The View From The Gallery - Bush and Democrats Face Off
I sat in the first row of the House gallery, watching the parade of Senators and Congressmen down below, knowing that the country’s fate rests in their hands and the power of the man at the podium. The President was gracious to new House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. But charm aside, this was serious business.
It was a fairly subdued House Chamber. The war hangs heavy over the government. The ruling Democrats were polite.The President seemed determined to steer the course toward domestic issues. The tax deduction for purchase of health insurance was a signal that he wants to take the lead in what could be the most important domestic issue of the next two years.
His remarks on alternative fuels were well received by both parties. It is a bipartisan issue. And reducing gas consumption by 20 percent over 10 year is a lofty goal.
What was most different about this state of the union was the muted applause on his plans for Iraq. For better or worse, new domestic programs or not, the war in Iraq remained the overriding issue in his assessment of the state of the union. He urged the Congress to give his new plan a chance, more of an appeal to the people rather than the Congress.
The State of the Union holds a tradition of giving embattled Presidents the opportunity to revive their administrations. And so it was that George W. Bush put on the proud face, defending his struggling war in Iraq and trying desperately to adopt converts to his domestic agenda. No one could argue for his call for funds for the war on terror, but you could hear a noticeable buzzing in the room when he tied the Iraqi war to the terror battle.
The newly empowered Democrats were polite, as they should be. members. Ironically, his domestic agenda might be helped along by Democrats who will want something to show for their first years in power.
IT IS AN IRONY THAT MR. BUSH NOW NEEDS THE DEMOCRATS TO SHAPE HIS LEGACY WHILE THE DEMOCRATS NEED HIM TO GET SOME OF THEIR PROGRAMS PASSED!
Wow, that’s so cool you were there, Larry. I was humbled when I was invited to share my analysis of the speech on ABC News Now’s wall to wall political coverage. That is my career highlight so far. But he regarding his speech, I got mixed emotions.
Most of his domestic issues I kind of liked. I do have a few problems. His health insurance plan is a good short term relief, however it is just simply shifting the burden over to the government. I hope he is cooking up a long term plan to put a cap on costs somehow. He was right in saying the best that can be done is by doctors and their patients.
Very good on alternative fuels. However, as mentioned in the democrats’ response, he mentioned this 7 times before. It seems like progress is being made and he is serious about reducing oil consumption. I hope we do because oil is like cigarettes. Corporations profit, those who quit endure the side effects. The car won’t go, the house freezes, etc.
I do not like his plan to expand the No-Child-Left-Behind. His rationale was good, but I know first hand of problems with the bill. Essential concepts necessary for getting into college have to be dropped from courses because more preparation for standardized tests are necessary as No-Child-Left-Behind assess schools a lot based on standardized tests.
I am happy that he recognized that our economy is growing and that we should keep it that way. I had a laugh when he said “we need to balance the national budget” and everybody stood up and applauded. I honestly think balancing the budget is usually goes without saying.
Finally, the “war on terror”. This is where I give the president a big thumbs down. I think he generalized the War In Iraq as part of the War On Terror. I wanted to hear him explain how the War In Iraq will benefit us and why it was worth the bloodshed so far. The only reason I got was that Iraq will be a good ally for us. He, however, explained very well of how it will all benefit the Iraqi people. It is a good thing that a dictator is no longer in power and they can participate in their government, but really am still waiting for a really good rationale from the president to why it was worth the cost for us.
This state of the union was among his stronger I personally think. However, that’s just my opinion.
Your analysis is clear and thought provoking
LK
As state of the Union speeches go, this was a good one.
Regardless of the ‘reall reasons’ for our incursion into Iraq, it is vital that we finish the job andprovide a stable government and system friendly to our interests in this country. The primary issue is and remains OIL and our insatiable thirst for it. The oil industry and the federalgovernment are not willing to do domestically that which we can - that is, develop our OWN resources (even if it means ‘violating’ the precious ANWR in the Great White North). How many oil fields around this great country sit idle or capped, yet have greatcapacity and are notbeing pumped because of corporate greed. It is not about the consumption/demand, because we COULD meet our demand domestically,if we made the choice to. People complain about the price that we pay for gasoline and other fossil fuels, yet, among developed nations, we have some of the LOWEST consumer prices for our fuels. Geographically, Iraq is vital to our interest in the Persian Gulf - lose it, and we might just lose friendly access to the entire region (kindasorta like a domino effect).
The time IS now to develop and implement a sound end strategy to this mess, but Iraq really needs to step up THEIR efforts, as well. If we have people making these decisions from our ’side’ that believe that we will change the peoples of Iraq (or ANYWHERE in that volitile region) they are sadly mistaken and incredibly naive, and true victory will never be achieved. They are much better at the conflict game than we will ever hope to be.
On domestic issues, it is very easy to saddle the President with blame, but, face it, the President is not the oone who controls the nation’s pursestrings. Our elected members of Congress do, and when they lose focus on ‘the people’s business’ and follow their OWN interest, stuff happens, and if the people get fed up enough with their ‘homeboy’ forgetting his roots, they elect somebody else who tickles their ear, then forgets them when he gets to Washington.
On health care - sure, everybody in this country (or ANYWHERE for that matter) deserves access to affordable health care. It is obscene to see an itemized doctor’s office visit bill or hospitalstay statement ans see what is tantamount to fraud waste and abuse on a gargantuan scale. Somehow, we need to rein this in. Look at the obscene profits reaped by the pharmaceutical companies - Why is it that we can pay 35-70 percent less for medicines North or South of our border than we do at our local pharmacy? Hmmmm. I do not believe that a government-sponsored health care plan or system, however, is the answer. They should get involved, however, in pushing for, nay MANDATING reform before the government needs to take it over and make a bigger mess of it.