IN THE NEWS

Editorial

USA Today

BUSH VOWS TO TAKE BITE OUT OF BUDGET, BUT DELIVERS A NIBBLE

February 7, 2005

Our view: Plan spends big, slashes taxes. Tough choices are missing.

Listening to President Bush's State of the Union address last week, you might have come away with the impression that the budget his administration is releasing today would strike a blow for fiscal responsibility.

Bush promised, for instance, to cut or eliminate more than 150 government programs. He also vowed to hold growth in spending, except for money to pay benefits, below the rate of inflation.

If these cuts sounded significant, there was a reason: They were meant to sound significant.

In reality, most of the cuts contained in today's budget appear to be little more than window dressing designed to divert attention from Bush's fiscal policies, which leave the tough choices to future leaders and the bills to future generations.

Federal spending during Bush's first term increased 29% to $2.4 trillion, the biggest surge since the 1960s. At the same time, Bush promoted, and Congress approved, tax cuts expected to reduce government revenues by $2 trillion during the next decade.

That irresponsible mix of higher spending and reduced revenue has wiped out the federal budget surplus Bush inherited and produced record deficits.

What the president offers as fiscal conservatism at the outset of his second term is so nominal it might be worth a chuckle -- if it weren't so troubling:

* Minimalist cuts. Bush's list of 150 proposed program cuts and eliminations is well worth considering. But it wouldn't have much impact. Last year, he promised to eliminate 65 programs and cut another 65. Those reductions, ranging from arts-in-education grants to subsidies for vocational education, would have reduced the budget by $11.7 billion. That may sound like a lot, but it was only 3% of the deficit and less than 1% of the budget. Only a handful of the cuts won congressional approval.

* Wrong targets. By focusing much of his attention on programs unrelated to benefits, national defense or homeland security, Bush ignores more than 80% of federal spending. What's more, the portion he has targeted is the least of the government's problems. In fact, even if these domestic departments, such as transportation and education, were eliminated altogether, the budget would still have a deficit.

* Gimmicks. The president's oft-heard mantra of halving the deficit by 2009 rings hollow. Even if he is able to stick to that timetable, which looks doubtful, he does so by pushing off the impact of many of his programs -- the Medicare drug benefit, tax cuts and Social Security privatization -- beyond that year.

To his credit, Bush has at least expressed a willingness to tackle Social Security. That's more than you can say for many Democrats in Congress, who vow that any effort to trim entitlement programs will be met with a partisan frontal attack.