Sunday, October 12, 2003
I’ve ignored the pathetic developments in California, but provide a snippet from Frank Rich in today’s NY Times that captures some of the craziness.
Last weekend, the candidate toyed with appearing on "60 Minutes," in emulation of the Clintons' Hail Mary pass after the Gennifer Flowers revelations, then thought better of the idea and went on his wife's network instead. "I never grabbed anyone," he told Tom Brokaw on "Dateline NBC," to which the newsman countered, "So you deny all those stories about grabbing?" Mr. Schwarzenegger's answer: "No, not all. I'm just saying this is not — this is not me." What was that again? The candidate was saying simultaneously that a) he never grabbed women; b) he grabbed some women; c) whoever grabbed those women was a mysterious interloper in his body. It's hard to imagine how any journalist, indeed any sentient listener, could parse the candidate's jabberwocky, an amalgam of denial, nondenial and nondenial denial all in the same thick mouthful.
.http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/12/arts/12RICH.html?pagewanted=print&position=
Of course this confusion of reality and the movies was at the heart of the Reagan candidacy. Then, the media blushed, but were silent when Reagan talked of his liberating the concentration camps, contrary to the reality of his never having left the states, including his working on a film for the army.
Rummy, Cheney and the D.C. Chaos
Another theme I’ve side-stepped is the in-fighting in the Administration. As Bush has returned to pre-9/11 poll numbers, Rumsfeld has returned to his pre-9/11 status of being the most criticized / isolated Cabinet member. The Occupation’s failures have cost Rummy his untouchable status and have led to Condi Rice being named the coordinator of the policy… as if the White House shouldn’t be coordinating! Meanwhile, despite everyone else admitting to the Saddam-al-Qaeda disconnect, Cheney persists. His script has remained stuck for two years and has raised concern that his presidency may be in trouble, i.e. Bush is being revealed as being not in charge.
Two entries: From Maureen Doud in Sunday’s Times on Cheney’s transformation since 1991:
When Bush the Elder put Bush the Younger in the care of Dick Cheney, he assumed that Mr. Cheney, who had been his defense secretary in Desert Storm, would play the wise, selfless counselor. Poppy thought his old friend Dick would make a great vice president, tutoring a young president green on foreign policy and safeguarding the first Bush administration's legacy of internationalism, coalition-building and realpolitik.
Instead, Good Daddy has had to watch in alarm as Bad Daddy usurped his son's presidency, heightened its conservatism and rushed America into war on the mistaken assumption that if we just acted like king of the world, everyone would bow down or run away.
Bush I officials are nonplused by the apocalyptic and rash Cheney of Bush II, a man who pushed pre-emption and peered over the shoulders of C.I.A. analysts, as compared with the skeptical and cautious Cheney of Bush I (who did not even press to march to Baghdad in the first gulf war, when Saddam Hussein actually possessed chemical weapons).
Some veterans of Bush I are so puzzled that they even look for a biological explanation, wondering if his two-year-old defibrillator might have made him more Hobbesian. Mr. Cheney spent so much time in his bunker reading gloomy books about smallpox, plague, fear and war as the natural state of mankind. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/12/opinion/12DOWD.html?pagewanted=print&positin
And, the growing concern from Republicans as well as Democrats that Bush is not in charge. From the San Francisco Chronicle, amongst others:
President Bush has lost control of Iraq policy because of infighting among administration officials, the leaders of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said Sunday.
The administration also came under criticism from Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry for being unwilling to create a real international coalition and alienating governments everywhere. "This is haphazard, shotgun, shoot-from-the-hip diplomacy," the Massachusetts senator said.
The committee leaders urged Bush to take charge of U.S. postwar policy in Iraq.
"The president has to be the president, over the vice president and over these secretaries," the chairman, Sen. Dick Lugar, R-Ind., said on NBC's "Meet the Press."
Added the committee's top Democrat, Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware: "There's no clear articulation within this administration of what the goals, what the message is, what the plan is. You have this significant division within the administration between the Powells and the Rumsfelds."
sfgate.com/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2003/10/12/national1339EDT0490.DTL
WMD: The Defense
No new developments in the last two days; just pathetic attempts to explain it away. What’s left of the Administration’s credibility is being shredded by attempts, such as the following:
Administration sources said they believe that the officials who discussed Plame were not trying to expose her, but were using the information as a tool to try to persuade reporters to ignore Wilson. The officials wanted to convince the reporters that he had benefited from nepotism in being chosen for the mission.
