BUSHS PLAN, Miscellaneous, College Term Papers.com


		Data Bases
		• Custom Term Papers • Free Term Papers • Free Research Papers • Free Essays • Free Book Reports • Plagiarism?

		Links
		• Top 100 Term Paper Sites • Top 25 Essay Sites • Top 50 Essay Sites • Search 97,000 Papers @ DirectEssays.com • Search 101,000 Papers @ ExampleEssays.com • Search 90,000 Papers @ MegaEssays.com

		Free Essays
		• Term Paper Sites • Chuck III's Free Essays • Free College Essays • TermPaperSites.com • My Term Papers • Get Free Essays • Essay World • Planet Papers

Search Lots of Essays

Back to Subjects - Miscellaneous

BUSHS PLAN

BUSHS PLAN Prosperity results from entrepreneurship & ingenuity Bush thinks the economy has meant more for the Gore and Clinton folks than the Gore and Clinton folks has meant for the economy. Bush thinks most of the economic growth that has taken place is a result of ingenuity and hard work and entrepreneurship. And that’s the role of government to encourage that. Gore thinks that the American people deserve credit for the great economy that we have. And it’s their ingenuity. I agree with that. But they were working pretty hard eight years ago, and they had ingenuity eight years ago. The difference is, we’ve got a new policy. Look, we have gone from the biggest deficits to the biggest surpluses; we’ve gone from a triple dip recession during the previous 12 years to a tripling of the stock market. Instead of high unemployment, we’ve got the lowest African-American and lowest Latino unemployment rates ever in history, and 22 million new jobs. Private sector responsible for economic boom, well Bush flatly rejected the contention from Clinton and Gore that their economic policies, particularly the 1993 deficit-reduction package that passed Congress solely on Democratic votes, had contributed to the nation’s boom times. “I think the economy has grown really in spite of government. This is an incredible period of time when productivity has been enhanced, not because of any great initiative of government, but because of the ability for entrepreneurs to stake a new claim.” Make budget biennial; reinstate line-item veto; target pork. “If the discord in Washington never seems to end, it’s because the budget process never seems to end,” Bush said. He decried an environment of “too much polling and not enough decision-making.” Bush proposed revamping the federal budget process to shift from an annual to a biennial exercise and to require the president and Congress to agree on spending targets early in the process, to prevent government shutdowns. Bush also said he would target wasteful spending by restoring a version of the line-item veto and installing a commission to recommend pork-barrel projects for elimination. [Bush proposes] devoting the off-year in the biennial budget process to examining which government programs should be eliminated. House and Senate members said Bush’s ideas would get a respectful hearing on Capitol Hill, although proposals requiring Congress to relinquish power over the nation’s purse strings likely would encounter resistance. $46B in new spending on health, education, & defense George W. Bush may be inventing a different species of politician: a tax-cut-and-spend Republican. So far this week, Bush has proposed new spending that would total about $46 billion over five years, most of it for health care. Yesterday, he recommended a $4.3 billion program, mostly to expand community health services in remote and urban areas. Earlier, he called for $13 billion in new education spending, a defense plan that requires at least $25 billion in new spending--perhaps more. And he’s not through. Aides say Bush will use the coming months to outline more of his domestic policy views and, likely, additional spending for health care and other problems. Democrats say Bush has overestimated the projected surpluses, significantly underestimated the size of his tax cut, and has not factored into his fiscal equation plans to privatize part of the Social Security system and has yet to outline a single significant cut in current spending. New Prosperity Initiative: remove obstacles to advancement I propose a New Prosperity Initiative.... A plan to help remove obstacles on the road to the middle class.... Instead of helping people cope with their need, we will help them to move beyond it. The Initiative focuses on four additional keys to ensuring upward mobility: Increasing Access to the Middle Class Rewarding Work Providing Access to Affordable Health Care Expanding Homeownership Building Savings and Personal Wealth Federal government should stay out of the marketplace I was deeply concerned about the drift toward a more powerful federal government. I was particularly outraged by two pieces of