In 2007, the State of the Union was not as we were told it was; nor is it as we were told it would be. Each year, and for eight long years, George W. Bush promised to unite us, and perhaps he has more so than most other Presidents. Collectively, Republicans and Democrats alike understand that as a nation we are not strong.
We have not been judicious with our capital. The President has not provided financial security as promised.
To extend this nation's prosperity; to spend the people's money wisely; to solve problems, not leave them to future generations; to guard America against all evil; and to keep faith with those we have sent forth to defend us. (Applause.)
A Nobel laureate, Joseph E. Stiglitz, believes Americans will not recover economically from a George W. Bush presidency for at least a generation. The next President, the person who follows that individual into the Oval Office, and even those who enter the White House later will be part of a struggle to recover from the economic catastrophe this President created.
When we look back someday at the catastrophe that was the Bush administration, we will think of many things: the tragedy of the Iraq war, the shame of Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib, the erosion of civil liberties. The damage done to the American economy does not make front-page headlines every day, but the repercussions will be felt beyond the lifetime of anyone reading this page.
I can hear an irritated counterthrust already. The president has not driven the United States into a recession during his almost seven years in office. Unemployment stands at a respectable 4.6 percent. Well, fine. But the other side of the ledger groans with distress: a tax code that has become hideously biased in favor of the rich; a national debt that will probably have grown 70 percent by the time this president leaves Washington; a swelling cascade of mortgage defaults; a record near-$850 billion trade deficit; oil prices that are higher than they have ever been; and a dollar so weak that for an American to buy a cup of coffee in London or Paris-or even the Yukon-becomes a venture in high finance.
And it gets worse. After almost seven years of this president, the United States is less prepared than ever to face the future. We have not been educating enough engineers and scientists, people with the skills we will need to compete with China and India. We have not been investing in the kinds of basic research that made us the technological powerhouse of the late 20th century. And although the president now understands-or so he says-that we must begin to wean ourselves from oil and coal, we have on his watch become more deeply dependent on both.
Up to now, the conventional wisdom has been that Herbert Hoover, whose policies aggravated the Great Depression, is the odds-on claimant for the mantle "worst president" when it comes to stewardship of the American economy. Once Franklin Roosevelt assumed office and reversed Hoover's policies, the country began to recover. The economic effects of Bush's presidency are more insidious than those of Hoover, harder to reverse, and likely to be longer-lasting. There is no threat of America's being displaced from its position as the world's richest economy. But our grandchildren will still be living with, and struggling with, the economic consequences of Mr. Bush.
Nonetheless, a man who reminds us that his legacy is not important to him, a President who frequently states, history will decide how well he did, performed miserably. Some believe we are in a recession. Others claim the economy is decidedly depressed. So too are the people. The common folk are perhaps in greater need of mental health care services. Daily stresses in America have taken a toil. Physically, we fare no better. The expense of medical insurance and the cost of services to aid in our well being cripple our citizenry. When ill or injured, millions delay before they see a physician. The expense is thought more painful than a cure. In the last state of the Union, President Bush addressed this issue.
A future of hope and opportunity requires that all our citizens have affordable and available health care. (Applause.) When it comes to health care, government has an obligation to care for the elderly, the disabled, and poor children. And we will meet those responsibilities. For all other Americans, private health insurance is the best way to meet their needs. (Applause.) But many Americans cannot afford a health insurance policy.
Our offspring can least afford Health Care Services. The babies are dependent on Mom and Dad for medical coverage. Parents can no longer provide as they did years ago. Jobs no longer last for life. Benefits are not a given. Employers, who feel the impact of an economy gone wrong, also understand the problem with the current Health Care system. Numerous corporations and institutions have dropped insurance plans from personnel contracts. Our little ones are in dire straits. While the Federal government once helped to ensure that, at least the children would be cared for, since the Compassionate Conservative concluded he was the ultimate decider, our progeny suffer in silence.
President Bush vetoed the children's health insurance bill today, as he had pledged to do, setting the stage for more negotiations between the White House and Congress and sparking unusual dismay from some prominent Republicans.
Mr. Bush wielded his pen with no fanfare just before leaving for a visit to Lancaster, Pa. The veto was only the fourth of Mr. Bush's presidency, and it may have spawned the most anger, not just from Democrats but also from some members of Mr. Bush's own party.
To cause confusion among colleagues once was not enough. To hinder parents whose only desire was to provide for their progeny did not seem Presidential. To repeat the practice would be unthinkable. America wept for her children and will the stroke of a pen continues to cry.
