Today the nation’s eyes will be on the Iowa Caucuses. This provides us with the rare opportunity and responsibility to demonstrate to the rest of the nation that us folks here in Iowa are well informed and intelligent.

The first step in proving this is for no one to show up at the Republican Caucuses.

Well, a boy can dream.

More realistically, those of you who do go to the Republican Caucus in your neck of the woods must vote for John McCain in order that we can have a presidential race and not a popularity contest.

George W. Bush is trying very hard to be as bland as possible so he can coast into the presidency on his father’s name.

This is very much in the interest of the GOP, as they haven’t won an election without a star from Texas or California in the past 50 years. Bush was VP and a Texas congressman, Reagan was governor of California and president of the Screen Actors Guild, Ford was from Michigan, but never got elected, Nixon was Eisenhower’s VP and a congressman from California whose political success stemmed from accusing people of being communists, and Eisenhower was a general and World War II hero.

By contrast, Clinton was governor of Arkansas, Carter was governor of Georgia, Johnson was VP and a Texas senator, Kennedy was a Massachusetts senator, and Truman was VP and a Senator from Missouri.

On Saturday, I watched an interview with George W. in Sioux City on CNN. The first thing I heard W. say was “I don’t trust those people in Washington.” He’s really a Washington outsider. Oh wait, his dad was President.

I guess he doesn’t trust his dad. So much for the GOP virtue of a strong family.

The interviewers asked him about Supreme Court Justice David Souter. Bush flat-out refused to answer the question and told the interviewers he knew what they were trying to do.

Souter was appointed to the Supreme Court in 1990 by President Bush. He has turned out to be more centrist than conservative and has been accused by some of using the bench to form public policy instead of interpreting the Constitution.

From a republican point of view, appointing Souter was probably one of the larger blunders of Bush’s presidency — but George W. can’t afford to distance himself from his father because being Bush’s kid is his whole platform.

They then asked him about his tax plan, which is laid out to help the working person. They pointed out curiously that W.’s plan leaves the capital gains tax alone (up to 39.6 percent), while Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board Alan Greenspan thinks it should be zero.

W. said he couldn’t get rid of everything.

Greenspan may spend two hours in the tub every day, but as far as I’m concerned he’s a pulsating brain of economics, so I decided to look into this discrepancy.

I found the August 1999 Staff Report of the U.S. Senate Joint Economic Committee, which you too can find at www.senate.gov/~jec/capgains.htm.

Capital gains are the increase of the value of an asset (i.e. stocks, business, or FARM) between the time it is bought and sold. According to the JEC, capital gains are derived from entrepreneurial ventures which are essential to economic growth. Most people who report capital gains do not have high incomes.

Capital gains taxes disproportionately hurt elderly and low- and middle- income investors because high-income investors have the most flexibility and means to avoid high tax rates.

High income investors pay a greater percentage of capital gains taxes when rates are low. Here’s the big shocker.

Capital gains comprise a minor part of the federal tax revenue, and cutting them further has little effect on the federal budget.

In summary, high-income investors like George W., who used to own part of the Texas Rangers baseball team, couldn’t care less about Iowa farmers.

After that, I watched the New Hampshire Youth Forum on C-SPAN. The first thing I heard him say was that the best way to fund higher education is through Pell Grants and private loans.

When asked how he was going to restore the faith of youth in politics, he said he was going to “tell the truth.” When further pressed on campaign finance reform, he dodged the question and through a Freudian slip or poor speaking ability said “I’m a campaign funding supporter.”

Moments later he said “soft money is not affecting this primary,” and that soft money only comes into play in national elections.

That’s a bold faced lie. Even if what he said were true, if it weren’t for soft money his dad wouldn’t have gotten elected, which would leave him with no platform, thus affecting the primary.

Lastly, he said that government can’t provide hope — it comes from the decent people around you. I guess he’s never seen the 13th Amendment to the Constitution (abolition of slavery), the 19th (women’s right to vote), or the 21st (repeal of prohibition).

If there’s no hope, why run for president anyway?

---

Erik Hoversten is a senior in math from Eagan, Minn. He’s going to start keeping track of his receipts a lot better just in case Bush reads this and gets elected.