forged documents before the UN in the effort to justify his decision, made in secret, long before there was any public debate on the subject. As dishonest in this regard as Lyndon Johnson was with respect to Vietnam, but less honorable, as Johnson did not try to delude the rest of the world into joining his crusade. As for decency, the use of profanity in public, on the Senate floor by the VP suggests a somewhat selective approach to this topic.
Education and Employment Training. "No child left behind" has robbed local districts of autonomy and taken valuable resources away from education. I don't know of any ne employment training provided by this administration, but since total employment has fallen almost continuously throughout his term, and since there has been a shift from higher-paying to lower-paying jobs for those who are employed, this would appear to be some sort of cruel joke.
Environment and Energy. Has permitted electrical generating plants to increase mercury emmissions with consequent adverse long term public health consequences. Has declined to implement the policies negotiated at Kyoto, or any other policies, to attempt to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, with consequent adverse long-term effects on food production, public health, and even national security.
Defence and Foreigh policy. Has squandered our reserves of military strength in a pointless invasion, to the point that the military is no longer able to recruit as many people as it needs, and this despite the poor job situation already noted! Has offended out allies to the point that they remain (quite properly) suspicious of our intentions, and those political leaders who value their careers are compelled to distance themselves from us. Has strengthened those who are our most likely adversaries at the expense of ourselves and our potential friends and has pursued policies whose effect has been to strengthen our only actual active adversary.
Globalization and Internationalization. Has continued his predecessor's position of pursuing policies favorable to firms that shift work abroad, at the expense of American working people, but often under conditions so unfavorable to workers in those places abroad as to prevent their deriving any benefit from the transfer.
Government Reform. He has pursued expanded police powers for various agencies, and continues to do so. Government agencies acting to protect the interests of the American People have been weakened.
Health. He has opposed basic research into the utilization of stem cells for the treatment of disease and injury, one of the most potentially fruitful areas of current research. He has opposed abortion regardless of the health consequences, and has opposed public health education in the areas of sex and childbirth.
Homeland security, Border enforcement and immigration. He has pursued policies which have strengthened international terrorism, increasing the numbers of such incidents to unprecedented levels, after many years of decline. Border enforcement remains unchanged except in the limited area of airline passengers, where his policies have resulted in massive inconvenience to the public in order to prevent completely harmless people from coming to the US quite legally. Overall levels of immigration remain high, and only the job situation has resulted in any of the temporary immigrants, such as those on the H1B visas, leaving.
Judiciary and Tort reform. Rather than making reforms to limit frivolous lawsuits, he has pursued reforms that prevent large awards, even when they are justified, and prevent victims from bringing suit when they don't discover how they came to be injured soon enough. This is of benefit to business, particularly the insurance business, but of no benefit to the public.
Politics. He has polarized the country to a degree not seen since the Viet Nam war. He continues to pursue the appointment of ill-qualified people to posts of high responsibility, such as Bolton as ambassador to the UN, or Wolfowitz to the World Bank. I cannot recall a period when voting in the houses of Congress has been so clearly along party lines as the present.
Second Amendment. I haven't seen any action from the president on this issue. I will note that he is presently looking for some changes to the Patriot act that would, in effect, remove much of our protection against unreasonable search and siezure gaurenteed in the first amendment. I note that he wants to appoint a bunch of judges who will probably support him in this.
Traditional values, compassion and volunteerism. He has approved policies of detention without due process, torture, leading to death in some instances, has unleashed untold destruction on innocents, and has not, so far as I can tell, persuaded anyone to volunteer for anything. Indeed, volunteers for our all volunteer military are now in short supply...
Alan Moore **************************************************************** 06-01-05, 11:24 PM honilov He has made stores make a big profit by selling duct tape. **************************************************************** 06-02-05, 07:01 PM Scotty Very good Clarebear , you have the Bush haters scrambling to try to whittle down your list, It is funny to see. **************************************************************** 06-02-05, 10:12 PM DvdGStwrt
quote: Originally posted by newnickname: As the Bush presidency winds down, it’s maybe time to be charitable. What good things has he done?
Usually I am charitable to a fault. **************************************************************** 06-03-05, 11:26 AM coldfuse If nothing, the guy has been busy!
Have we really shifted to lower paying jobs? Around here, the jobs we have lost overseas were relatively low paying and on balance seem to have replaced by higher paying jobs.
From the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Employment Cost Index during the present administration (June 1989 = 100):
Civilian Workers, March 2001: 152.3 Civilian Workers, March 2005: 176.7 Civilian Workers, Increase: 16.02%
Government Workers, March 2001: 150.2 Government Workers, March 2005: 174.3 Government Workers, Increase: 16.05%
White Collar Occupations, March 2001: 155.6 White Collar Occupations, March 2005: 180.3 White Collar Occupations, Increase: 15.87%
Blue Collar Occupations, March 2001: 148.1 Blue Collar Occupations, March 2005: 172.0 Blue Collar Occupations, Increase: 16.14%
Maybe I've missed something. There are some rather exhaustive figures here.
