HOW CONSERVATIVE IS PRESIDENT BUSH?

The Cato Institute ^ | August 3, 2002 | By Veronique de Rugy

[Uncle Bill]

How Conservative Is President Bush?

The Cato Institute
By Veronique de Rugy
August 3, 2002
Source

Veronique de Rugy is a fiscal policy analyst at the Cato Institute.

President Bush may be repeating the sins of his father. Although elected on a Reaganesque, tax-cutting platform, the White House has veered to the left. President Bush has signed a bill to regulate political speech, issued protectionist taxes on imported steel and lumber, backed big-spending education and farm bills, and endorsed massive new entitlements for mental health care and prescription drugs. When the numbers are added up, in fact, it looks like President Bush is less conservative than President Clinton.

It makes little sense to discourage one's core supporters prior to a mid-term election. Yet that is the result when a Republican president expands government, which Bush is doing. Also, academic research on voting patterns shows that a president is most likely to get re-elected if voters are enjoying an increase in disposable income. Yet making government bigger is not a recipe for economic growth. After all, there is a reason why Hong Kong grows so fast and France is an economic basket case. But you can't tell that to the Bush administration.

Administration officials privately admit that much of the legislation moving through Congress represents bad public policy. Yet they argue either that everything must take a back seat to the war on terror (much as the first Bush administration treated the war against Iraq) or that compromises are necessary to neutralize issues such as education. But motives and rationalizations do not repeal the laws of economics.

In less than two years, President Bush has presided over more government expansion than took place during eight years of Bill Clinton. For instance:

• The education bill expands federal involvement in education. The administration originally argued that the new spending was a necessary price to get vouchers and other reforms. Yet the final bill boosted spending and was stripped of almost all reform initiatives. And there is every reason to believe that this new spending will be counter-productive, like most other federal money spent on education in the past 40 years. Children and taxpayers are the big losers.

• The farm bill is best characterized as a bipartisan orgy of special interest politics. Making a mockery of the Freedom to Farm Act, the new legislation boosts farm spending to record levels. Old subsidies have been increased and new subsidies created. Perhaps worst of all, the administration no longer has the moral credibility to pressure the European Union to reform its socialized agricultural policies. Taxpayers and consumers are the big losers.

• The protectionist decisions on steel and lumber imports make free traders wish Bill Clinton were still president. These restrictions on world commerce have undermined the productivity of U.S. manufacturers by boosting input prices and creating massive ill will in the international community. American products already have been targeted for reciprocal treatment. Consumers and manufacturers are the big losers.

• The campaign finance law is an effort to protect the interests of incumbent politicians by limiting free speech rights during elections. The administration openly acknowledged that the legislation is unconstitutional, yet was unwilling to make a principled argument for the Bill of Rights and fair elections. Voters and the Constitution are the big losers.

• New health care entitlements are akin to throwing gasoline on a fire. Medicare and Medicaid already are consuming enormous resources, and the burden of these programs will become even larger when the baby boom generation retires. Adding a new prescription drug benefit will probably boost spending by $1 trillion over 10 years. A mandate for mental health coverage will drive up medical costs, making insurance too expensive for many more families.

Those policy decisions make government bigger and more expensive. They also slow the economy and hurt financial markets -- read the headlines lately? For all his flaws, President Clinton's major policy mistake was the 1993 tax increase. Other changes, such as the welfare reform bill, NAFTA, GATT, farm deregulation, telecommunications deregulation, and financial services deregulation, moved policy in a market-oriented direction.

Perhaps most importantly, there was a substantial reduction in federal spending as a share of gross domestic product during the Clinton years. Using the growth of domestic spending as a benchmark, Clinton was the second most conservative president of the post-World War II era, trailing only Ronald Reagan.

To be sure, much of the credit for Clinton's good policy probably belongs to the Republican Congress, but that is not an excuse for bad policy today. And on one positive note, President Bush has "promised" to fight for partial privatization of Social Security. Yet, so far, President Bush has not vetoed a single piece of legislation. Needless to say, this means it will be rather difficult to blame "big-spending" Democrats if the economy continues to sputter.

---

Compassionate Conservatism Means Big Government

No To 'Compassionate Conservatism'
"Marvin Olasky, the former Marxist journalism professor who coined the term. But he and George W. Bush are barking up the wrong tree if they think "compassionate conservatism" is going to rally popular support necessary to effect the real change needed to turn this country around."

