If elected this November, George W. Bush has promised to reduce spending on many popular domestic programs in 2006, according to a memo leaked from the White House Office of Management and Budget. Education spending would decrease by $1.5 billion; the Department of Homeland Security would lose $1 billion and Veterans Affairs $900 million.

Of course, we won’t really know about spending until Congress passes the spending bills, but we can sure learn a great deal about the path the current administration will take if it wins in November.

Bush has declared he will cut the deficit in half in five years, but has provided few details outside of plans to cut domestic spending.

The conservative approach to deficits has often been to try and grow our way out of the shortfall by cutting taxes to stimulate economic growth.

The Republican mantra since Reagan has been that reducing taxes on rich families and corporations spurs economic growth that trickles down to everyone else.

Republicans tout that the tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 have saved an average of $144 billion per family this year, but as always with Bush, the devil is in the details. His tax cuts have benefited the wealthy much more than everyone else.

Take 2004 for example: The 257,000 families making more than $1 million per year received a larger combined tax cut than the 85 million households that comprise the bottom 60 percent of the income ladder.

To put that into perspective, one of the 257,000 families at the top saved more than $330 in taxes for every dollar saved by one of the families at the bottom.

The current economic recovery is also titled toward the wealthy because workers are not benefiting as they have in past recoveries.

In 2002 and 2003, corporate profits gobbled up 40 percent of the economic gains, more than twice the previous historic high of 19 percent. Contrast this with the share of the recovery going to workers is only 39 percent, down from the historic high of 55 percent.

Bush has helped create an environment in this country where the net flow of wealth is from the middle class to the wealthy.

To be fair to Bush, this phenomenon has been occurring for a long time, but his policies are increasing the rate of disparity. Bush is praised for his great moral clarity in removing Saddam Hussein, but nobody in the Republican Party says “boo” when his policies make life more difficult for a majority of our families.

Ted Peterson

Alumnus

Ames