legislation, the Natural Gas Policy Act and the Fuel Use Act. It seemed to me that elite central planners were determining the course of our nation. Allowing the government to dictate the price of natural gas was a move toward European-style socialism. If the federal government were going to take over the natural gas business, what would it set its sights on next? Simplify tax code to stimulate economic growth Bush said he would present a plan for a flatter and simpler tax code. He said the principal goal of his tax plan is to stimulate economic growth and productivity. A second goal is to return government surpluses to taxpayers, once ‘basic needs’ of society have been met. More job training; R&D tax credits Gov. Bush supports the following principles concerning the economy and employment. Reduce state government regulations on the private sector in order to encourage investment and economic expansion Increase funding for state job-training programs that re-train displaced workers or teach skills needed in today’s job market. Bush notes that he “proposed tax credits for companies to invest in research and development and a franchise tax cut for small business.” The surest way to bust economy is Gore’s enlarged government. Bush thinks that the surest way to bust this economy is to increase the role and the size of the federal government. The Senate Budget Committee did a study of Gore’s expenditures: it could conceivably bust the budget by $900 billion. That means he’s either going to have to raise your taxes by $900 billion or go into the Social Security surplus for $900 billion. Gore what he’s quoting is not the Senate Budget Committee, it is a partisan press release by the Republicans. And as for the surest way to threaten our prosperity, having a $1.9 trillion tax cut, almost half of which goes to the wealthy, and a $1 trillion Social Security privatization proposal, is the surest way to put our budget into deficit, raise interest rates and put our prosperity at risk. Let’s recall Bush’s line “I can’t let the man continue with fuzzy math. It’s $1.3 trillion, Mr. Vice President. And it’s going to go to everybody who pays taxes. I’m not going to be a pick-and-chooser. What is fair is everybody who pays taxes ought to get relief. Don’t let Gore bring back big government; 200 new programs Bush painted Gore on as a big spender who would bring back the era of expansive government and threaten prosperity. “He is proposing the largest increase in federal spending in 35 years.” He said Gore was proposing more than 200 new or expanded federal programs that would result in an estimated 20,000 to 30,000 new federal employees. He said there would be 412 new Medicare regulations and more audits of taxpayers. “All this could amount to over $2 trillion in bigger government in 10 years.” Bush’s budget: $265B left of surplus after 10 years Gore believes Feds spend surplus; Bush wants taxpayers to spend it. Gore and Bush’s [tax cut and spending] plans would reduce the surplus by an equivalent amount. [Where Gore and Bush differ is in] philosophies of government: Gore believes that government should direct and control the use of the surplus that is not allocated to debt reduction, whether on the tax side or the spending sides. He would increase government spending substantially more than Bush, would cut taxes less, and would aim more of his tax cuts to specific taxpayer behavior. Gore’s proposed tax cuts are little different substantively from direct spending, except that they go through the tax code. By contrast, Bush would “spend” more of the surplus on across-the-board tax cuts. Moreover, most of his reductions, in contrast to Gore’s, would not depend on taxpayers’ behavior, but would be given to all of them in the form of rate decreases. Cutting taxes allows people to keep more of their money, so that they decide, rather than the government, how to apportion it. Spend $586B surplus on tax cuts, health, & defense 10-year surplus: $2T Social Security; $1T debt; $1T tax cut I believe we’ve got $4 trillion [in surpluses available] over 10 years; $2 trillion of which will go to save Social Security and pay down debt; $1 trillion available for debt repayment and other programs and $1 trillion, over a 10-year period, for a meaningful, substantial, real tax cut to the people. Use presidential power to get money away from Congress McCAIN [to Bush]: You seem to depict the role of the president as a hapless bystander. [Clinton] is threatening to shut down the government and vetoing bills to force the congress to spend more money. An active president, i.e. me, will veto bills and threaten to shut down the government to make them spend less money. Bush: It’s the president’s job to make sure Congress doesn’t have the money to spend