President Highlights Compassionate Conservative Agenda for Inner Cities

---

If You Want Increasing Huge Government, Vote Bush

BUSH SPENDING BILL LARGEST EVER

U.S. quietly OKs fetal stem cell work - Bush allows funding despite federal limits on embryo use

Bush Signs Largest Family Planning Bill In U.S. History

Un El día En El la vida de Jorge W. La arbusto

OPEN BORDERS

Bush's 'open door' slammed

"I told the Congress that I want to make sure that the Mexican citizen here is well-respected," Bush said. "And one way to do that is to pass 245I."

CFR - "I Believe In Free Speech"

Meanwhile, Back On The Farm

Bush Urges Congress To Deliver on Prescription Drugs For Medicare

• AARP Likes Bush's Prescription Drug Plan

GOP Medicare Prescription Drug Plan Advances in House - Another Trillion Dollars

Pig Book - 2002

Orgy At Federal Trough

Bush and House Republicans Push Legislation For Full Drug Subsidies For Low-Income Elderly

Bush Prepares 'Big-Time' Response To African Famine

Government Spending - War Against The Stock Market

Bush signs debt-limit increase

Bush Pushes Minority Homeownership

Bush's Food Stamp Plan Called Ethnic Pandering

Bush Wants Food Stamps For Non-Citizens

Worse Than Drunken Sailors!

Senate Clears Way For Trade Bill - More Spending

BUSH AND THE BIG GOVERNMENT GOP

Security Bill Loaded With Wasteful PORK

Senate Ok's $31.5 Billion Anti-Terror Bill Loaded With Pork

How Bad Can Things Get?

George W. Bush and Gun Control

Bush Pushes Gore Plan For Orwellian Government

Bush Backs Down From Immunity Demand - Caves Again

Bush administration has been "as bad, if not worse" than the Clinton administration when it comes to the transfer of sensitive technologies to the People's Republic of China

BUSH, G7 to pay $20 billion to get rid of Russian nuke stockpiles

George W. Bush - The Global Warming Sell-Out

• George W. Bush Told Americans Before Elected That He Was A Global Warming Wacko

• Conservatives Angered by Environmental Provision [Bush pulls another Al Gore]

Dubya's New Deal - The New FDR

• Roosevelt -- Man Of The Century?

Bush Won't Label Arafat A Terrorist

George W. Bush's Terrorist Buddy

"When peoplelose faith in their institutions they trust to enforce the law, justice is no longer possible."

Bush Caves On Airport Screeners

Bush's Latest Srategic Mistake

BUSH: NINE FORMER PRESIDENTS WRONG; CLINTON RIGHT!

CRISIS? WHAT CRISIS? GEORGE BUSH'S NEVER-ENDING DOMESTIC BUDGET BUILD-UP - Father Like Son

Bush Appoints Four More Homosexuals

Dr. James Dobson Criticizes Bush Appointment to the CDC

Bush Pushes $500 Million HIV/Aids Funding For Africa

Bush to Propose Another $100 Million Over Five Years for Education in Africa

Are You Fat? No Problem, George W. Bush Will Help

House Conservatives Budge on Arts Spending

Bush Cheers Government Support For Art

Bush to Name Justice Dept. BUILDING After Kennedy

GOP Right In Iowa Fear Purge

GOP Leaders Spurn Right in Key Races

Laura Ingraham's analysis of yet another Bush betrayal

Bush decisions rankle conservatives

BUSH PROPOSES LARGEST EXPANSION OF GOVERNMENT SINCE TRUMAN

Bush's Record Calls into Question His Conservative Label

Conservatives Question Dubya's Direction

Conservatives not satisfied with Bush's record

Bush, Ashcroft Run Roughshod Over Bill Of Rights, Study Says

Republicans: Big Government Addicts

A Few Questions For Die-Hard Bush Supporters

Are Republicans losing their constituency?

Ann Coulter: BUSH PAYS HOMAGE TO THE FETISHISTIC RITUALS OF LIBERALISM

Compassionate conservatism is about socialism, not Americanism

Bush is jettisoning his principles for what?

Bush: stop the runaway federal spending and regulating!

Mark Levin Hammers Bushbots

Was Clinton More Conservative Than Bush? - Fox News

Bush: A Democrat in Republican clothing?

Bush continues Clinton Agenda

GEORGE W. BUSH: CLINTON'S THIRD TERM ©

---

Bush's Court Jester

---

"Another way to make sure that we foster growth and restore confidence is to hold people accountable for misdeeds in the public sector."
George W. Bush - University of Alabama at Birmingham Alys Stephens Center - July 15, 2002.

NOTE: Do As I Say, Not As I Do.

