• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Bush Paints His Goals As 'Crises'

BBond

Diamond Member
Bush Paints His Goals As 'Crises'

President Reprises A First-Term Tactic

By Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, January 8, 2005; Page A01

President Bush had great success in his first term by defining crises that demanded decisive responses. Now, as he begins a second term, Bush is returning to the same tactic to accomplish three longtime conservative goals.

Warning of the need for urgent action on his Social Security plan, Bush says the "crisis is now" for a system even the most pessimistic observers say will take in more in taxes than it pays out in benefits well into the next decade.

He calls the proliferation of medical liability lawsuits a "crisis in America" that can be fixed only by limiting a patient's right to sue for large damages. And Bush has repeatedly accused Senate Democrats of creating a "vacancy crisis" on the federal bench by refusing to confirm a small percentage of his judicial nominees.

This strategy helped Bush win support for the war in Iraq, tax cuts and education policies, as well as reclaim the White House. What is unclear is whether the same approach will work, given the battering to the administration's credibility over its Iraq claims and a new Democratic campaign accusing Bush of crying wolf.

"This White House had made an art of creating crisis where a crisis does not exist," said Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.).

Painting a grim picture of problems is as old as politics itself. But Democrats and some presidential scholars say there is a danger for Bush if he appears to stoke fears for political gain. The Bush administration was criticized throughout the campaign -- and before -- for its repeated prewar warnings of Saddam Hussein's deadly weapons cache, which turned out to be based on faulty intelligence and proved largely untrue. Democrats contend Bush also exaggerated the nation's economic problems to justify tax cuts, terrorist threats to convince the public of the need for restrictions on civil liberties, and John F. Kerry's record to win a second term.

"One of the key problems of this form of rhetorical leadership" is discerning the difference "between a genuine and manufactured crisis," said Jeffrey K. Tulis, author "The Rhetorical Presidency" and a government professor at the University of Texas. "People do respond to crisis -- if you think there is one, you tend to support the leader. The danger there is if it appears there is not one, you can have a credibility problem."

A crisis, of course, is often in the eye of the elected. Webster's Dictionary defines it as "an unstable situation of extreme danger or difficulty." To Bush, vacancies on the federal bench, high-dollar medical liability lawsuits and the strained Social Security system all fit the definition.

But there is a political strategy behind the rhetorical technique, too. The president is convinced that lawmakers -- and the public -- are not inclined to tackle difficult issues unless "crisis is upon them."

In a Dec. 20 news conference, the president explained. "Many times, legislative bodies will not react unless the crisis is apparent, crisis is upon them," Bush said, discussing Social Security. "And so for a period of time, we're going to have to explain to members of Congress that crisis is here."

Four days earlier, he told participants at an economic conference how central this concept is to White House leadership. "A lot of government, if the truth be known, is crisis-oriented management," he said. "We wait and wait and wait, and then crisis is upon us and everybody demands a solution."

But are programs such as Social Security really in crisis? There is strong disagreement between Bush and Democrats. The president, for instance, has described the Social Security program as being in crisis in more than a dozen speeches, statements and news conferences since the Nov. 2 election. "You may not feel it, your constituents may not be overwhelming you with letters demanding a fix now, but the crisis is now," he said last month.

The crisis, as Bush explains, is this: A decade or so from now the Social Security system will begin paying out more in benefits than it takes in payroll taxes because there will be higher percentage of older Americans than there is today. From that point, the system, if unchanged, will create a $3.7 trillion shortfall by 2075, or $10.4 trillion if calculated over eternity, that future generations will be forced to pay for. The crisis, in effect, is not fixing the problem before it spreads out of control, according to Bush.

But Bush's chief solution -- allowing younger workers to divert a portion of their 6.2 percent payroll tax into private investment accounts -- will do nothing to avert it unless it is accompanied by a reduction in future guaranteed benefits or other changes to the retirement program, according to many experts on Social Security.

"It is a crisis created in the mind of the White House because they want to take care of the fat cats on Wall Street," Reid said. He argued that Social Security is primed to pay out full benefits until 2055 -- even if no changes are made. Many Democrats propose small and gradual changes such as raising the payroll tax or reducing future benefits, perhaps just for the wealthy, to head off problems. Reid and most Democrats oppose private Social Security accounts.