Note: During the same period, the Consumer Price Index has risen by 9.7%. **************************************************************** 06-03-05, 11:57 AM coldfuse Employment
1993 - 194,838 1994 - 196,814 1995 - 198,584 1996 - 200,591 1997 - 203,133 1998 - 205,220 1999 - 207,753 2000 - 212,577 2001 - 215,092 2002 - 217,570 2003 - 221,168 2004 - 223,357 **************************************************************** 06-03-05, 02:48 PM DorianGreyed I wonder how many of those jobs in the last few years were replacements for Guard and Reserve people who were called to active duty. **************************************************************** 06-03-05, 03:17 PM coldfuse This is civilian employment; if a reservist is called up and someone takes his/her place, the net effect should be zero. If someone doesn't take his/her place, I don't know if the numbers are skewed downward or not. Companies here tend to hold the jobs for people called to active duty.
Good point, though. The "weekend warrior" is becoming a thing of the past.
A relevant but dated article here. **************************************************************** 06-03-05, 03:36 PM frankvan
quote: Originally posted by Scotty: Very good Clarebear , you have the Bush haters scrambling to try to whittle down your list, It is funny to see.
I find it even funnier to see the paucity or real positive results the Bush lovers are coming forward with. Roll Eyes **************************************************************** 06-03-05, 03:43 PM Rakuchild -snip-______________________________________ Education and Employment Training. "No child left behind" has robbed local districts of autonomy and taken valuable resources away from education. I don't know of any ne employment training provided by this administration, but since total employment has fallen almost continuously throughout his term, and since there has been a shift from higher-paying to lower-paying jobs for those who are employed, this would appear to be some sort of cruel joke. _______________________________________________
New employment training is available. Contact your local armed forces recruiter.
The shift is this area has been to lower-paying jobs and people aren't getting raises anymore. Also when someone leaves their position isn't filled if the work can be shifted to others.
I went back to work for a little less money and half the hours. My neighbor, who's job is in India now, must work more hours because though she found a job comparable in skills to the one she lost, it pays much less. This leaves her less time to raise her children. Frown **************************************************************** 06-03-05, 06:14 PM coldfuse
quote: Originally posted by frankvan: I find it even funnier to see the paucity or real positive results the Bush lovers are coming forward with. Roll Eyes
Maybe that's because there are no Bush lovers - only Bush haters!
The list provided by clare, which I believe is posted at a Cal Poly website, is darned good stuff if you really love Bush. If you don't like Bush, you probably don't think much of the list.
Ain't politics fun?
----
PS: Raku, hope luck up your way turns for the better. **************************************************************** 06-03-05, 07:09 PM newnickname
quote: The list provided by clare... ...is darned good stuff if you really love Bush.
Even if you love Bush, you'd probably want to take a second look at some of the line items. Take 'supports permanent elimination of the death tax', for example.
Firstly, this isn't an achievement, it's an intention.
Secondly, it's (like much of the list) misleadingly written; "death tax" - that can't be a good thing, can it?
Actually, it's called the Inheritance Tax and (thirdly) 'it is axiomatic that those with the most assets profit the most from any across-the-board tax cut. But because only the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans face any inheritance tax liability at all, the beneficiaries of its repeal would be an especially elite class.' http://www.freep.com/news/metro/ndicker7_20000807.htm
What I'd like to do is identify those items on the list that don't crumble to dust in your hands when pulled out for a closer look. Any suggestions? **************************************************************** 06-03-05, 08:28 PM newnickname
quote:
Information regarding nearly 100% of all containerized cargo is carefully screened by DHS before it arrives in the United States. Higher risk shipments are physically inspected for terrorist weapons and contraband prior to being released from the port of entry. Advanced technologies are being deployed to identify warning signs of chemical, biological, or radiological attacks.
This one is wrong, no matter what your partisan leanings. (Although, if you read it closely, it doesn't actually tell any outright lies.)
'Following a 20-month investigation that took U.S. Senate and House of Representatives officials to shipping ports from Rotterdam to Singapore, officials found that only a tiny portion of the containers destined for U.S. ports were being inspected.
"Only one-third of one percent of all containers" were inspected at 36 foreign ports that participate in a Container Security Initiative that the United States launched in 2002, according to a congressional aide who briefed reporters.
Of cargo deemed "high-risk," only 17.5 percent was inspected before leaving overseas ports, the congressional findings said...
...GAO investigators said Customs and Border Protection "has not established minimum technical requirements" for inspection and radiation detection equipment used in the Container Security Initiative.'news.yahoo.com
The system seems to depend on the "carrier's bill of lading/manifest" - which can be pretty vague. As long as the terrorists don't do something stupid like putting down frozen trout as cargo for an unrefrigerated container, there isn't much of a defence.
I can't find up-to-date figures on containers inspected in US ports (although in some scenarios that's kind of late for inspection anyway). DorianGreyed,
Methinks I owe methos a thank you for setting the numbers straight - I can't even blame this one on Jack Daniels!
The employment figures have been relatively lackluster even if an inherited recession is figured in.
Two years into their administrations, Bush's and Clinton's employment growth numbers (2002 - 2004 vs. 1994 - 1996) are similar. It'd be nice if the growth numbers for the next four years are similar to those of Clinton's second term. ********************************************************************* 06-05-05, 01:25 PM DorianGreyed "Draw a line under the top 0.1 percent of income earners - the top one-thousandth. Above that line are about 145,000 taxpayers, each with at least $1.6 million in income and often much more. "The average income for the top 0.1 percent was $3 million in 2002, the latest year for which averages are available. That number is two and a half times the $1.2 million, adjusted for inflation, that group reported in 1980. No other income group rose nearly as fast. "The share of the nation's income earned by those in this uppermost category has more than doubled since 1980, to 7.4 percent in 2002. The share of income earned by the rest of the top 10 percent rose far less, and the share earned by the bottom 90 percent fell." - NYTimes.com
Where the Times got the figures . **************************************************************** 06-05-05, 01:45 PM newnickname The Times article is available without registration here - www.truthout.org.