Laughable.
Meanwhile supporters such as columnist Andrew Sullivan (www.andrewsullivan.com) seek to work on the language front. There’s apparently few quotes of Bush saying Iraq was an “imminent threat”, but more so “grave and gathering danger”. So, now the media is being attacked for being its liberal self, picking on the poor White House.
Conyers Calls For Rove's Resignation:
Dear Mr. Rove:
I write to ask you to resign from the White House staff. Recent press reports have indicated that, while you may or may not have been the source of the Robert Novak column which revealed the status and name of a covert operative, the wife of Ambassador Joseph Wilson, you were involved in a subsequent effort to push this classified information to other reporters and give it even wider currency. This itself may be a federal crime, but regardless of that fact, your actions are morally indefensible. In my view, it is shameful and unethical that an
Administration that promised to govern with "honor and integrity" and "change the tone" in Washington has now engaged in an orchestrated campaign to smear and intimidate truth-telling critics, placing them in possible physical harm and impairing the efforts and operations of the CIA.
Recent reports indicate that you told the journalist, Chris Matthews, and perhaps others, that Mr. Wilson's wife and her undercover status were "fair game." Evan Thomas and Michael Isikoff, Newsweek, Oct. 13, 2003. Since these initial allegations have arisen, neither the White House nor your office have denied your involvement in furthering the leak. Repeated press inquiries into this matter have been rebuffed with technical jargon and narrow legalisms, instead of broader ethical issues. Indeed, in the same article it appears a White House source acknowledged that you contacted Matthews and other journalists, indicating that "it was reasonable to discuss who sent Wilson to Niger."
It should be noted that these actions may well have violated 18 U.S.C. ¤ 793, which prohibits the willful or grossly negligent distribution of national defense information that could possibly be used against the United States. The law states that even if you lawfully knew of Mr. Wilson's wife's status, you were obliged to come forward and report the press leak to the proper authorities - not inflame the situation by encouraging further dissemination. Larger than whether any one statute can be read to find criminal responsibility is the issue of whether officials of your stature will be allowed to use their influence to intimidate whistle-blowers.
Over three decades ago, our nation was scarred by an Administration that would stop at nothing to smear and intimidate its critics. I do not believe the Nation will countenance a repeat of such activities. For your role in this campaign, I would ask that you resign immediately.
Sincerely,
John Conyers, Jr.
Ranking Minority Member
John Dean comments:
The Watergate figure contributes:
What counts as "fraud" under the statute? Simply put, "any conspiracy for the purpose of impairing, obstructing, or defeating the lawful function of any department of government." (Emphasis added.) If telephoning reporters to further destroy a CIA asset whose identity has been revealed, and whose safety is now in jeopardy, does not fit this description, I would be quite surprised.
If Newsweek is correct that Karl Rove declared Valerie Plame Wilson "fair game," then he should make sure he's got a good criminal lawyer, for he made need one. I've only suggested the most obvious criminal statute that might come into play for those who exploit the leak of a CIA asset's identity. There are others.
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/scripts/printer_friendly.pl?page=/dean/20031010.html
Cheney under Investigation
The Guardian (Jon Henley) reports that la merde is hitting the fan. The French public prosecutors office has opened a “formal judicial inquiry” into possible corruption by a French engineering firm and Halliburton, the American oil services giant that Cheney headed until elected as VP. The charge: that $200 million in bribes were given to Nigerian leaders, that there was a web of offshore bank accounts / front companies that evaded cross-border corruption laws that had been signed in 1997. http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1060773,00.html
Israel and Iran:
Syria is a potential hot spot. But, we can’t forget Iran…
The LA Times (Douglas Frantz) keeps us informed about Israel’s nuclear options.
Israel has modified American-supplied cruise missiles to carry nuclear warheads on submarines, giving the Middle East's only nuclear power the ability to launch atomic weapons from land, air and beneath the sea, according to senior Bush administration and Israeli officials.
The previously undisclosed submarine capability bolsters Israel's deterrence in the event that Iran — an avowed enemy — develops nuclear weapons. It also complicates efforts by the United States and the United Nations to persuade Iran to abandon its suspected nuclear weapons program.
