Congressional Reaction: Back to the Future

• Share

Not surprisingly, the self-proclaimed "war president" spent the first half of his State of the Union Address defending his record on foreign policy issues. But it was the second half, focusing on domestic policy, that included most of the President's new proposals. In truth, however, even many of those were recycled ideas from last year's State of the Union or the 2004 campaign, such as a guest worker program for immigrants, expanding the use of health savings accounts, cutting hundreds of programs from the budget to reduce the deficit, extending tax cuts and renewing the Patriot Act.

In his defense, Bush had a perfectly good reason to push those proposals yet again—Capitol Hill hasn't yet approved them, despite GOP control of both houses. And now dissent within his party threatens Bush again. House conservatives, worried about the effects of increased immigration, have so far balked at a guest worker program and may not change their tune this year. Democrats, aided by a few Republicans, have blocked the Patriot Act from being renewed. A different group of Republicans, combined with Democrats, have stopped Bush's efforts to make permanent tax cuts passed in 2001 and 2003, worried the deficit is growing too large. And Congress may keep many of the 140 programs that Bush wants eliminated. In any case, the $14 billion in savings Bush proposed is very small in a federal budget of more than $2 trillion, and won't do much to reduce the deficit.

A few of the genuinely new ideas may actually fare better in part because they are so non-controversial. Two months ago, Democrats released their "Innovation Agenda," and "Bush's Competitiveness Initiative" includes many of the same elements: increased funding to recruit and pay math and science teachers, more federal funding for the physical sciences and tax credits for research and development projects. Both sides agree on the notion of "energy independence" and the increased use of hybrid cars and ethanol, although neither has anything close to a precise plan for how America can be less reliant on Middle Eastern oil.

After failing in his attempt to reform Social Security last year, Bush now proposes a commission composed of members of both parties to fix the rapid growth of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. This should sound familiar; Bush has already appointed expert panels to simplify the tax system and reform Social Security, both of which had their ideas largely ignored. The problem with this commission, which Assistant Senate Democratic Leader Richard Durbin said his party would support, is that the reforms it will propose aren't likely to make members of Congress very excited. Fixing Social Security would mean reducing benefits and/or increasing taxes, and the same goes for Medicare and Medicaid. Members of Congress have shown very little desire to support such painful measures.

All of these ideas are complicated by the fact that 2006 is an election year. Republicans on Capitol Hill may focus on tax cuts and limits on lawsuits, two priorities that excite their base but Democrats strongly oppose. Meanwhile, congressional Democrats have an incentive to oppose everything the GOP does, so they can paint the current Congress as ineffective and convince Americans they should elect Democrats to replace them. Taken together, it's a recipe for the same kind of gridlock and partisanship that has already bedeviled many of the same proposals—and the same President.