I don't think (as Supreme Panjandrum of this thread Smile) we can allow this as a criticism of George W. in particular. Under any president, the rich find ways to avoid paying tax, and tend to benefit more from tax cuts - just because they have so much already. The article also points out that some low income families (less than $40,000) no longer pay income tax.
It's interesting to see the identification of a new class - the hyper-rich. I read elsewhere that these people don't actually care much about taxes. They can afford the advice that allows them to avoid taxes. In any case, they're living off the interest on the interest on their capital. They have "**** you" money - pretty much free of financial concern, and are not necessarily Republicans. It's the paupers with just a couple of million that sweat over tax-breaks and government spending.
The article also says ""As long as people think they have a chance of getting to the top, they just don't care how rich the rich are."
While people (everything else being equal) tend to vote according to how well-off they think they are, it seems that presidents and prime-ministers are not really remembered for economic stewardship, unless they make a really spectacular messs of it. **************************************************************** 06-05-05, 04:50 PM coldfuse Sort of an emotional aside: does it bother anyone that some people earn nearly unfathomable sums of money? Does it make a difference if they are businessmen, athletes, or movie stars? If they are CEO of a public company or a private entrepreneur? **************************************************************** 06-05-05, 06:33 PM Scotty
quote: Sort of an emotional aside: does it bother anyone that some people earn nearly unfathomable sums of money? Does it make a difference if they are businessmen, athletes, or movie stars? If they are CEO of a public company or a private entrepreneur?
It doesn't bother me one bit ,isn't that what capitalism is all about? If you have what it takes ,more power to you. **************************************************************** 06-05-05, 10:35 PM Rakuchild I believe it bothers me more that they work toward not paying taxes and that "leaders" like Bushie help them avoid paying anything like a fair share. That goes for individuals and corporations who make deals and ask for tax abatements before they will consider setting up shop in a US city.
I would like to believe that proud, wealthy Americans would have no problem paying taxes that would be invested in our country's education, infrastructure, Social Security, etc.
In the early 20th century, Andrew Carnegie made wads of money that in those days was unbelievable. But many of us recognize his name because he funded so many libraries across the country. Even the little podunk town I grew up in had a library thanks to him. Now, how many towns have a Bill Gates computer center free and open to the public? (Oh, wait, the computers are in the Carnegie libraries and the are paid for out of the libraries' budgets. Smile )
What have the ultrawealthy done to be well thought of and remembered these days? How do they invest in the country that made them rich? All they do is buy government and turn it into organized crime. **************************************************************** 06-05-05, 11:29 PM newnickname Going by the higher profile super-rich, I'm concerned about their mental health. (Although Bill Gates seems to present as a level-headed guy.) Does having that amount of money unbalance you, or do you have to have some kind of kink to be able to accumulate that amount in the first place?
I feel bad if I spend $10 on some kitchen gadget which I subsequently never use. It's not the waste of money, it's the waste. These people have whole houses they don't need. It can't be good for you. There's something pathetic about people who have more money than they can actually keep track of scrabbling around trying to prevent any of it 'trickling down'.
I won't die lonely I'll have it all prearranged A grave that's deep and wide enough For me and all my mountains o' things - Tracy Chapman **************************************************************** 06-06-05, 01:03 AM AMoore
quote: Originally posted by newnickname: The Times article is available without registration here - www.truthout.org. I don't think (as Supreme Panjandrum of this thread Smile) we can allow this as a criticism of George W. in particular. Under any president, the rich find ways to avoid paying tax, and tend to benefit more from tax cuts - just because they have so much already. The article also points out that some low income families (less than $40,000) no longer pay income tax.
- snip -
Interestingly, however, when the income tax was first introduced here, only the top-earning third of the earning populace was subject. Two thirds had incomes low enough that they were not required to pay any income tax at all.
Over time, the income tax burden has shifted from those with the highest incomes to those with middle incomes.
Alan Moore **************************************************************** 06-06-05, 01:25 AM newnickname Getting back on track, I notice that I did miss something from that list; Disarmed Libya of its chemical, nuclear and biological WMD's without bribes or bloodshed.
The 'without bribes or bloodshed' is questionable - Libya got the dropping of all US sanctions, and promises of US protection (although are any international deals promised by George W. worth anything?) in return. If Libya's desire to normalise its relations with the world was because of the war in Iraq (and not part of a process already ongoing, which included paying compensation for the Lockerbie bombing), then it hardly came 'without bloodshed' either.
'Disarmed' is a bit strong, too. Libya's WMD program was largely undeveloped . It's more that they stopped the development, rather than disarmed anything.
Nevertheless, the timing is suggestive. Coincident with the invasion of Iraq, Gadhafi wanted a deal on Libya's giving up WMD development in return for normal trading rights.
Is that a 'good thing', or is outweighed by the death, destruction and instability the invasion of (WMD-less) Iraq has caused? **************************************************************** 06-06-05, 08:30 AM methos
quote: Originally posted by Rakuchild: Now, how many towns have a Bill Gates computer center free and open to the public?