in the first place. It is the president’s job to stand up to express the will of the people, advocate and fight for a meaningful real tax cut. And that’s what I’m going to do. Supports Balanced Budget Amendment Gov. Bush stated that he would support an amendment to the U.S. Constitution requiring an annual balanced federal budget. George W. Bush on Oil & Energy. better to drill ANWR than import oil from Saddam Hussein GORE (to Bush): Gov.Bush is proposing to open up some of our most precious environmental treasures, like the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, to the big oil companies to go in and start producing oil there. I think that is the wrong choice. It would only give us a few months worth of oil, and the oil wouldn’t start flowing for many years into the future. I don’t think it’s a fair price to pay, to destroy precious parts of America’s environment. BUSH: We need an active exploration program in America. The only way to become less dependent on foreign sources of crude oil is to explore at home. And you bet I want to open up a small part of Alaska because when that field is online, it will produce a million barrels a day. Today we import a million barrels from Saddam Hussein. I would rather that a million come from our own hemisphere, our own country, as opposed from Saddam Hussein. Replenish energy supplies with new domestic coal & pipelines GORE [to Bush]: We have to free ourselves from big oil, from OPEC. We have to give new incentives for the development of resources, like deep gas in the western Gulf, but also renewable sources of energy and domestic sources that are cleaner and better. I’m proposing a plan that will give tax incentives for the rapid development of new kinds of cars, trucks, buses, factories, boilers, and furnaces that don’t have as much pollution. Bush wants to build pipelines to move natural gas. I want to develop coal resources. It’s an issue I know a lot about. I was a small oil person for a while. This is an administration that’s had no plan. And now, the results of having no plan have caught up with America. We’ve got abundant supplies of energy here, and we better start exploring it. There’s an interesting issue up in the Northwest, as well. And that is whether or not we remove dams that propose hydroelectric energy. I’m against removing dams in the Northwest. Use ANWR fees for alternative energy and home oil help [Under Bush’s plan for drilling the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge], the federal government would get up-front fees from oil companies that wanted to bid to explore the refuge, and eventually get royalties from oil and gas that was found. Bush said he would direct part of this money to the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program-perhaps as much as $1 billion over 10 years, Bush said. We would also start a Royalties for Conservation Fund, which would use money from Arctic drilling to “protect the environment and develop alternative energy sources,” including wind and solar power. He said that could total $1.2 billion over 10 years. The energy proposals offered by Bush today, some of which are new and some of which he had unveiled earlier, total $7.1 billion over 10 years. Of that, $3.1 billion would come from new revenue, including royalties and bid fees. Look for oil in US rather than tap into emergency reserves Bush assailed Gore’s suggestion as “bad public policy,” and accused the vice president of trying to manipulate a national strategic asset for political purposes. The reserves are “an insurance policy meant for sudden disruptions of the oil supply. It should not be used for political gain at the expense of national security.” Rather, plans must be implemented to make the United States less dependent on oil imports. “I would like to aggressively explore our own continent for oil and natural gas.” Explore ANWR; explore for gas; reduce foreign dependence. Our country better become less dependent on foreign crude, that’s why I’m for the exploration of ANWR, that’s why I’m for the exploration of natural gas, which is hemispheric. It’s not subject to price. In the meantime, I support the congressional attempt to fund LIHEAP, which is that low-income heating assistance program. Wean from oil, via electric deregulation & natural gas. I did something in Texas and that’s decontrol our electricity system, to invite a different type of demand into the equation into Texas. In other words, you’re focusing on the supply side, I think we need to wean ourselves off of foreign oil and rely upon other products and in my state of Texas we’re doing that. We’ve got a huge demand for natural gas, which as you know is immune from OPEC and immune from overseas pricing controls. Bibliography:

Word Count: 2288