by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright March 3, 2004
All Rights Reserved.

ocking up the Democratic Party nomination, Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry was all smiles, winning nine-of-ten contests, sending his closest rival North Carolina Sen. John Edwards packing. Edwards officially withdrew from the race, graciously praising the Bostonian, hinting at the possibility of a Kerry-Edwards ticket. Yet, despite all the hoopla, Kerry has a big mountain to climb upending a popular incumbent, whose Texas charm matches up well against his aristocratic New England demeanor. Unlike Edwards, or, for that matter, former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, Kerry has trouble rolling up his sleeves, exuding warmth and reaching out to the masses. While presidential politics turn on personality and all candidates have strengths and weaknesses, several key issues—some expected, some unexpected—leave President Bush vulnerable heading into November.

      Creating his biggest headache, Bush faces an economy—and stock market—still sputtering from the technology and dot-com meltdown begun under Clinton's watch in March 2000, plunging the DOW 40% and the tech-rich Nasdaq by 80%. Sept. 11 pushed an already teetering economy into recession. Fed Chairman Greenspan came to the rescue, dropping interest rates to 45-year lows. Coupled with Bush's $1.4 trillion tax cut in 2002-03, the economy should be humming along, yet corporations continue to suffer from fragile earnings, leaving companies reluctant to boost payrolls. Funding an open-ended war on terror, democratizing Iraq, lowered capital gains from a lackluster stock market, sluggish jobs growth, stubbornly resistant levels of unemployment, federalizing national baggage screening and giving seniors new Medicare benefits, have fueled unprecedented budget deficits, now exceeding $541 billion.

      Given the current economic climate, Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan—and the White House—proposes cutting 76-million baby-boomers' Social Security benefits. “I am basically saying that we are over-committed at this stage,” said Greenspan, admitting that there's not enough money to meet future obligations. Only seven-years from collecting Social Security, aging boomers aren't willing to subsidize the war in Iraq at the expense of future benefits. Bush never explained that he would fund his pre-emptive war doctrine by looting the Social Security trust fund and eviscerating baby-boomers benefits. Thanks to Greenspan, Bush has a serious chink in his once impregnable armor. With deficits in the stratosphere, he must look to pinch pennies, including heartless ways to balance the budget. Unlike past elections, Social Security promises to be a pivotal issue.

      Bush promised he'd never use the military like Clinton did in Bosnia and Kosovo to nation-build. Yet Bush's plan to democratize Iraq and “transform the Middle East” promises to be the biggest drain on the federal treasury since the Marshall plan after WWII. There's no bigger siphon on the federal budget than funding130,000 troops on an open-ended mission with no exit strategy. Calling Iraq “the central front in the war on terrorism” and reminding the nation about Sept. 11 doesn't justify liquidating the retirement accounts of aging baby-boomers. If the nation's economy can't support the current adventure without sacrificing hard-working taxpayers approaching retirement, then operations should be scaled back. When the economy was booming, that was the time to issue generous tax cuts, costly new Medicare benefits and lavish amnesty programs, not when tax revenues remain anemic.

      Hyping the treat of terrorism—no matter how plausible—doesn't explain how Bush shifted his policy away from capturing Osama bin Laden and dismantling his Al Qaeda terror organization to Iraq. No matter what human rights violations took place under Saddam, it wasn't the administration's rationale for war. Only Saddam's alleged weapons of mass destruction and threat to U.S. national security justified the costs and sacrifice of American lives. No matter how faulty prewar intelligence, the U.S. military and weapons inspectors confirmed the U.N.'s prewar assessment that WMD did not exist. Once known, that was the time to rapidly transition to U.N. control. Despite controlling Iraq's vast oil wealth, international pressure—and terrorists—prevents the U.S. from capitalizing on Iraqi resources. Instead, the U.S. finds itself squeezed by Saudi Arabia and OPEC, driving gas prices through the roof.

      Before the White House and Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan decide to savage baby-boomers' Social Security, they should rein-in the administration's uncontrolled spending binge. No expected economic growth from either tax cuts or rock-bottom interest rates can outpace runaway spending squandering the treasury on costly military adventures and new government largesse. Seniors deserve new Medicare drug benefits but not at the expense of boomers' Social Security benefits. Future economic growth is now imperiled by soaring deficits and the administration's plans to add tens-of-millions of illegal aliens to the federal welfare system already stretched to the breaking point by a weak economy and out-of-control spending. If national security is really the White House's job-one, they need to set priorities, make the right choices and show some respect for the U.S. economy.

About the Author

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2002 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.