11,000 of them in the US. Ok, maybe they aren't named that, but that's the number of libraries that have received computers (since 1997) from the US part of the program below (so that doesn't seem to include the donations to Native American communities and certainly doesn't include the donations in other countries).
The Global Libraries program seeks to increase access to technology for residents in low-income and disadvantaged communities through partnerships with public libraries in the United States and throughout the world. The Global Libraries program consists of three program areas: U.S. Library Program, Native American Access to Technology and International Library Initiatives. **************************************************************** 06-06-05, 10:15 AM newnicknameBill Gates political donations:
$47,200 Republican $32,750 Democrat $71,500 Other
Total - $151,450 (Since 1986 - I think)
Bill Gates charity donations (adjusted to discount money for causes that we wouldn't normally call 'chaitable', though the taxman might) total: 1.847 billion dollars
”Earlier this year, an online magazine called Slate published a list of the top sixty donors to charity in the United States. I actually first read about the list in a column by Arianna Huffington, who criticized the list for counting all charitable dollars the same. Arianna said she was appalled to find the twenty-million-dollar donation of winemaker Robert G. Mondavi for the American Center for Wine, Food and the Arts in his hometown of Napa, only a click away from a thirty-million-dollar gift to a scholarship fund for low income children. She writes: "This overemphasis on raw dollars implies some equivalence between these acts of generosity, when we know that one gift advances the giver's personal interests and the other addresses a pressing social need." Arianna goes on to propose an adjustment scheme, to adjust philanthropic dollars up or downward. For example: "Minus 10 percent for investing in buildings, not people・inus another 11 percent if the receiving institution's endowment fund is bigger than the GDP of the poorest 100 countries, and another 15% if the gift goes to a building named after you or a loved one." OK. So how, you may wonder, did Bill and Melinda Gates stack up compared with other big donors to charity, using this readjusted formula proposed by Arianna Huffington? The answer is that there is simply no comparison. Bill and Melinda's adjusted donation was 1.847 billion dollars, more than 15 times higher than the #2 donors, Warren and Susan Buffet, and more than of all the other 59 donors on the list combined! Wow. Let me just say that again. 1.847 billion dollars; more than the sum of the next 59 most generous donors.” Will Bill Gates Go To Heaven **************************************************************** 06-06-05, 01:55 PM Rakuchild That was a very fun article, Newnickname. Thanks. Smile
I wonder- charitable giving is tax deductible so by giving money to foundations (and setting up the foundations to distribute funds)one is actually able to sort of control the way their "tax dollars" are spent. I wonder what the world would be like if everyone was required to allocate their "tax dollars" to charity, educational funds or social programs? Or if we could check boxes on our tax forms specifying exactly where our tax dollars were to go. What would people choose to fund? Smile **************************************************************** 06-06-05, 11:05 PM AMoore
quote: Originally posted by newnickname: Getting back on track, I notice that I did miss something from that list; Disarmed Libya of its chemical, nuclear and biological WMD's without bribes or bloodshed.
The 'without bribes or bloodshed' is questionable - Libya got the dropping of all US sanctions, and promises of US protection (although are any international deals promised by George W. worth anything?) in return. If Libya's desire to normalise its relations with the world was because of the war in Iraq (and not part of a process already ongoing, which included paying compensation for the Lockerbie bombing), then it hardly came 'without bloodshed' either.
'Disarmed' is a bit strong, too. Libya's WMD program was largely undeveloped. It's more that they stopped the development, rather than disarmed anything.
Nevertheless, the timing is suggestive. Coincident with the invasion of Iraq, Gadhafi wanted a deal on Libya's giving up WMD development in return for normal trading rights.
Is that a 'good thing', or is outweighed by the death, destruction and instability the invasion of (WMD-less) Iraq has caused?
Actually, this was done without the assistance of the US. The European negotiating team was fortunately able to convince the US that the negotiations would fail (as they did in Korea) if Mr. Bolton was included in the team.
Bush continues to back Bolton as a diplomat, so this particular victory for the forces of peace and reason cannot be attributed to Bush in any way.
Alan Moore **************************************************************** 06-07-05, 12:13 AM newnickname But... Newsmax said that Libya caved because Bolton talked tough. Mind you, Newsmax also said that "So far, the Bush administration has made significant progress with Syria, Libya and Iran. Cuba and North Korea remain hostile to American efforts."
