WASHINGTON — President Bush emphasized previously stated foreign and domestic policy goals during his State of the Union address Wednesday, leaving some Iowans wondering if his plans were too ambitious.

Social Security reform is a high priority for the administration, Bush said, along with the goal of spreading freedom abroad.

ISU College Republicans president Louis Kishkunas said Bush’s Social Security agenda to make private investment accounts available to younger citizens will be a “tough sell.”

“He may not be able to fund another transitional program,” Kishkunas said. “But where President Bush is right is there is a problem in the program … This is something that is a real big issue to college students.”

Rep. Tom Latham, R-Iowa, said he agrees. Something needs to be done about Social Security, Latham said, and President Bush only highlighted one option for its future.

“I think we certainly have to agree Social Security is in long-term jeopardy,” Latham said. “What they are talking about is personal accounts they can put money into. Ownership is a critical issue.”

Bush’s claim that Social Security could potentially bankrupt drew cries from the Democratic side of the room Wednesday. The opposition was felt in Iowa as well.

ISU Democrats president Gabriel Whitaker said Democrats recognize the need for reform, but not what Bush has been proposing.

“I think the Democrats understand something has to be done, but they think Bush is going about it in completely the wrong way,” Whitaker said. “I am completely against privatizing Social Security. That is supposed to just be supplemental to a retirement account, not the entire thing.”

The speech followed Sunday’s successful elections in Iraq. Bush and his supporters repeated his plan to spread freedom globally.

“Sunday’s election in Iraq marked an important milestone,” said Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, in a statement after the speech. “Following the elections, the Iraqi people will now develop a constitution that will be the foundation for a truly democratic Iraq. It’s important that the president made clear that the United States is committed to helping build an Iraqi security force to protect their infant democracy.”

Whitaker said Bush’s campaign strategy in 2000 for Iraq differs from the goal he has now set. Even after the elections took place, Whitaker said Bush’s intent for invasion was disconcerting.

“When he wanted to go into Iraq, it was for the weapons of mass destruction, not to spread democracy” he said. “When we went in, there were no weapons of mass destruction. So, what we did was good, but we went in for the wrong reasons.”

Kishkunas said Bush’s plan for Iraqis is another step closer to an ongoing goal, which isn’t a partisan issue.

“The ultimate goal is to end tyranny in the world,” he said.