Two Bush administration officials described the missile modification and an Israeli official confirmed it. All three spoke on condition their names not be used.
The Americans said they were disclosing the information to caution Israel's enemies at a time of heightened tensions in the region and concern over Iran's alleged ambitions.
http://www.latimes.com/la-fg-iznukes12oct12,1,1483949.story
What’s Happening, Iraq:
Rival Government being established?
Moqtada Al Sadr, a radical Shiite cleric announced that he was setting up a government. The announcement comes on the heels of sizable, angry demonstrations by Iraq’s Shiites and front-page U.S. media coverage of this new threat to the U.S. The Governing Council, appointed by the U.S., announced that they were the legitimate government of Iraq.
Microcosm: The Fate of Baghdad’s Jews
MSNBC (Christopher Dickey / Sarah Sennoti) profiled how the invasion was a powerful missed bag for Iraq’s Jewish population. Saddam was suspicious of the Jews and thus the invasion has provided a greater sense of freedom. Yet, the Jews also feel more threatened- their lives and the culture itself. The one remaining synagogue remains closed and they lie low, fearing being targeted as “Zionists.”
http://www.msnbc.com/news/978403.asp
States in Trouble:
Now that this is a chronic state of affairs, it’s getting less ink. Last week there was a brief mini-headline about Mass. having a $2 billion deficit; otherwise usually there’s little concern.
Not so in the past days. Two entries here. Below is a front-page NY Times article illustrating the chronic borrowing and risks the states are taking.
…state and local governments, facing ballooning pension promises to police officers, firefighters, teachers and other public employees, are rushing to sell bonds to cover the shortfall. That strategy has sometimes backfired in recent years, leaving taxpayers on the hook for even more debt.
States and municipalities are drawn to bond sales because they bring instant cash, easing budget pressures without further tax increases or reductions in retirement benefits.
But critics say the bonds could prove costly for some officials using them — and for the local taxpayers. The cities and states have to pay a fixed rate of interest on the bonds, and are essentially betting they can earn a higher rate of return by investing the proceeds in their pension funds.
But recent investment losses have already left some cities and states on the hook for a mounting debt, covering not just the retirement money for their workers but also the interest on the bonds. New Orleans, Pittsburgh and New Jersey have all placed losing bets in recent years.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/12/business/12PENS.html?pagewanted=print&position
And, the Washington Post had a powerful report on the declining tax revenues, hitting a 44 year low. When one thinks about a range of factors- the wealthy and their off-shore accounts, lower rates, etc. and the conversion of many decently-paying, benefited jobs in the manufacturing and service sectors to Walmart ($8/hour, no benefits) employ, it’s hardly surprising.
Federal tax receipts relative to the overall economy have reached their lowest level since Dwight D. Eisenhower was president, while government spending has climbed to the highest point since Bill Clinton declared the era of big government over, according to new figures released by the Congressional Budget Office.
The CBO closed its books on the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30 with a report that presents a mixed picture of the federal government's financial position. Although it documented a large fiscal imbalance that's expected to grow, the report from Congress' nonpartisan budget scorekeeper also showed how the economy's building strength helped reduce the near-term growth rate of the federal budget deficit…
"There's no good news there," said Kent Conrad (N.D.), the senior Democrat on the Senate Budget Committee.
With Congress considering spending $87 billion on Iraq and Afghanistan, the figures are expected to rise. Bolten said he still expected the deficit to top $500 billion this year, even with a brightening economic picture. Strong economic growth expected next year will not produce a surge in tax receipts until 2005, he said.
Still, Bolten said, the president's expectation that the deficit will be half that size in five years now seems easily attainable.
Critics of the president's fiscal stewardship are not backing off. Bush's $1.7 trillion in tax cuts will really begin taking a toll on government finances toward the end of the decade, when forecasters expect the economy to be rolling, said William G. Gale, an economist at the Brookings Institution. By 2010, the tax cuts will account for nearly half the swing from government surpluses once predicted to the deficits now expected.
And by then, the vanguard of Baby Boom retirees will have begun driving up Social Security and Medicare expenses by nearly 7 percent a year.
