Bush tax cut unwise

Three years ago, with a Democrat in the White House, the federal budget was balanced. Less than a year after President Bush took over, our budget surpluses were gone. The man who ran for election as a "fiscal conservative" made an economic proposal this year that called for borrowing $304 billion dollars to pay the nation's bills.\nThe centerpiece of the president's economic plan was a $726 billion tax cut. The House and Senate agreed that a tax cut should be no larger than $550 billion, so Bush and House Republicans are now advocating a plan of that size that would lower capital gains and dividend taxes, among others.\nThis year's prospective tax cut comes on top of the $1.3 billion cut enacted last year -- a tax cut that primarily favored those in the upper income brackets. The 2003 tax cut, similarly, follows the philosophy of trickle-down economics. That is, if you give money to the rich, they will invest, and eventually their prosperity will reach all Americans.\nThis theory failed in the past, and it is failing again. Bush's first tax cut at $1.3 billion was hardly a modest proposal. It simply failed to boost our economy. Instead, we have seen our unemployment rate soar to 6 percent. \nDespite this poor record for Bush's tax cuts for the rich, he continued this philosophy with his proposal this year. By targeting dividend and capital gains taxes, the 2003 tax cut will help out wealthy investors while providing meager relief to middle-class Americans. \nSuch a plan is not only unfair, but it is also economically unsound. If the president and Republicans in Congress wanted to jump-start our economy, they would give most of the tax cut to the people who will spend it quickly, those in the middle class who need discretionary income. Instead, they have chosen to help out the wealthy, who will be content with saving their money for the future.\nBut, at least our tax-cutting president is living up to his campaign promise of being a "fiscal conservative," right? Wrong. Republicans regularly run for office as "fiscal conservatives." It's a phrase you hear quite often around election time; who doesn't want to be a fiscal conservative?\nUnfortunately, President Bush and the Republicans in Congress are in no way fiscally conservative. Since Bush has been in office, he has continually failed to spend within his means. Again, this year, he proposed spending $300 billion more than the federal government took in -- that sure doesn't qualify as fiscally conservative in my book. And, not coincidentally, the president has frequently gone to Congress to request that the federal government can borrow more money. This allows the federal government to spend more while it is continually cutting taxes for the richest Americans.\nJust last week, The New York Times reported that the president asked Congress to raise our $6.4 trillion debt ceiling by almost a trillion more dollars. That's $6.4 trillion that you and I will have to pay interest on in the future. Thanks a lot, Mr. President.\nThe new Bush tax cut is just another gimmick to make the American people feel like Bush and the Republican-controlled Congress are working hard for them. Instead of making tough decisions to provide for a balanced budget, George W. Bush has decided to cut taxes for the rich while expanding the federal debt to record levels. Fiscal conservatism, it seems, is dead.