(The Politico) For the second time, President Bush has vetoed a major expansion of the children's health insurance program, making it clear that the debate will linger as a political issue throughout 2008.
In 2008, and far beyond this New Year, Americans will feel the pain of policies invoked by the Bush Administration. We may recall, that in 2000, two oil men entered the White House. With the Blessings of oil magnate Bush, Vice President Cheney met with other industry leaders and devised an energy policy for the benefit of friends and family. The White House did not seek to invest in alternative fuels. The profits from petroleum were great. There was no reason for change. Corporations prospered and the people need only line the pockets of those in power. While the President's words were wondrous . . .
It is unfortunate that President Bush opposed our legislation to repeal multi-billion dollar subsidies given to Big Oil companies. We will again seek to repeal these subsidies and to enact strong legislation to stop price gouging at the pump and pursue anti-trust actions against OPEC entities that fix the price of oil.
Perchance oil has always been the main issue. Originally, for George W. Bush, crude would certainly help America to remain on the road to prosperity, or at least the United States citizens who own petroleum pumps would do well. Indeed, for those at the top, times are good.
This economy is on the move, and our job is to keep it that way.
Indeed, it is Mister President. Economically, America spirals downward. There is no stability in the market or market place. Our scant dollars are in decline. Our hopes and dreams have been all but destroyed. The average citizen cannot be certain from day-to-day whether they will have a job. If an individual is privileged enough to work, will their income remain the same. Some workers are asked to labor for less. New hires are offered a lower wage. More Americans live without a job, and without hope. This tumble downward began early in the Bush Years.
Washington - The proportion of Americans living in poverty rose significantly last year, increasing for the first time in eight years, the Census Bureau reported Tuesday.
At the same time, the bureau said that the income of middle-class households fell for the first time since the last recession ended in 1991.
The Census Bureau's annual report on income and poverty provided evidence that the weakening economy had begun to affect large segments of the population, regardless of race, region, or class. Daniel Weinberg, chief of income and poverty statistics at the Census Bureau, said the recession that began in March 2001 had reduced the earnings of millions of Americans.
The report also suggested that the gap between rich and poor continued to grow.
All regions except the Northeast experienced a decline in household income, the bureau reported. For blacks, it was the first significant decline in two decades; non-Hispanic whites saw a slight decline. Even the incomes of Asian and Pacific Islanders, a group that achieved high levels of prosperity in the 1990s, went down significantly last year.
The Census Bureau said the number of poor Americans rose last year to 32.9 million, an increase of 1.3 million, while the proportion living in poverty rose to 11.7%, from 11.3% in 2000. Median household income fell to $42,228 in 2001, a decline of $934, or 2.2%, from the prior year. The number of households with income above the median is the same as the number below it.
We continue to bleed. Americans can no longer find shelter from the storm of Bush, his policies, and the ploys now in place, each of which favors big business, banks, and balloon payments. Citizens of this country find themselves out on the streets, or in homes that are not worth what they once were.
What could be worse than getting behind on mortgage payments? Owing your lender more than your home is worth.
That's what's happening to homeowners across the country, many of whom just a couple of years ago opted for interest-only or adjustable-rate mortgages. For them, just as their loans reset and interest rates rose, home values began to plummet, leaving them with negative equity; this is where their mortgage is greater than the value of their home.
Of course, some homeowners started off walking a shakier tightrope than others. Many subprime borrowers acquired piggyback mortgages, where a second mortgage covered the downpayment, leaving them with negative equity from the beginning. Congress's Joint Economic Committee estimates that 2 million Americans will lose their home over the next two years, a figure in line with most research firms and rating agencies.
Who is most feeling the crunch? Using data from RealtyTrac, a national firm that tracks foreclosures using data from multiple listing services, bank-owned property records, bankruptcy records, loan histories, tax liens and lender information, we evaluated which of the nation's counties had the most negative equity loans, by examining all loans currently in foreclosure.
Our President failed us economically. He failed to ensure our energy independence. Mister Bush did not provide adequate Health Care for our children or us. George W. Bush moved us closer to poverty and kicked Americans to the curb. We need not delve into the subject of war or Iraq. There is enough pain without that discussion. The President of the United States, George W. Bush has failed us, or perchance we, the people have caused our own demise.
America, we have done nothing to prevent this President from acting as though he has absolute power. We have but a year left in this term. Will we, the people continue to watch George W. Bush destroy the nation and shred the Constitution. Citizens of this once great country, you have a choice. Move to impeach this Administration, or watch as we wane further. The future is in your hands.
The State of the Union, The Slide, The Sources . . .
Subscribe to Site [RSS]
