This was my favorite part:
America's prosperity requires restraining the spending appetite of the federal government. I welcome the bipartisan enthusiasm for spending discipline. So next week I will send you a budget that holds the growth of discretionary spending below inflation, makes tax relief permanent, and stays on track to cut the deficit in half by 2009. My budget substantially reduces or eliminates more than 150 government programs that are not getting results, or duplicate current efforts, or do not fulfill essential priorities. The principle here is clear: a taxpayer dollar must be spent wisely, or not at all.
I would love it if our President were successful in curtailing spending and shrink the size of our government. Unfortunately, I'm not sure he's taking his own words seriously given this report. How can we shrink the government when we're hiring new federal employees? I'm interested in seeing what it is exactly he has planned. Bush doesn't have a good track record on shrinking the government. A lot of that is due to the extra homeland security bureaucracy set up after 9/11, but I still cringe when I think of the massive Medicare entitlement he signed.
I also enjoyed this portion of the speech:
To build the prosperity of future generations, we must update institutions that were created to meet the needs of an earlier time. Year after year, Americans are burdened by an archaic, incoherent federal tax code. I have appointed a bipartisan panel to examine the tax code from top to bottom. And when their recommendations are delivered, you and I will work together to give this Nation a tax code that is pro-growth, easy to understand, and fair to all.
Please, oh please let them do something drastic to the federal tax code this year. Earlier this year there were rumors flying around about Republicans mounting an effort to rid this country of the terrible burden the IRS has become. One can only hope that the President can lead the party to make some progress in this direction. But with the Social Security issue also on the agenda I'm not so sure he'd be able to pull it off. I'd be a great thing for this country, but I'm guessing its a pipe dream at this point.
This part of his speech made me angry:
America's immigration system is also outdated -- unsuited to the needs of our economy and to the values of our country. We should not be content with laws that punish hardworking people who want only to provide for their families, and deny businesses willing workers, and invite chaos at our border. It is time for an immigration policy that permits temporary guest workers to fill jobs Americans will not take, that rejects amnesty, that tells us who is entering and leaving our country, and that closes the border to drug dealers and terrorists.
We cannot keep the drug dealers and terrorists out under the current immigration laws, what makes him think we'd be able to do it with laws that are more lax? Is he forgetting that many of the 9/11 hijackers were here legally on student visas which are in reality a lot like the "guest worker" program he's suggesting?
As far as I'm concerned, if these people want to come here and work for a living they can jump through the hoops of becoming a citizen. If that means we need to allow more immigrants in per year than so be it, but this "guest" citizen stuff is nonsense.
Lets hope the Democrats were paying attention through this part of the speech:
Today, more than 45 million Americans receive Social Security benefits, and millions more are nearing retirement -- and for them the system is sound and fiscally strong. I have a message for every American who is 55 or older: Do not let anyone mislead you. For you, the Social Security system will not change in any way.
For younger workers, the Social Security system has serious problems that will grow worse with time. Social Security was created decades ago, for a very different era. In those days people didn't live as long, benefits were much lower than they are today, and a half century ago, about 16 workers paid into the system for each person drawing benefits. Our society has changed in ways the founders of Social Security could not have foreseen. In today's world, people are living longer and therefore drawing benefits longer -- and those benefits are scheduled to rise dramatically over the next few decades. And instead of 16 workers paying in for every beneficiary, right now it's only about three workers -- and over the next few decades, that number will fall to just two workers per beneficiary. With each passing year, fewer workers are paying ever-higher benefits to an ever-larger number of retirees.
So here is the result: Thirteen years from now, in 2018, Social Security will be paying out more than it takes in. And every year afterward will bring a new shortfall, bigger than the year before. For example, in the year 2027, the government will somehow have to come up with an extra 200 billion dollars to keep the system afloat -- and by 2033, the annual shortfall would be more than 300 billion dollars. By the year 2042, the entire system would be exhausted and bankrupt. If steps are not taken to avert that outcome, the only solutions would be dramatically higher taxes, massive new borrowing, or sudden and severe cuts in Social Security benefits or other government programs.
I recognize that 2018 and 2042 may seem like a long way off. But those dates are not so distant, as any parent will tell you. If you have a five-year-old, you're already concerned about how you'll pay for college tuition 13 years down the road. If you've got children in their 20s, as some of us do, the idea of Social Security collapsing before they retire does not seem like a small matter. And it should not be a small matter to the United States Congress.
He nailed it. It should be perfectly clear to all concerned that Social Security is headed for the cliff. We need to do something. Maybe the President's plan isn't the best plan, but at least it will get the program back on track. It'd be helpful in the Democrats would recognize the problem and at least offer an alternative plan or work with the President to make his plan better.
That is exactly what the President is calling for:
You and I share a responsibility. We must pass reforms that solve the financial problems of Social Security once and for all.
