Fill out this form to email this article to a friend
State of the Union
In his Tuesday night speech, the president recited a familiar mantraon Iraq and laid out a modest domestic agenda.
A Times Editorial
Published February 1, 2006
George W. Bush went before the Congress and the nation Tuesday night to try to reinvigorate his beleaguered presidency and his scandal-plagued party. Despite his rhetoric, there was little in the speech to suggest that much is going to change in the three years Bush has left in office. The war in Iraq and the fiscal insanity in Washington will see to that.
In his fifth State of the Union speech, Bush had little new to say about Iraq and offered a modest proposal for making health care more affordable - the two issues that polls say are most on the minds of Americans. Bush reiterated his resolve to stay the course in Iraq and to spread democracy around the world. "There is no peace in retreat," he said. "And there is no honor in retreat."
In laying out a modest domestic agenda, Bush called for the development of alternative energy sources to lessen our "addiction" to foreign oil. But his own addiction to tax cuts is unbroken. The president again called on Congress to make his first-term tax cuts permanent. So much for deficit reduction and fiscal responsibility.
Health care ranks as the top priority of most Americans, according to the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll. Yet Bush had little to offer on that issue except tax incentives for individual medical savings accounts that would be beyond the means of many of the 46-million uninsured Americans. There is no money for big second-term initiatives because the war, homeland security, the Katrina disaster, an expensive Medicare drug benefit and tax cuts have left the government drowning in red ink and the president and the Congress with little room to maneuver on spending.
Historically, second terms are difficult times for a president, and Bush's is especially challenging. The public has grown weary of the war in Iraq and the toxic partisanship in Washington. A year ago, Bush towered over the political scene after winning re-election. The Republican majority in Congress was eager to do his will, and the Democrats seemed adrift and divided. But 2005 became one of the worst years of his presidency - public opinion turned on the war in Iraq; Hurricane Katrina was a political disaster; a top White House aide was indicted for lying to a grand jury in the CIA leak case; Bush's Social Security overhaul crashed on takeoff; and the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal has sent Republicans running for cover.
The president who stood before Congress Tuesday night was the weakest sixth-year chief executive (his approval rating is hovering around 40 percent) since Richard Nixon at the height of the Watergate scandal. Congressional Republicans are no longer cowed by Bush and are breaking ranks with the White House on issues such as immigration and deficit spending.
Americans want not only a change of course but a change in the way Bush governs - less partisan, more realistic, less arrogant. The public mood is sour and polls show that a restless majority of Americans are fed up with the scandals and partisan warfare in Washington. Bush needs to do more than just lay out an agenda. He also needs to repair his credibility with the public and reach out to moderate Democrats. It's unlikely that Bush can accomplish much this year without bipartisan support, which will be even harder to come by in an election year when Democrats believe they have an opportunity to recapture control of at least one house of Congress.
Sitting in the House chamber where Bush spoke were two new faces to remind Washington that whatever becomes of his legislative agenda, Bush is closing in on one of his major goals - to move the U.S. Supreme Court to the right. Hours before the president's speech, Samuel Alito was sworn in to replace Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. Alito joined another conservative Bush appointee, Chief Justice John Roberts, on the high bench. It's a reminder that even lame-duck presidents can make a difference.
[Last modified February 1, 2006, 01:03:19]
Share your thoughts on this story
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|