---

A Bush administration insider has privately leaked word that a deal was struck between Democratic congressional leaders and the Bush White House not to prosecute Bill and/or Hillary Clinton

Bush Administration Lawyers Defending Hillary - Gratis

Bush and Ashcroft Justice Dept. Hamstringing Pardongate Probers.

Bill Clinton broke the law and the Republicans let him off the hook.

What we need is the tough Newt Gingrich back.

"As far back as April 7, 1998, then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich was asked on NBC’s Today if he were going to press for impeachment. His response: "No, we don’t have any evidence."
Source.

Al Gore Broke The Law and the Republicans let him off the hook.

"I don’t care if you have proof that he raped a woman, stood up and shot her dead, you’re still not going to get 67 votes."

Bush Says He Wants to Let Clinton 'Move On'
"Listen, here's my view: I think it's time to get all of this business behind us. I think it's time ... to allow the president to finish his term, and let him move on and enjoy life and become an active participant in the American system. And I think we've had enough focus on the past. It's time to move forward." - George W. Bush.

Bush Won't Dwell On Clinton Affair, "We're Moving Forward"
"B/S, Mr Bush. Clinton is a criminal and a traitor. We demand a thorough investigation and prosecution. Our Republic is dead and our liberty is at stake if the next administration does not clean up this mess for now and forever more. Corrupt politicians must pay the price for subverting our Constitution and using their offices for personal gain."
4 Posted on 01/20/2000 14:17:56 PST by Jim Robinson

---

A Republic If We Can Keep It - Bush Trashing The Constitution

It's About The Republic, Not The Republican

How Big Is The Government's Debt? - $33.1 TRILLION

There Must Be Some Way Out Of Here

---

"Not over my dead body will they raise your taxes,"
George W. Bush - SOURCE.

[Texasforever]

The 11th commandment initially applied to Republican primaries, and how we should not bad-mouth each other.

Nice try but no cigar. Try harder.

[Jesse]

At least he won't bail out some 3rd world South American country so the big banks don't lose money.

Uh-oh. You were saying? See below.

On a conservative scale of 1-10 with Bill Clinton being a 2, Ronald Reagan an 8, and Ron Paul a 10, Bush is a 3.5.

U.S. to Give $1.5B Loan to Uruguay
Sun Aug 4, 1:27 PM ET
By MARTIN CRUTSINGER, AP Economics Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Bush administration will provide an emergency $1.5 billion loan to Uruguay to help the country deal with an economic crisis that forced its banks to close last week, officials said Sunday.

The U.S assistance will come in the form of a loan to be repaid in a matter of days once the South American nation receives a new loan package from the International Monetary Fund ( news - web sites), said the officials, speaking on condition of anonymity.

It will be the first time the administration has agreed to provide direct support to a country in economic trouble.

The immediate support was judged critical to ease what has become an escalating financial crisis in South America. It began in Argentina in December and since has spread to Uruguay and Brazil, the region's largest economy.

Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill left Sunday for Brazil, and later will visit Uruguay and Argentina.

The administration took office pledging to oppose the type of direct financial assistance and big bailouts the Clinton administration used during the 1997-98 Asian currency crisis. But the deepening economic woes in Latin America have forced the Bush administration to reconsider that stance.

A $1.5 billion loan for Uruguay was seen as essential to allow the country to reopen its banks Monday. They shut down last Tuesday as authorities sought to deal with a run on deposits. The closings sparked violent street protests.

Uruguay's Senate on Sunday approved a request by the economy minister to restrict withdrawals of deposits linked to the U.S. dollar for three years; the money would draw interest. The lower House was expected to meet later Sunday to consider final passage of the legislation.

The minister, Alejandro Atchugarry, said the proposal was the "only solution" to the crisis. It was expected that the IMF would grant approval for new assistance after the plan was approved.

The IMF this year granted Uruguay a $3 billion credit line, saying the money would help the country withstand the economic fallout from the troubles in neighboring Argentina.

The new $1.5 billion loan package was expected to include an extra $800 million in support and an acceleration in the disbursement of some of money already approved.

U.S. officials insisted that the loan was not a return to the bailouts of the Clinton years. They included support during the Asian crisis and billions of dollars in direct loans to Mexico in 1995 to help that country recover after it was forced to devalue its currency the year before.

The Bush administration has softened its hard line in recent days against large IMF aid packages, given the troubles in Latin America.

The IMF is in negotiations with Brazil over an increase in its credit line, which now totals $15 billion. Published reports have said that amount could be boosted by $10 billion to $20 billion in an effort to calm increasing worries about Brazil's ability to meet payments on its $264 billion foreign debt.