(And have you seen those ads on the Newsmax page? What kind of audience does Newsmax have? Fighting techniques, stop hair loss, buy gold and get rich, but Iraqi dinars and get rich, more fighting techniques... Roll Eyes)
The Newsweek scoop was:
'On several occasions, America's closest ally in the war on terror, Britain, was irked by what U.S. and British sources say were efforts by Bolton to undermine promising diplomatic openings. Perhaps the most dramatic instance took place early in the U.S.-British talks in 2003 to force Libya to surrender its nuclear program, NEWSWEEK has learned. The Libya deal succeeded only after British officials "at the highest level" persuaded the White House to keep Bolton off the negotiating team. A crucial issue, according to sources involved in the affair, was Muammar Kaddafi's demand that if Libya abandoned its WMD program, the U.S. in turn would drop its goal of regime change. But Bolton was unwilling to support this compromise. The White House agreed to keep Bolton "out of the loop," as one source puts it. A deal was struck only after Kaddafi was reassured that Bush would settle for "policy change"—surrendering his WMD. One Bush official called the accounts of both incidents "flatly untrue."' msnbc.msn.com
I guess you can choose who to believe. **************************************************************** 06-07-05, 03:41 AM FredPuli Newsweek's scoop was only a scoop in the US. The British press reported this of Bolton. The 'highest level' officials included the Foreign Secretary himself, though , naturally, his words in public were diplomatic. It was reported that privately he was very angry at Bolton. He wanted him off the case as much as anyone else did. **************************************************************** 06-07-05, 09:44 AM newnickname Not that it disqualifies him as a diplomat, but as an ambitious, angry man with a wig, it seems that Bolton fits the Newsmax reader profile perfectly. **************************************************************** 06-07-05, 08:35 PM newnickname Here's a possibility that Bush might do some solid good, which posterity would recognise as significant - the cancellation of African debt.
One question seems to be over how it's to be funded. If it were through, essentially, a diversion of funds from other necessary projects, it'd more of a headline-grabber than a good thing. **************************************************************** 06-08-05, 01:27 AM AMoore
quote: Originally posted by FredPuli: Newsweek's scoop was only a scoop in the US. The British press reported this of Bolton. The 'highest level' officials included the Foreign Secretary himself, though , naturally, his words in public were diplomatic. It was reported that privately he was very angry at Bolton. He wanted him off the case as much as anyone else did.
Yes. The US press has also been avoiding the infamous intelligence memo published over there, indicating that Bush had decided on war in Iraq many months before the decision appeared to have been taken -- long before, for example, the time when he told congress that a vote to authorize the use of force was not necessarily a vote for war.
The "liberal media" here in the US have actually been pretty consistently supportive of the Bush administration.
Alan Moore **************************************************************** 06-11-05, 02:04 AM newnickname Will George do the right thing for Africa?
"However, both of Mr Bush's African initiatives have made slower progress than expected - partly because of the reluctance of Congress - stuck in the middle of the budget crisis - to fund them and because of problems of implementation.
The Millennium Challenge Account has only certified eight countries in Africa as qualified for aid, and only one (Madagascar) has received any funds.
The US Aids fund has been partly stymied by a debate over whether in order to qualify countries have to teach abstinence, rather than condom use, as the key means to prevent the spread of Aids.
Its donations can only be used to buy drugs approved by the US drugs authority, the FDA, which excludes many cheaper generic drugs and favours American manufacturers.
The US penchant for unilateral not multilateral action has also affected a possible deal on debt relief.
The US has agreed in principle to allow the World Bank, now headed by former US Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, to write off the debts of highly-indebted countries, but only by reducing its own lending programme.
It has no stomach for increasing World Bank resources, which would require another bruising Congressional battle.
Nor can it support UK proposals to fund debt relief by selling off some of the IMF's gold reserves, which US and Canadian mining interests believe would depress the price of gold." news.bbc.co.uk
Headline-grabbing words 'in principle', then raising (self-serving religious and financial) obstacles in practice? Or is it just too complex to do successfully? **************************************************************** 06-18-05, 01:15 PM newnickname Should we add "agreeing to proposals for African debt-relief" to the list?
Bush didn't agree to as much funding as campaigners, and Blair, would have liked. He didn't agree to all of Blair's proposals, either. That was always going to be the case, however; no matter what was agreed, someone would have said it wasn't enough.
On the other hand, the agreement in principal seems to have been negated by all the 'ifs' and 'buts' that have appeared:
"...last week Mr Bush made clear he would stick to the smaller amounts specified by the so-called Millennium Challenge account, unveiled in 2002.
This ties aid to "good governance" and the embrace of market economics by recipient countries. The goal was to double core US development aid by 2005. But disbursements have been held up by bureaucracy, and pressures arising from the huge US budget deficit."news.independent.co.uk "Also yesterday, the House Appropriations subcommittee on foreign operations slashed a White House foreign-aid request, recommending $1.75 billion instead of the $3 billion Bush had sought for the Millennium Challenge Account for developing countries."www.washingtonpost.com What help, actually, will the US give? How will the debt-relief be funded? **************************************************************** 09-25-05, 11:27 PM newnickname World Bank backs debt relief deal
The debt relief plan seems to be coming together. The IMF and the World Bank have backed it, and there has been a (vague) "joint-pledge by the G8 on Friday not to dilute the resources of the international financial institutions" (i.e. not simply pay the debt by slashing aid programs.)
On the other hand, the wheels seem to have come off the social security proposals. Bush's proposed reforms were polled as being less popular after his road show promoting them. He may have actually poisoned the idea the reforming social security for his successor, too. There seems to be little trust of politician's plans for it.
Katrina's aftermath seems to have sunk inheritance tax repeal. It'd be a bit insensitive to devote time to ensuring that Chinless-Wonder III could inherit all of his daddy's millions intact, when people are (so obviously) without food and shelter.
Anyway - the updated list of 'good things':
- Began to address the End of Oil; a duty other leaders have shirked.
- Pledged to spend what it takes to get New Orleans back on its feet (but hasn't actually said where the money will come from, yet).
- Post-Pet Goat and pre-Iraq played his role in regard to 9/11 in an exemplary way.