As for medical malpractice, Bush says greedy trial lawyers are driving up health care costs for consumers and driving good doctors out of business by filing frivolous lawsuits. "It's crisis because it affects lives and health care," said Trent Duffy, a White House spokesman.

Bush used the word "crisis" four times Thursday in a campaign-style speech in Collinsville, Ill., where he blamed lawsuits for depriving Americans, especially those in rural areas, of quality physicians to deliver babies and save lives. "It is a societal issue that we must deal with," he said. "We don't want our little towns . . . not having any health care."

Both sides agree there is major health care problem in some states and localities where doctors are fleeing because of skyrocketing medical malpractice insurance costs. But there is widespread disagreement about how pervasive the problem is and who is to blame.

In 2002, the last year for which complete figures are available, malpractice costs amounted to less than 2 percent of health care costs, according to the Congressional Budget Office. "A reduction of 25 percent to 30 percent in malpractice costs would lower health care costs by only 0.4 percent to 0.5 percent, and the likely effect on health insurance premiums would be comparably small," according to the CBO study. Still, several areas are suffering from a shrinking number of doctors.

Reid said the insurance companies, which set the rates for physicians, are to blame, not the trial lawyers.

Finally, Bush accuses Democrats of creating a "vacancy crisis" on the courts by opposing his nominees. Republicans claim Democrats have abused the Senate filibuster by blocking 10 of the president's 229 judicial nominees in his first term -- although confirmation of Bush nominees exceeds, in most cases, the first-term records of presidents going back to Ronald Reagan. "Does that sound like a crisis? Only if you failed math really badly," Reid said.

 
crisis on earth 1! justice league assemble!

(sorry... dc comics is the first thing I thought of when I read the article 😛)
 
Yep, and the sheep lap it up over and over again. "The sky is falling" has become the Bush mantra. (Well that, and "You're either with us or you support terrorism.")
 
For Medicare and Social Security, he's right. If we don't take action now the system will be untenable within 15-20 years.
 
Originally posted by: Orsorum
For Medicare and Social Security, he's right. If we don't take action now the system will be untenable within 15-20 years.
Does that really constitute a "crisis?" In my mind at least, a crisis would be: Unless we do something now we won't be able to send out SS checks next month. That's just me though.
 
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: Orsorum
For Medicare and Social Security, he's right. If we don't take action now the system will be untenable within 15-20 years.
Does that really constitute a "crisis?" In my mind at least, a crisis would be: Unless we do something now we won't be able to send out SS checks next month. That's just me though.

Ever heard of being a little proactive? Heck, lets just call it a "pre-emptive strike" against insolvency. 😉

CsG
 
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: Orsorum
For Medicare and Social Security, he's right. If we don't take action now the system will be untenable within 15-20 years.
Does that really constitute a "crisis?" In my mind at least, a crisis would be: Unless we do something now we won't be able to send out SS checks next month. That's just me though.
My thought as well. While they are certainly looming problems, they are nowhere near the crisis stage yet. We have time to fix these problems.
 
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: Orsorum
For Medicare and Social Security, he's right. If we don't take action now the system will be untenable within 15-20 years.
Does that really constitute a "crisis?" In my mind at least, a crisis would be: Unless we do something now we won't be able to send out SS checks next month. That's just me though.

Is global warming a crisis? Is the fact that there is 20 years of oil left a crisis? You liberals paint those as crisis', yet there won't even be any affect from them for many decades. Why is SS and Medicare any different?
 
Originally posted by: ntdz
Is global warming a crisis? Is the fact that there is 20 years of oil left a crisis? You liberals paint those as crisis', yet there won't even be any affect from them for many decades. Why is SS and Medicare any different?
Upon reviewing this with my son, the Philosophy expert, we are ruling that this is both a red herring and a straw man. It is a red herring since it is irrelevant to the topic at hand. It is also a straw man since it attacks a position the opponent has not taken. Both are looming problems that must be addressed, just like the long-term solvency of SS and Medicare.
 
