While it’s been just over a month since he entered office, President George W. Bush hasn’t wasted any time pushing for his campaign ideals.Immediately after Bush’s first speech to a joint session of Congress Tuesday night, Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., and House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt, D-Miss., urged Americans not to support Bush’s proposed budget, saying it is too risky.Steffen Schmidt, university professor of political science, said Democrats are very concerned about Bush’s proposed tax cuts. Democrats want to spend more on social programs, he said, while Bush is more interested in the nation’s infrastructure. “The Democrats want to restrain a little more on some of the military spending,” Schmidt said. “Bush is interested in reforming Social Security, which makes Democrats nervous.”Sheila Riggs, executive director of the Iowa Democratic Party, said she is concerned with Bush’s increase of military spending. “In so many ways, Bush seems to be reverting back to the 1980s,” she said, when federal funding was focused on building the military in the midst of the Cold War.According to the president’s Web site, www.whitehouse.gov, Bush’s proposed budget increases military spending by $14 billion in 2002. This includes a $1.4 billion increase aimed at re-enlistment, retention and improving the quality of life in the military. Another $400 million would be allocated to improve housing for military personnel and their family members. There is also a $2.6 billion increase for military research and development of new technology — including the development of a controversial missile-defense system.Craig Schoenfeld, communications director for the Republican Party of Iowa, said the missile-defense system is something the country needs to develop. More nations have the capability to launch an attack on the United States, he said, instead of a cold-war situation, with only one country to worry about.”It comes down to priorities — we believe in having a strong national defense,” Schoenfeld said. “We have got to explore [missile defense]. National defense has got to be a priority.”Another conflict between Democrats and Republicans is the rate at which the national debt is paid down. According to www.whitehouse.gov, Bush’s proposal sets aside $2 trillion of an estimated $5.6 trillion surplus over 10 years to pay down the debt.Riggs said $2 trillion is not enough. “We have money in the bank, but we have not paid off our credit cards,” she said.Schoenfeld said paying down the national debt is the most important part of Bush’s proposal. He said a limited amount of the debt can be paid off without being charged penalties for paying the debt prematurely.”The president is paying down as much debt as possible without being penalized,” he said. “The leftover surplus is money the government is just sitting on.”Plans for the leftover surplus appear to be causing the most controversy. Schmidt said Bush is proposing a $1.6 trillion across-the-board tax cut. This has Democrats worried because it is based on an estimated surplus over 10 years.Democrats are proposing a $900 billion tax cut to avoid giving too much of the surplus back. “The priorities are too focused on redistributing the wealth to the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans,” Riggs said. “Once the tax cut is in place, the money won’t be spent on other programs. Ten-year economic forecasts are about as reliable as 10-year weather forecasts.” Schoenfeld said Democrats are using “their typical class warfare,” and Bush’s tax cut gives all people a break on their taxes. He said the cut will help the slowing economy, which Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan renewed warnings about Wednesday.Schoenfeld referred to the current state of the economy as “the Clinton recession” in response to Democrats condoning “Reaganomics.”Schoenfeld also said he is not concerned about the surplus estimates being inaccurate as long as Bush’s tax cut is approved. “If we leave it in Washington, it is going to be spent,” he said. “I would rather have it here to pump into the economy.”