- Effectively backed debt-relief for the poorest African countries.
- Has not seen any US citizens harmed by terrorism on US soil since 9/11.
- Has kept the job-figures, and wages, on the up.
And the miscellaneous list of smaller measures:
Provided $20 million to states to help people with disabilities work from home. (Is that a typo? That's less than $500,000 per state.)
Created a fund to encourage technologies that help the disabled.
Granted a complete tax exemption for prepaid or college tuition savings plans.
Established a $10 million grant program to promote private conservation initiatives.
Provided matching grants for state programs that help private landowners protect rare species.
Strengthened the National Health Service Corps to put more physicians in the neediest areas, and make its scholarship funds tax-free.
Doubled the research budget of the National Institutes of Health.
Increased funding for low-interest loan programs to help people with disabilities purchase devices to assist them.
What about his Rita response? Does that make the list? What has he actually done to help? **************************************************************** 09-25-05, 11:54 PM DorianGreyed I agree on the first part of your list. I won't agree with the second part until I look further into each item. I still remember Bush touting how he added X amount of square miles to the protected wetlands, and many people bought it. What they didn't realize was that long before he added X amount, he took X+ amount out of the protected list. The end result was that the US lost more wetlands. All he did was to put back some of what he removed.
For thse who don't understand why the wetlands are so important, consider the following: The Flood of 93 wouldn't have been nearly as bad as it was had several cities, counties, and states not allowed some needed wetlands to be developed. Levees were built, preventing water from going into what for centuries was a "relief valve" for the land downstream. The result, of course, was that areas downstream of the levees flooded to a much greater degree than they would have, and many areas wouldn't have flooded at all had the wetlands upstream taken some of the water. The Mississippi around St. Louis looked more like a lake, from about 20 miles north of St. Louis to about 15 miles south. Had the levee for Locks #27 located less than a mile from my house failed, the water would have been up to my second floor. As it was, no barge traffic could pass until the water went down. The river was flowing too fast to be safe for barge traffic. One report stated that water was passing the Arch at St. Louis at a rate of about a million gallons a second. **************************************************************** 10-10-05, 11:02 PM newnickname That pledge to fund the rebuilding of New Orleans is looking a bit shaky:
'Bear with me while I make the case for doubting whether Mr. Bush will make good on his promise.
First, Mr. Bush already has a record of trying to renege on pledges to a stricken city. After 9/11 he made big promises to New York. But as soon as his bullhorn moment was past, officials began trying to wriggle out of his pledge. By early 2002 his budget director was accusing New York's elected representatives, who wanted to know what had happened to the promised aid, of engaging in a "money-grubbing game." It's not clear how much federal help the city has actually received.
With that precedent in mind, consider this: Congress has just gone on recess. By the time it returns, seven weeks will have passed since the levees broke. And the administration has spent much of that time blocking efforts to aid Katrina's victims.
I'm not sure why the news media haven't made more of the White House role in stalling a bipartisan bill that would have extended Medicaid coverage to all low-income hurricane victims - some of whom, according to surveys, can't afford needed medicine. The White House has also insisted that disaster loans to local governments, many of which no longer have a tax base, be made with the cruel and unusual provision that these loans cannot be forgiven.
Since the administration is already nickel-and-diming Katrina's victims, it's a good bet that it will do the same with reconstruction - that is, if reconstruction ever gets started.
Nobody thinks that reconstruction should already be under way. But what's striking to me is that there are no visible signs that the administration has even begun developing a plan. No reconstruction czar has been appointed; no commission has been named. There have been no public hearings. And as far as we can tell, nobody is in charge.
Last month The New York Times reported that Karl Rove had been placed in charge of post-Katrina reconstruction. But last week Scott McClellan, the White House press secretary, denied that Mr. Rove - who has become a lot less visible lately, as speculation swirls about possible indictments in the Plame case - was ever running reconstruction. So who is in charge? "The president," said Mr. McClellan.
Finally, if we assume that Mr. Bush remains hostile to domestic spending that might threaten his tax cuts - and there's no reason to assume otherwise - foot-dragging on post-Katrina reconstruction is a natural political strategy.
I've been reading "Off Center," an important new book by Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson, political scientists at Yale and Berkeley respectively. Their goal is to explain how Republicans, who face a generally moderate electorate and have won recent national elections by "the slimmest of margins," have nonetheless been able to advance a radical rightist agenda.
One of their "new rules for radicals" is "Don't just do something, stand there." Frontal assaults on popular government programs tend to fail, as Mr. Bush learned in his hapless attempt to sell Social Security privatization. But as Mr. Hacker and Mr. Pierson point out, "sometimes decisions not to act can be a powerful means of reshaping the role of government." For example, the public strongly supports a higher minimum wage, but conservatives have nonetheless managed to cut that wage in real terms by not raising it in the face of inflation.
Right now, the public strongly supports a major reconstruction effort, so that's what Mr. Bush had to promise. But as the TV cameras focus on other places and other issues, will the administration pay a heavy political price for a reconstruction that starts slowly and gradually peters out? The New York experience suggests that it won't.'www.truthout.org **************************************************************** 10-11-05, 11:12 PM AMoore
quote: Originally posted by newnickname: That pledge to fund the rebuilding of New Orleans is looking a bit shaky:
'Bear with me while I make the case for doubting whether Mr. Bush will make good on his promise.