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: ntdz
Is global warming a crisis? Is the fact that there is 20 years of oil left a crisis? You liberals paint those as crisis', yet there won't even be any affect from them for many decades. Why is SS and Medicare any different?
Upon reviewing this with my son, the Philosophy expert, we are ruling that this is both a red herring and a straw man. It is a red herring since it is irrelevant to the topic at hand. It is also a straw man since it attacks a position the opponent has not taken. Both are looming problems that must be addressed, just like the long-term solvency of SS and Medicare.

yes!
obviously SS and medicare are problems...but crisis suggests a problem that requires immediate (and therefore, emergency - ie: rushed and probably not precise or as well planned as it could be - action)
none of the problems require immediate action.
talk was brought up of the "2004 gay crisis" and i suppose it became one to both sides because it was suddenly put up to a vote in many places.
but truly, the first step to getting what bush wants is making it clear to everyone that action needs to be taken now, so that it will be taken with little time for all people involved to truly discuss the issue.
 
Originally posted by: PatboyX
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Originally posted by: ntdz
Is global warming a crisis? Is the fact that there is 20 years of oil left a crisis? You liberals paint those as crisis', yet there won't even be any affect from them for many decades. Why is SS and Medicare any different?
Upon reviewing this with my son, the Philosophy expert, we are ruling that this is both a red herring and a straw man. It is a red herring since it is irrelevant to the topic at hand. It is also a straw man since it attacks a position the opponent has not taken. Both are looming problems that must be addressed, just like the long-term solvency of SS and Medicare.

yes!
obviously SS and medicare are problems...but crisis suggests a problem that requires immediate (and therefore, emergency - ie: rushed and probably not precise or as well planned as it could be - action)
none of the problems require immediate action.
talk was brought up of the "2004 gay crisis" and i suppose it became one to both sides because it was suddenly put up to a vote in many places.
but truly, the first step to getting what bush wants is making it clear to everyone that action needs to be taken now, so that it will be taken with little time for all people involved to truly discuss the issue.



Ok, so if SS and medicare are only problems, what steps should we take to prevent them from becoming a crisis?
 
Originally posted by: charrison




Ok, so if SS and medicare are only problems, what steps should we take to prevent them from becoming a crisis?

Social Security reform: A guide

Eliminate the Social Security taxable income limit until the system achieves balance.

Each worker must pay in 12.4 percent of wages up to a certain income limit ($90,000 in 2005). If you're self-employed, you pay the whole amount. If you work for someone else, your employer kicks in half (6.2 percent).

HERE is the crux of the true problem...

Social Security has been taking in more money than it has had to pay out since the 1980s. It will continue to do so through 2017. But the surplus isn't cash that's locked away. Rather, it is loaned to the U.S. Treasury, which puts it in the general revenue pool. As such, it is spent on anything the government deems fit.

The system is solvent until at least 2042. There is no crisis. The Bush administration is only trying to achieve the goal of the radical wing of the Republican Party since Social Security was enacted.

Come 2018, when its revenue will be less than its costs, Social Security is expected to tap its Treasurys to pay benefits in full through 2042.

You know, we baby boomers aren't going to live forever. The system is solvent right now until at least 2042. A little planning and the system will get through the baby boom retirement bulge just fine. Do the math. By 2042 the oldest of the baby boomers will be in their 90s. Most in their 70s and 80s. Look at figures on life expectancy. Many of us will be long gone before the "crisis" hits. The burden will be easing.

This "crisis" is being manufactured so Bushco can get their hands on the $2 trillion current surplus and have an excuse to borrow $2 trillion more they can then find a way to get their hands on.

Wake up.

 
Investment pros see bonanza

The prospect of 100 million Americans each having $1,000 of their Social Security contributions to invest every year has investment professionals salivating at the potential financial bonanza.

About $100 billion a year would be freed up for stocks, bonds and other investments under a tentative plan President Bush has floated to fix the Social Security retirement system by creating private investment accounts.

The fees paid to brokers and money managers could run into the billions.

 
Back
Top