The 2003 numbers are "a distraction compared to the big story of where this is all heading," Conrad said. "A fiscal crisis unlike any we've ever seen."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A10618-2003Oct10?language=printer
-R
Last weekend, the candidate toyed with appearing on "60 Minutes," in emulation of the Clintons' Hail Mary pass after the Gennifer Flowers revelations, then thought better of the idea and went on his wife's network instead. "I never grabbed anyone," he told Tom Brokaw on "Dateline NBC," to which the newsman countered, "So you deny all those stories about grabbing?" Mr. Schwarzenegger's answer: "No, not all. I'm just saying this is not — this is not me." What was that again? The candidate was saying simultaneously that a) he never grabbed women; b) he grabbed some women; c) whoever grabbed those women was a mysterious interloper in his body. It's hard to imagine how any journalist, indeed any sentient listener, could parse the candidate's jabberwocky, an amalgam of denial, nondenial and nondenial denial all in the same thick mouthful.
.http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/12/arts/12RICH.html?pagewanted=print&position=
Of course this confusion of reality and the movies was at the heart of the Reagan candidacy. Then, the media blushed, but were silent when Reagan talked of his liberating the concentration camps, contrary to the reality of his never having left the states, including his working on a film for the army.
Rummy, Cheney and the D.C. Chaos
Another theme I’ve side-stepped is the in-fighting in the Administration. As Bush has returned to pre-9/11 poll numbers, Rumsfeld has returned to his pre-9/11 status of being the most criticized / isolated Cabinet member. The Occupation’s failures have cost Rummy his untouchable status and have led to Condi Rice being named the coordinator of the policy… as if the White House shouldn’t be coordinating! Meanwhile, despite everyone else admitting to the Saddam-al-Qaeda disconnect, Cheney persists. His script has remained stuck for two years and has raised concern that his presidency may be in trouble, i.e. Bush is being revealed as being not in charge.
Two entries: From Maureen Doud in Sunday’s Times on Cheney’s transformation since 1991:
When Bush the Elder put Bush the Younger in the care of Dick Cheney, he assumed that Mr. Cheney, who had been his defense secretary in Desert Storm, would play the wise, selfless counselor. Poppy thought his old friend Dick would make a great vice president, tutoring a young president green on foreign policy and safeguarding the first Bush administration's legacy of internationalism, coalition-building and realpolitik.
Instead, Good Daddy has had to watch in alarm as Bad Daddy usurped his son's presidency, heightened its conservatism and rushed America into war on the mistaken assumption that if we just acted like king of the world, everyone would bow down or run away.
Bush I officials are nonplused by the apocalyptic and rash Cheney of Bush II, a man who pushed pre-emption and peered over the shoulders of C.I.A. analysts, as compared with the skeptical and cautious Cheney of Bush I (who did not even press to march to Baghdad in the first gulf war, when Saddam Hussein actually possessed chemical weapons).
Some veterans of Bush I are so puzzled that they even look for a biological explanation, wondering if his two-year-old defibrillator might have made him more Hobbesian. Mr. Cheney spent so much time in his bunker reading gloomy books about smallpox, plague, fear and war as the natural state of mankind. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/12/opinion/12DOWD.html?pagewanted=print&positin
And, the growing concern from Republicans as well as Democrats that Bush is not in charge. From the San Francisco Chronicle, amongst others:
President Bush has lost control of Iraq policy because of infighting among administration officials, the leaders of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said Sunday.
The administration also came under criticism from Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry for being unwilling to create a real international coalition and alienating governments everywhere. "This is haphazard, shotgun, shoot-from-the-hip diplomacy," the Massachusetts senator said.
The committee leaders urged Bush to take charge of U.S. postwar policy in Iraq.
"The president has to be the president, over the vice president and over these secretaries," the chairman, Sen. Dick Lugar, R-Ind., said on NBC's "Meet the Press."
Added the committee's top Democrat, Sen. Joseph Biden of Delaware: "There's no clear articulation within this administration of what the goals, what the message is, what the plan is. You have this significant division within the administration between the Powells and the Rumsfelds."
sfgate.com/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2003/10/12/national1339EDT0490.DTL
WMD: The Defense
No new developments in the last two days; just pathetic attempts to explain it away. What’s left of the Administration’s credibility is being shredded by attempts, such as the following:
Administration sources said they believe that the officials who discussed Plame were not trying to expose her, but were using the information as a tool to try to persuade reporters to ignore Wilson. The officials wanted to convince the reporters that he had benefited from nepotism in being chosen for the mission.