Fixing Social Security permanently will require an open, candid review of the options. Some have suggested limiting benefits for wealthy retirees. Former Congressman Tim Penny has raised the possibility of indexing benefits to prices rather than wages. During the 1990s, my predecessor, President Clinton, spoke of increasing the retirement age. Former Senator John Breaux suggested discouraging early collection of Social Security benefits. The late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan recommended changing the way benefits are calculated.
All these ideas are on the table. I know that none of these reforms would be easy. But we have to move ahead with courage and honesty, because our children's retirement security is more important than partisan politics. I will work with members of Congress to find the most effective combination of reforms. I will listen to anyone who has a good idea to offer. We must, however, be guided by some basic principles. We must make Social Security permanently sound, not leave that task for another day. We must not jeopardize our economic strength by increasing payroll taxes. We must ensure that lower income Americans get the help they need to have dignity and peace of mind in their retirement. We must guarantee there is no change for those now retired or nearing retirement. And we must take care that any changes in the system are gradual, so younger workers have years to prepare and plan for their future.
Sadly, for purely partisan reasons I just don't see that happening. If Democrats can't admit that there is a problem we can't very well expect them to work toward fixing it.
The President also sent a message to congress about judicial nominees:
Because courts must always deliver impartial justice, judges have a duty to faithfully interpret the law, not legislate from the bench. As President, I have a constitutional responsibility to nominate men and women who understand the role of courts in our democracy, and are well qualified to serve on the bench -- and I have done so. The Constitution also gives the Senate a responsibility: Every judicial nominee deserves an up-or-down vote.
That's certainly very clear. Its time for the Democrats to set aside their obstructions and work with the President in appointing some judges. Unfortunately, much like the Social Security issue above, Democrats seem more interested in being obstinate for political reasons. One gets the feeling that, as far as they're concerned, the more they can prevent this President from accomplishing the better. That's not the way our government is supposed to work.
The President also stated, once again, his basic philosophy regarding the fight against terrorism:
In the long term, the peace we seek will only be achieved by eliminating the conditions that feed radicalism and ideologies of murder. If whole regions of the world remain in despair and grow in hatred, they will be the recruiting grounds for terror, and that terror will stalk America and other free nations for decades. The only force powerful enough to stop the rise of tyranny and terror, and replace hatred with hope, is the force of human freedom. Our enemies know this, and that is why the terrorist Zarqawi recently declared war on what he called the "evil principle" of democracy. And we have declared our own intention: America will stand with the allies of freedom to support democratic movements in the Middle East and beyond, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world.
I don't understand why so many people fail to comprehend this most basic of strategies. Terrorism flourishes in oppressed cultures. We can fight the terrorists all we want at our borders and in our cities, but if we want to reduce and even kill the overall threat we must go to where the terrorism has its roots. Places like Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran.
The President goes on to state, explicitly, the places in the world where he feels the threat of terrorism is most rooted.
To promote peace in the broader Middle East, we must confront regimes that continue to harbor terrorists and pursue weapons of mass murder. Syria still allows its territory, and parts of Lebanon, to be used by terrorists who seek to destroy every chance of peace in the region. You have passed, and we are applying, the Syrian Accountability Act -- and we expect the Syrian government to end all support for terror and open the door to freedom. Today, Iran remains the world's primary state sponsor of terror -- pursuing nuclear weapons while depriving its people of the freedom they seek and deserve. We are working with European allies to make clear to the Iranian regime that it must give up its uranium enrichment program and any plutonium re-processing, and end its support for terror.
The President also had a special message for the Iranian people currently engaged in a desperate struggle against that country's oppressive regime:
And to the Iranian people, I say tonight: As you stand for your own liberty, America stands with you.
I'm guessing that statement sent a shiver or two down the spines of a few mullahs in Iran.
Bush closed on a strong note:
In these four years, Americans have seen the unfolding of large events. We have known times of sorrow, and hours of uncertainty, and days of victory. In all this history, even when we have disagreed, we have seen threads of purpose that unite us. The attack on freedom in our world has reaffirmed our confidence in freedom's power to change the world. We are all part of a great venture: To extend the promise of freedom in our country, to renew the values that sustain our liberty, and to spread the peace that freedom brings.
As Franklin Roosevelt once reminded Americans, "each age is a dream that is dying, or one that is coming to birth." And we live in the country where the biggest dreams are born. The abolition of slavery was only a dream -- until it was fulfilled. The liberation of Europe from fascism was only a dream -- until it was achieved. The fall of imperial communism was only a dream -- until, one day, it was accomplished. Our generation has dreams of its own, and we also go forward with confidence. The road of Providence is uneven and unpredictable -- yet we know where it leads: It leads to freedom.
Its too early to tell of course, but I think President Bush may well go down in history with Lincoln (who freed the slaves), Franklin Roosevelt (who defeated European fascism), Reagan (who faced the Russian "evil empire" down) as the President who faced down the threat of fascist Islamic terrorism and sowed the seeds of modern democracy in the middle-east. A lot of things still need to go right in order for that to happen, but its not out of the realm of possibility either.