O'Neill said last week that the administration supported more assistance to Brazil and Uruguay because those countries were following the appropriate policies to deal with their economic troubles. He did include Argentina in that list.

O'Neill said authorities there needed to go further with economic reforms before the United States, the IMF's largest contributor, would feel comfortable in endorsing new IMF loans for Argentina.

[Howlin]

Actually, the poster of this thread should be the first indication.

GP, here's one.

[Texasforever]

Look, you are a well-known freeper liberal. If Bush is so damned liberal you should be in spasms of ecstasy. Stop playing both sides of the fence.

[NeoCaveman]

Well an article that starts with 'President Clinton was more conservative than President Bush' should be the first indication.

Ding. Ding. Ding. We have a winner. Terry McAullife could have written this article. How dumb do they think we are?

[Satadru]

Reagan took on the Evil Empire. Bush wants to help out the Evil Empire (China). He will not even call communism evil, as was evident in his speech in Congress. Reagan was the ultimate supply-sider who wanted to cut the size of the govt. Bush not only wants to expand it, but he thinks big govt is compassionate. If Reagan had any one chamber of Congress behind him, he would have been able to do much more.

[rintense]

Good point.

[Satadru]

Just because you don't know it, that doesn't mean that I need to try harder. Maybe that is Bush's logic, but it makes no sense.

[NeoCaveman]

If Reagan had any one chamber of Congress behind him, he would have been able to do much more.

Did not Reagan have the Senate from 1980 - 1986? True he never had the House.

[mrsmith]

"willie's special flavoring "

LOL! He's a wild man- but a treasure.
(Though this article isn't worthy of his effort IMHO)

[Texasforever]

Reagan took on the Evil Empire. Bush wants to help out the Evil Empire (China). He will not even call communism evil, as was evident in his speech in Congress. Reagan was the ultimate supply-sider who wanted to cut the size of the govt. Bush not only wants to expand it, but he thinks big govt is compassionate. If Reagan had any one chamber of Congress behind him, he would have been able to do much more.

Sort of like the "Axis of Evil"? He wanted to cut government but spent more than any previous president. He had the Senate behind him for 6 years. What did he do with it?

[watcher1]

Bump To read later

[doryfunk]

I think it is an exaggeration to say that Bush is more liberal than Clinton. Certainly Bush has had more success instituting leftist, collectivist programs, but Im sure Clinton would have liked to pass alot more, but he was stopped, because 'republicans' oppose democrat socialist programs. 'Republicans' only support socialist programs put forward by one of their own.

In reality, Republicans and Democrats are two sides of the same coin on the national level. As George Wallace said years ago, 'Theres not a dimes worth of difference between republicans and democrats.' Most republicans are RINO and most democrats are right with them. When was the last President we had that wasnt on the CFR?

Its easy to control the two parties at a national level with big money donations to support the propoganda machines of the two parties. In reality, it matters little if the democrat or republican candidate wins the race. The primary systems assure that two socialists go into the main election, and the apparent desire for the States to appeal to the masses in a false election makes the outcome self evident. We need some State legislatures to take charge and appoint electors to the electoral college with no pretense of an election of the masses, the way our system was desinged.

[Abcdefg]

Hey, I was just kidding.

[gcruse]

Yeah, I'm real happy about sending my taxes off to prop up corruption elsewhere, the steel tariffs to buy corrupt union votes, agriwelfare to corporations to grow food we don't need so we can send it to corrupt governments in Africa, and education spending to prop up corrupt teacher unions that don't educate. Only blind fools think this is conservatism.

[doryfunk]

Hear Hear

[afuturegovernor]

A read thread one time that detailed the number of moderate positions Reagan took. People were bashing Reagan and longing for "the last true Republican president" (as one poster put it): Calvin Coolidge.

I have disagreed with Bush numbers of times, but I get really tired of these hit pieces. You know the articles always put under breaking news in all caps. Shouldn't breaking news be reserved for news that is breaking from Fox News, Washington Times, ect.

[Texasforever]

Yeah, I'm real happy about sending my taxes off to prop up corruption elsewhere, the steel tariffs to buy corrupt union votes, agriwelfare to corporations to grow food we don't need so we can send it to corrupt governments in Africa, and education spending to prop up corrupt teacher unions that don't educate. Only blind fools think this is conservatism.

Give me a break.

[gcruse]

Sound like a liberal, still? 'Give me a break' means you have no defense.

[Texasforever]

These are the same idiots that blasted Reagan for the same things they are blasting Bush for. They just forget that some of us have good memories.