State of the Union: The Legacy of George W. Bush in Cold, Hard Numbers

The economy is front and center again on the front pages, and President Bush's State of the Union address tonight will reflect that.

Bush is likely going to praise the bipartisan stimulus deal as a cure-all while continuing to tell us that America has been doing exactly the right thing for the past seven years--fighting the terrorists over there so we don't have to fight them here. No bad decisions were ever made, no recession is occurring, no heads need roll.

That's to be expected from this dead-ender president.

The current economic crisis (recession?!) is not entirely Bush's fault, but it would be hard to say his policies have helped anyone but the rich.

Anticipating an inevitible pass-the-buck from Bush, Rahm Emanuel, chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, released a chart last week titled "The Legacy of George W. Bush."

The chart looks at twenty national statistics in January 2001 and today. It's disturbing.

A few lowlights:

--The number of Americans living in poverty has jumped from 31.6 million to 36.5 million.
--The uninsured population has grown from 38 million to 47 million.
--The annual total premium cost has nearly doubled from $6,230 per family to $12,106 per family.
(Bush's heartless health care policy: Let the markets sort it out. Business first, human beings later.)

--The trade deficit has more than doubled from $380 billion to $759 billion.
--Our dependency on foreign oil has shot up from 52.75% of fuel consumption to 60.38%. (Sweetheart trade deals benefit mega-corporations and oil companies, but not people.)

--Public opinion around the world about the U.S. has plummeted. In a Pew Poll of ten nations, respondents viewing America favorably dropped from 58.3% to 39.2%. In specific countries, the drops are steeper.

One would think that any politician with sense would run screaming away from this anti-Midas president. Mind-bogglingly, the G.O.P. presidential front-runners are embracing the man; John McCain is running on Bush's military policy and Mitt Romney is running on Bush's economic policy.

"Change" is the word in vogue again this political season. Let's mean it this time!

Dan Brown is the author of "The Great Expectations School."

Comments

[kentninomiya]

Kent Ninomiya - President George W. Bush's final State of the Union speech seemed more about his legacy than the state of our union. He expended great effort to give his spin on the war in Iraq. Bush realizes that history will judge him by the outcome of the Iraq war. Convincing the masses that the cause was just, will determine whether Bush goes down in history as a great leader or a butcher. Bush even floated a Mid East peace agreement. Bill Clinton wanted that to be his legacy but failed. Bush hopes to one-up his predecessor. What the State of the Union speech was NOT... was politics. Bush did not overtly press a republican agenda that could help GOP candidates for president. None of the candidates want to be associated with Bush. The president is remarkably unpopular these days. It's quite a change from his nearly 90% approval rating he enjoyed just after 9-11. That's a similarity he shares with his father. George H.W. Bush was hugely popular following the first Gulf War only to leave office after one term when the economy went belly up. How will history judge "W?" That depends on how the Iraq war eventually wraps up. Kent Ninomiya
http://kent-ninomiya-history.blogspot.com/
http://www.kentninomiya.com
http://www.kentninomiya.org/
http://www.kentninomiya.info/
http://kent_ninomiya.bravejournal.com/
http://www.zimbio.com/Kent+Ninomiya+news

[LeftRight]

Hey, isn't the definition of insanity doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting a different reult each time? Kinda seems like this "stimulus package" is more of the same!

[oldpotsmuggler]

--The annual total premium cost has nearly doubled from $6,230 per family to $12,106 per family.

The Republican answer to health care is that we're not sufficiently "market driven", meaning, as this stastic shows, that we don't pay enough. For instance even Ron Paul advocates allowing doctors to collectively negotiate with insurers, and it's not too likely that this ex-doctor really believes that the doctor are going to insist on being paid less so the premiums can go down.

Typically, this is happening in an environment where our health care costs are the highest of any developed country and where our health outcomes are anything but noteworthy. If there is any Democrat out there that can't take this situation and drive a stake through the heart of the Republican Party then that is absolute proof of a sellout.

[desmirl]

The Republican candidates are as out of touch with the voting public as is the current resident of the oval office. McCain believes that the public supports the war because they are so afraid of the 'Global Islamic Threat' (and if you believe that one, I have this bridge to sell) that they will follow his lead to financial ruin through military spending. Romney thinks the economy is great--after all, he's rich, so isn't everyone else? McCain and Romney are bubbleboys--sons of privilege who are totally disconnected with reality, and the numbers of people voting (Democrat turnout vs Republican turnout for the respective contests) should be telling them that they are no longer relevant. Of course, the Democrats are still more than capable of shooting themselves in the foot and presenting a presidential candidate so trashed from the primary races that nothing is left but bloody shreds.