Laughable.
Meanwhile supporters such as columnist Andrew Sullivan (www.andrewsullivan.com) seek to work on the language front. There’s apparently few quotes of Bush saying Iraq was an “imminent threat”, but more so “grave and gathering danger”. So, now the media is being attacked for being its liberal self, picking on the poor White House.
Conyers Calls For Rove's Resignation:
Dear Mr. Rove:
I write to ask you to resign from the White House staff. Recent press reports have indicated that, while you may or may not have been the source of the Robert Novak column which revealed the status and name of a covert operative, the wife of Ambassador Joseph Wilson, you were involved in a subsequent effort to push this classified information to other reporters and give it even wider currency. This itself may be a federal crime, but regardless of that fact, your actions are morally indefensible. In my view, it is shameful and unethical that an
Administration that promised to govern with "honor and integrity" and "change the tone" in Washington has now engaged in an orchestrated campaign to smear and intimidate truth-telling critics, placing them in possible physical harm and impairing the efforts and operations of the CIA.
Recent reports indicate that you told the journalist, Chris Matthews, and perhaps others, that Mr. Wilson's wife and her undercover status were "fair game." Evan Thomas and Michael Isikoff, Newsweek, Oct. 13, 2003. Since these initial allegations have arisen, neither the White House nor your office have denied your involvement in furthering the leak. Repeated press inquiries into this matter have been rebuffed with technical jargon and narrow legalisms, instead of broader ethical issues. Indeed, in the same article it appears a White House source acknowledged that you contacted Matthews and other journalists, indicating that "it was reasonable to discuss who sent Wilson to Niger."
It should be noted that these actions may well have violated 18 U.S.C. ¤ 793, which prohibits the willful or grossly negligent distribution of national defense information that could possibly be used against the United States. The law states that even if you lawfully knew of Mr. Wilson's wife's status, you were obliged to come forward and report the press leak to the proper authorities - not inflame the situation by encouraging further dissemination. Larger than whether any one statute can be read to find criminal responsibility is the issue of whether officials of your stature will be allowed to use their influence to intimidate whistle-blowers.
Over three decades ago, our nation was scarred by an Administration that would stop at nothing to smear and intimidate its critics. I do not believe the Nation will countenance a repeat of such activities. For your role in this campaign, I would ask that you resign immediately.
Sincerely,
John Conyers, Jr.
Ranking Minority Member
John Dean comments:
The Watergate figure contributes:
What counts as "fraud" under the statute? Simply put, "any conspiracy for the purpose of impairing, obstructing, or defeating the lawful function of any department of government." (Emphasis added.) If telephoning reporters to further destroy a CIA asset whose identity has been revealed, and whose safety is now in jeopardy, does not fit this description, I would be quite surprised.
If Newsweek is correct that Karl Rove declared Valerie Plame Wilson "fair game," then he should make sure he's got a good criminal lawyer, for he made need one. I've only suggested the most obvious criminal statute that might come into play for those who exploit the leak of a CIA asset's identity. There are others.
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/scripts/printer_friendly.pl?page=/dean/20031010.html
Cheney under Investigation
The Guardian (Jon Henley) reports that la merde is hitting the fan. The French public prosecutors office has opened a “formal judicial inquiry” into possible corruption by a French engineering firm and Halliburton, the American oil services giant that Cheney headed until elected as VP. The charge: that $200 million in bribes were given to Nigerian leaders, that there was a web of offshore bank accounts / front companies that evaded cross-border corruption laws that had been signed in 1997. http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1060773,00.html
Israel and Iran:
Syria is a potential hot spot. But, we can’t forget Iran…
The LA Times (Douglas Frantz) keeps us informed about Israel’s nuclear options.
Israel has modified American-supplied cruise missiles to carry nuclear warheads on submarines, giving the Middle East's only nuclear power the ability to launch atomic weapons from land, air and beneath the sea, according to senior Bush administration and Israeli officials.
The previously undisclosed submarine capability bolsters Israel's deterrence in the event that Iran — an avowed enemy — develops nuclear weapons. It also complicates efforts by the United States and the United Nations to persuade Iran to abandon its suspected nuclear weapons program.