- snip -
One little subversive thought that has crossed my mind repeatedly since these disasters is that Bush wants to give federal money to private relief organizations -- particularly religious ones. Remember the "faith-based" initiatives? He has an interest in seeing to it that no matter how inadequate private relief efforts are, that Federal efforts should be worse, to help him sell this concept.
This may help explain the federal response. Watch out if we get hit by avian flu. Experts recommend that the country should have 150 million doses of the only available treatment on hand. We now have two million doses, and the administration plans to up that to 20 million. I can almost hear it now: "How could we possibly have known?"
Alan Moore **************************************************************** 11-07-05, 10:45 AM newnickname [i]'A decade ago, the heartland was a force for isolation. That's why Tom DeLay said foreign aid meant "putting Ghana over Grandma," and Jesse Helms referred to aid as "money down a rat hole."
Now, in contrast, conservatives are leading the charge on some of these issues. Regular readers know that I'm no fan of this administration, but there's no arguing with facts. President Bush has almost tripled actual spending on overseas development assistance to $19 billion last year, compared with its trough under President Clinton of less than $7 billion in 1997, according to O.E.C.D. figures. (Mr. Bush hasn't given nearly as much as he's promised, but his broken promises still amount to far more than Mr. Clinton ever gave.)
Pushed by conservative Christians, Mr. Bush is also doing more to fight both AIDS and sex trafficking than any of his predecessors did. Foreign governments are learning that the U.S. now takes the slavery of 13-year-old girls almost as seriously as the pirating of American movies, and that's a step forward.
So that's the context in which Ms. Albright and Mr. Brownback (who call themselves "the ultimate political odd couple") held their conference, under the auspices of the Aspen Institute. There was a voyeuristic thrill of spying illicit love - as when Mr. Brownback praised Hillary Clinton, who spoke on sex trafficking, for her "outstanding job."
And cooperation can achieve more than just civility. Darfur is a perfect example of left-right cooperation that has saved thousands of lives, because the leaders in Congress against the genocide are Jon Corzine, one of the most liberal members, and Mr. Brownback, one of the most conservative.
Of course, they have their work cut out for them: Congress just sent Darfur a "drop dead" message by cutting funds for African Union peacekeeping troops there. If Congressional leaders let that stand, they should just rename the bill the Genocide Enabling Act.
What next? Ms. Albright and Mr. Brownback agreed on a tentative agenda by coming up with a list of "the Top 5 worst places to wake up in the morning."
Those are Darfur, North Korea, Burma, Congo and northern Uganda. They're all neglected, brutal spots. Congo, for example, is the site of the most lethal conflict since World War II, with four million dead since 1998.' www.truthout.org
Interesting. I'm not sure about the idea that Bush has helped much in the fight against AIDS - the 'faith-based' initiatives he tends to support push unworkable ideas of abstinence rather than sensible condom use, and his Big-Business bias has blocked the use of cheaper, generic anti-AIDS drugs in Africa.
On the other hand, those figures do seem unarguable, "...tripled actual spending on overseas development assistance to $19 billion last year..." (I guess that doesn't include 'help' for Iraq.) **************************************************************** 11-16-05, 10:18 AM newnickname Stonewalling Katrina Victims
Hmm. I guess we can scratch that New Orleans pledge from the list. **************************************************************** 12-08-05, 04:41 AM Fourbrick2 Good to know the world is in safe hands.
Smile **************************************************************** 01-08-06, 09:55 PM wlmwallace some things never change Roll Eyes **************************************************************** 01-30-06, 09:24 PM newnickname Louisiana in Limbo
While Bush's record on foreign aid is good, he seems incapable of helping New Orleans - maybe even of grasping the problem there. Why? **************************************************************** 02-01-06, 02:11 PM Rakuchild Ask Kanye West. Laugh at the startled look on Mike Myers's face. **************************************************************** 02-01-06, 04:23 PM sid1114
quote: While Bush's record on foreign aid is good
Unless, of course, you happen to be one of the many health organizations around that world that's had its US funding cut off because they dare to mention abortion and/or birth control to their clients.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: sid1114, 02-02-06 09:34 AM **************************************************************** 03-04-06, 11:55 AM newnickname 'President George W Bush has indicated the US has dropped its staunch opposition to a proposed gas pipeline from Iran to India via Pakistan...
...The US had previously stated it was "absolutely opposed" to the gas pipeline, even indicating Pakistan and India could face sanctions if the project got under way.'Bush U-turn on Iranian pipeline
'Lahore-based political analyst and writer Khalid Ahmed thinks the proposed project is truly a historic opportunity for both the countries to change the politics of the region forever.
"This is the first time in the history of South Asia that such an occasion has arrived. Pakistan can redefine its identity as a transit state in the region and can pave the way for peace and prosperity." According to Mr Ahmed such a project would go a long way in changing the nature of political relationships in the region.
"Instead of basing its identity on animosity towards India, when Indian economic prosperity will also mean prosperity for Pakistan, things will definitely change." That indeed would be a historic change in relations between India and Pakistan.'Why Pakistan-India pipeline matters **************************************************************** 03-15-06, 09:55 PM newnickname 'In March 2002, with one war raging in Afghanistan and another looming in Iraq, President Bush announced that he intended to undercut terrorism by attacking poverty overseas. "I'm here today to announce a major new commitment by the United States to bring hope and opportunity to the world's poorest," Bush declared. Under his watch, the president said, America would increase its annual foreign aid to $5 billion. And instead of giving handouts, he added, the program would employ an entirely new model: investing in countries to spark their economic growth and holding them accountable for their policies. "I carry this commitment in my soul," Bush said, concluding his speech with a trademark religious touch. "We will make the world not only safer but better."
