State of the Union

I didn’t listen to the State of the Union, primarily because it’s a waste of time to listen to George Bush. For example, if I would have listened to George Bush in 2001, I would have thought we needed tax cuts because surpluses were too high and, even with the tax cuts, we would have the national debt halfway paid down.

My budget has funded a responsible increase in our ongoing operations.  It has funded our nation’s important priorities.  It has protected Social Security and Medicare.  And our surpluses are big enough that there is still money left over.

Many of you have talked about the need to pay down our national debt.  I listened, and I agree.  We owe it to our children and grandchildren to act now, and I hope you will join me to pay down $2 trillion in debt during the next 10 years.  At the end of those 10 years, we will have paid down all the debt that is available to retire.  That is more debt, repaid more quickly than has ever been repaid by any nation at any time in history.

We should also prepare for the unexpected, for the uncertainties of the future.  We should approach our nation’s budget as any prudent family would, with a contingency fund for emergencies or additional spending needs.  For example, after a strategic review, we may need to increase defense spending.  We may need to increase spending for our farmers or additional money to reform Medicare.  And so, my budget sets aside almost a trillion dollars over 10 years for additional needs.  That is one trillion additional reasons you can feel comfortable supporting this budget.

We have increased our budget at a responsible 4 percent.  We have funded our priorities.  We paid down all the available debt.  We have prepared for contingencies.  And we still have money left over.

. . .

   Unrestrained government spending is a dangerous road to deficits, so we must take a different path.  The other choice is to let the American people spend their own money to meet their own needs.

. . .

The people of America have been overcharged and, on their behalf, I am here asking for a refund.

If I had listened to George Bush’s speech in 2002, I would have believed that, even though spending had to be increased to meet security needs, the deficit that had to be run would “be small and short term.”  Oh, and this time tax cuts would be just the thing to grow the economy and reduce deficits. Tax cuts are magic! They reduce surpluses AND deficits.

If I had listened to George Bush’s speech in 2003, I would have believed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, including 500 tons of sarin, mustard, and VX nerve agent; 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin; 25,000 liters of anthrax; and that he had attempted to purchase significant quantities of uranium from Africa and aluminum tubes suitable for production of nuclear weapons.

If I had listened to George Bush’s speech in 2004, I would have believed that the deficit (not the debt, mind you) would be cut in half (not eliminated) in the next 5 years. On the other hand, I would have learned to nevermind the silliness of the 2003 speech, instead all of those dire chemical agents and portents of nuclear doom were really just “weapons of mass destruction-related program activities.” I also would have been puzzled by the fact that Mr. Bush unveiled a mission to Mars less than a week before the State of the Union, then somehow failed to mention it in the State of the Union address.

It’s probably too soon to know what I would have believed about George Bush’s 2005 speech but shouldn’t have. My suspicion — more deficit reduction and hydrogen cars.

The biggest outrages came in 2001 in the form of broken promises to pay down the National Debt (not merely reduce deficits) and in 2003 in the form of outrageously puffed up claims about the threat posed to the United States by Iraq.