Two Bush administration officials described the missile modification and an Israeli official confirmed it. All three spoke on condition their names not be used.
The Americans said they were disclosing the information to caution Israel's enemies at a time of heightened tensions in the region and concern over Iran's alleged ambitions.
http://www.latimes.com/la-fg-iznukes12oct12,1,1483949.story
What’s Happening, Iraq:
Rival Government being established?
Moqtada Al Sadr, a radical Shiite cleric announced that he was setting up a government. The announcement comes on the heels of sizable, angry demonstrations by Iraq’s Shiites and front-page U.S. media coverage of this new threat to the U.S. The Governing Council, appointed by the U.S., announced that they were the legitimate government of Iraq.
Microcosm: The Fate of Baghdad’s Jews
MSNBC (Christopher Dickey / Sarah Sennoti) profiled how the invasion was a powerful missed bag for Iraq’s Jewish population. Saddam was suspicious of the Jews and thus the invasion has provided a greater sense of freedom. Yet, the Jews also feel more threatened- their lives and the culture itself. The one remaining synagogue remains closed and they lie low, fearing being targeted as “Zionists.”
http://www.msnbc.com/news/978403.asp
States in Trouble:
Now that this is a chronic state of affairs, it’s getting less ink. Last week there was a brief mini-headline about Mass. having a $2 billion deficit; otherwise usually there’s little concern.
Not so in the past days. Two entries here. Below is a front-page NY Times article illustrating the chronic borrowing and risks the states are taking.
…state and local governments, facing ballooning pension promises to police officers, firefighters, teachers and other public employees, are rushing to sell bonds to cover the shortfall. That strategy has sometimes backfired in recent years, leaving taxpayers on the hook for even more debt.
States and municipalities are drawn to bond sales because they bring instant cash, easing budget pressures without further tax increases or reductions in retirement benefits.
But critics say the bonds could prove costly for some officials using them — and for the local taxpayers. The cities and states have to pay a fixed rate of interest on the bonds, and are essentially betting they can earn a higher rate of return by investing the proceeds in their pension funds.
But recent investment losses have already left some cities and states on the hook for a mounting debt, covering not just the retirement money for their workers but also the interest on the bonds. New Orleans, Pittsburgh and New Jersey have all placed losing bets in recent years.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/12/business/12PENS.html?pagewanted=print&position
And, the Washington Post had a powerful report on the declining tax revenues, hitting a 44 year low. When one thinks about a range of factors- the wealthy and their off-shore accounts, lower rates, etc. and the conversion of many decently-paying, benefited jobs in the manufacturing and service sectors to Walmart ($8/hour, no benefits) employ, it’s hardly surprising.
Federal tax receipts relative to the overall economy have reached their lowest level since Dwight D. Eisenhower was president, while government spending has climbed to the highest point since Bill Clinton declared the era of big government over, according to new figures released by the Congressional Budget Office.
The CBO closed its books on the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30 with a report that presents a mixed picture of the federal government's financial position. Although it documented a large fiscal imbalance that's expected to grow, the report from Congress' nonpartisan budget scorekeeper also showed how the economy's building strength helped reduce the near-term growth rate of the federal budget deficit…
"There's no good news there," said Kent Conrad (N.D.), the senior Democrat on the Senate Budget Committee.
With Congress considering spending $87 billion on Iraq and Afghanistan, the figures are expected to rise. Bolten said he still expected the deficit to top $500 billion this year, even with a brightening economic picture. Strong economic growth expected next year will not produce a surge in tax receipts until 2005, he said.
Still, Bolten said, the president's expectation that the deficit will be half that size in five years now seems easily attainable.
Critics of the president's fiscal stewardship are not backing off. Bush's $1.7 trillion in tax cuts will really begin taking a toll on government finances toward the end of the decade, when forecasters expect the economy to be rolling, said William G. Gale, an economist at the Brookings Institution. By 2010, the tax cuts will account for nearly half the swing from government surpluses once predicted to the deficits now expected.
And by then, the vanguard of Baby Boom retirees will have begun driving up Social Security and Medicare expenses by nearly 7 percent a year.
The 2003 numbers are "a distraction compared to the big story of where this is all heading," Conrad said. "A fiscal crisis unlike any we've ever seen."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A10618-2003Oct10?language=printer
-R
