Bush charts second-term strategy

msnbc.msn.com ^ | Dec. 10, 2004 | Jim VandeHei and Mike Allen

[crushelits]

Bush Not Screwing Around On Making "Ownership Society" A Reality

President Bush is moving quickly to create a new, tighter and more disciplined domestic policy team to pursue transforming the way Americans save for retirement, pay taxes and seek legal damages.

Convinced his leadership style and policy vision were vindicated by the election results, Bush is aggressively targeting these domestic programs for the second term by essentially replicating the formula he used to reshape foreign policy in the first. This includes creating a small, loyal and trustworthy team to press for sweeping changes largely dictated by the White House.

To build public support and circumvent critics in Congress and the media, the president will travel the country and warn of the disastrous consequences of inaction, as he did to sell his Iraq and terrorism policies during the first term, White House officials said. He is also enlisting well-funded conservative groups such as the Heritage Foundation to help build the case for change -- or "reform," in the words of the White House -- through ads and commentary on television and in targeted publications, the aides said.
Bush's post-election moves to strengthen White House control of the government reflect his plans for an aggressive second-term focus on domestic policy, which in his first term was overshadowed by the national security fallout from the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. The agenda includes creating private Social Security accounts for younger workers, revising the tax code to make it less complicated, limiting the size and number of lawsuits, and changing immigration laws.

[inquest]

The whole idea of making them permanent would be to put pressure on them to cut spending.

[Drennan Whyte]

The whole idea of making them permanent would be to put pressure on them to cut spending.

Why?

[inquest]

Why what? Why should we want to put pressure on them to cut spending? See FR's mission statement.

[Drennan Whyte]

Why should we want to put pressure on them to cut spending.

No, why should we expect this President or this Congress to cut spending? Neither one has shown any inclination to reign in federal spending, regardless of the size of the deficit. Just the opposite, Bush has indicated that he is prepared to accept $1 trillion to $2 trillion more in deficit spending in order to privatize a part of Social Security. Congress just passed an omnibus spending bill so laden with pork that it squeals. And you expect them to respond to some vague pressure from us to cut spending? Please.

[inquest]

There's a limit to how much they can load onto the deficit without causing major economic trouble. That's where the pressure comes in. Making the tax cuts permanent will increase the pressure that much further.

[Drennan Whyte]

There's a limit to how much they can load onto the deficit without causing major economic trouble.

Agreed. But this administration and this Congress have shown no signs of believing that. It will take a major economic disaster to accomplish that.

[inquest]

I don't think they'd be willing to risk a major economic disaster. That generally doesn't help their political fortunes.

[BJClinton]

Aside from these being very necessary reforms this should create some coattails for '06.