The only thing conservative about President Bush's proposed $2.23-trillion budget is its estimate of onrushing deficits. While the White House admits that its spending plan could enlarge the national debt by $1-trillion over the next five years, that estimate is likely too small. And while leaving those who come after him in a deep financial hole, the president would deny them some of the tax revenues necessary to pay off the IOU.

There is little compassion in this budget, either. While increased spending on the military and homeland defense is understandable, the budget is stingy with help for struggling cities and states and programs for the poor. The wealthy would be relieved of taxes on their dividends, but low-income families seeking free lunches for their children would be subjected to strict scrutiny.

Even key spending decisions don't make sense under close inspection. The president is preparing Americans for war with Iraq, yet he doesn't include a penny in his budget for that campaign. If war comes, the budget (and deficit) could grow by another $50-billion to $200-billion.

So where does the increase in military spending end up? A pay raise for military personnel is deserved. After that, however, the bulk of the money goes for armaments and programs developed before terrorism became the military's focus. The president would spend $9-billion on a missile defense system that may not work, but there is nothing set aside for the continuing conflict in Afghanistan.

The most damaging part of the budget is the president's call for even more tax cuts weighted disproportionately toward the wealthy. Bush helped turn a surplus into a deficit with his $1.35-trillion tax cut two years ago. Now, he wants to more than double that amount over the next decade by speeding up the original tax cuts and adding a new one -- tax-free dividends.

While a tax exemption for dividends would deepen the deficit crater, it would benefit only higher-income Americans. The president justifies further tax cuts by saying the economy needs a stimulus, yet under his tax plan it comes too far down the road. Even the White House doesn't believe that its plan will create jobs or stimulate economic growth now. The budget envisions little improvement in the unemployment rate over the next five years.

Even the president's proposal to boost retirement savings by allowing workers to shelter more of their disposable income is misguided. While the budget assumes that this will increase taxes in the short term by causing Americans to roll over their IRAs (a transaction that would be initially taxed), it would take tens of billions of dollars off federal and state tax rolls after that. And only those with money to spare would benefit.

"This is a president of big projects and big ideas," boasted Mitchell E. Daniels Jr., White House budget director. He should have added: and big deficits.

Budgetary shortfalls for the next two years are expected to exceed $300-billion annually, larger than the previous record deficit of $290-billion set by the first President Bush. Admittedly, the current deficit is smaller than the one in 1992 when adjusted for inflation. But the White House's estimates have left out key factors that are likely to expand the coming debt.

In addition to leaving a possible war with Iraq out of the budget, the president didn't account for a likely change in the alternative minimum tax, which if updated as expected could cost the government another $500-billion over the next decade. And the president is counting on billions in increased user fees and spending cuts that likely will be resisted in Congress, even by some Republicans.

Deficits are probably inevitable over the next few years, but they should be as limited and short-lived as possible. An effective economic stimulus should be temporary and aimed at all income levels. Additional military dollars should favor programs to fight the new war against terrorism, not the Cold War. And even in tough economic times, a federal budget should not add to the suffering of our most vulnerable citizens.

The president's budget fails those tests and places an unconscionable financial burden on future generations. Congress should not hesitate to fix its worst excesses.

Back to Opinion

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright

From the Times
Opinion page