The president's plan looked revolutionary. US aid efforts, long hampered by an ossified bureaucracy, often fail to ensure that recipient nations spend the money wisely. Bush's plan, by contrast, recognized that poverty cannot be conquered without economic development, and that countries should continue to receive aid only if they use it effectively. "It seemed a bold, exciting new experiment in development policy," says Mary McClymont, the former head of InterAction, the largest alliance of aid organizations in the US
In a pattern that has become a hallmark of the administration, however, Bush's aid initiative - the Millennium Challenge Corporation - has become an object lesson in dramatic ideas followed by disastrous action. Over the past three months, Rolling Stone has reviewed the MCC's "compacts" with foreign countries, compared the work of similar agencies and spoken with a wide range of supporters and critics - including many of the conservative insiders responsible for creating the program. Instead of hiring aid experts, the administration at first staffed the MCC with conservative ideologues. Rather than partnering with other countries, the White House operated on its own, disconnected from the rest of the world. And when experts criticized the new agency, the administration responded with a bunker mentality, refusing to talk to detractors and learn from its mistakes.
Today, four years after the president announced his initiative, the MCC has signed compacts with six countries - offering only $1.2 billion in assistance. In February, Bush released a budget for 2007 that falls another $2 billion short of his pledge, bringing the total aid to less than half of what he promised. And the new budget once again pushes back the goal, stating that the administration "expects" to provide $5 billion annually in 2008.
"Not only has President Bush broken his word on funding, he has not put in the effort required to turn this excellent idea into a lifesaving reality," says Jamie Drummond, executive director of DATA, the international aid organization co-founded by Bono.
Even leading conservatives who initially supported the program are now blasting the MCC. "The great promise of the Millennium Challenge was met with tremendous hope and anticipation," said Rep. Henry Hyde, who voted to authorize the initiative as chairman of the House International Relations Committee. But now, he said, "we see a program struggling to get off the ground . . . lacking the boldness necessary to break the cycle of poverty" - a failure that "belies the original vision."'Bush's Fake Aid
Seriously, I'm puzzled. Is Bush's record on foriegn aid better or worse than his predecessors, on balance? **************************************************************** 03-15-06, 10:08 PM DorianGreyed What was the US annual foreign aid before Bush changed the focus? I suspect that this was a way to both cut foreign aid and, at the same time, appear to increase it. **************************************************************** 05-18-06, 09:52 AM newnickname What is different about Bush’s stance on immigration is that the president is, at long last, dealing with a subject he actually knows something about — as opposed to his failed war of words against terrorism, Iraq, nuclear weapons proliferation, and even Social Security. On this subject, the former governor of a state with a 1,200-mile border with Mexico grasps that the problem is complex and the solution elusive and that fact and logic do matter.
Unfortunately, complexity doesn’t sell. Not to the media, at least, which have largely lost the ability to parse serious issues. Nor are Bush’s rabid Republican cohorts in the House and even some shameless Democrats willing to let common sense interfere with their exploitation of this emotional, explosive issue, which gets hyped up to crisis level every decade or so. It is to Bush’s credit that he refused to join the stampede of the immigration hysterics and dared to suggest a reasonable compromise.
What Bush got right about serious immigration reform is the need to join two apparently irreconcilable but inevitably co-dependent goals: control of the border and amnesty for most of those already here illegally. While shunning the explosive A-word, he does propose legalizing the status of millions of illegal immigrants if they pay back taxes and fines... www.truthdig.com
The article does go on to say -
The jobs that draw the immigrants will continue to exist, and it is in his failure to deal forthrightly with that magnet that Bush’s immigration proposal dramatically fails. In fact, the best way to stem the flow of cheap immigrant labor is to substantially increase the minimum wage requirement to a living wage, and to deploy sufficient U.S. Labor Department inspectors to enforce it.
- but could Bush basically be right in trying to balance these two approaches; immigration control and regularisation of undocumented workers already in the US?
Of course, as one comment on the article notes, 'Bush has some very good speechwriters and there can be a cavernous gap between the speech and the reality at the other end of the shovel'. **************************************************************** 11-17-06, 01:24 PM newnickname 'U.S. President George W. Bush announced a month ago the U.S. will join the U.K., Australia and New Zealand in supporting a temporary moratorium on deep-sea trawling in international waters.' Fuel subsidies keep trawlers 'strip-mining' sea: report
(The article notes that a moratorium isn't even necessary - this destructive and unsustainable method of fishing could be ended by ending the subsidies which make it economically viable.) **************************************************************** 12-29-06, 10:30 PM newnickname 'U.S. President George W. Bush's administration is proposing to list the polar bear as an endangered species because of warming temperatures in the animal's habitat, The Washington Post reported on Wednesday.' ca.news.yahoo.com It seems that, as long as it isn't likely to inconvenience any oil companies, George can be a bit of a tree-hugger.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: DorianGreyed,
Posts: 7517 | Location: in the backwoods of North Carolina | Registered: 06-07-02
