REPRINT

Bush Has the Right Combination to be President

Editorial Board
Austin American-Statesman
Sunday, October 22, 2000

The real question facing voters in the Nov. 7 election is one of trust: Which of the two major presidential candidates will best lead the nation through a future that offers little in the way of guarantees and much in the way of challenge?

That candidate is George W. Bush.

The Republican Texas governor has demonstrated the rare combination of humanity, humility and leadership in using the limited power of his office to lead and push a dynamic and growing state with grace, dignity and confidence.

Has he done everything right? Of course not. Whatever our disagreements with the governor on policy matters -- and there have been some -- we know him and we respect him. Moreover, we trust him.

The governor has confidence in his ability but the humility to know that he doesn't know everything. He is never afraid to probe, ask questions and reach beyond the comfort zone to find answers.

Let's review a few of the issues.

Social Security

The fund is structured on a 1930s model, but attempts to modernize it carry great political risk. For many, Social Security is their only retirement income, so sentencing people to live on the fund's paltry returns is a classic case of a government philosophy that condones misery as long as it is equally disbursed.

Bush would give taxpayers the option of placing a small portion of their Social Security tax contribution in a carefully regulated private stock investment fund.

Vice President Al Gore, the Democratic nominee, talks about placing Social Security in a ``lockbox.'' That's a fatuous promise in light of a bipartisan history of raids that continue even now as Congress continues in its pre-adjournment spending binge.

Granted, there are valid questions about how Bush will replenish revenues in his proposal, which amounts to a pay-as-you-go retirement system. Even a small portion of contributions ``invested'' in private markets will draw away receipts needed to fund current retiree payments. Still, Bush is right to challenge the system and force new ways to think about a vital feature of our government.

Tax cut

The rosy budget surpluses projected by Bush and Gore may be optimistic given that neither acknowledges Congress' role in the discussion.

Congress can't be counted on to do anything with a surplus except spend it. The vice president wants to spend the expected surplus on an extensive list of shiny new proposals. Bush proposes a $1.3 trillion tax cut.

Bush is right when he says the surplus is our money. But the national debt is ours, too. A tax cut should be balanced with continued reduction of the national debt.

Bush's tax-cut plan, while oversized, would lower rates for taxpayers across the board, but the rates would be lowered more for middle- and low-income taxpayers. The ``wealthiest 1 percent'' Gore likes to talk about would pay a heavier proportion of the tax load.

National defense

Gore brags about being an active partner in this administration. The administration's national defense policies are nothing to brag about.

The administration has overextended a pared-down force and has been unable to curb congressional appetites for pork, which too often puts money into hardware and not enough into training and retaining military personnel.

Our troops need more than glib assurances from the vice president that they are the finest fighting force in the world. They need training, benefits and better pay.

Bush's comments about restraint and humility suggest an administration that would be slow to commit military power to problems overseas. Bush's wise caution is reflected in the widespread support of his candidacy by retired military leaders who understand the limits as well as the uses of U.S. power.

Foreign affairs

Most governors don't need foreign-policy experience. That's not true with the governor of a border state, however.

With the exception of the Johnson administration, Washington has tended to ignore in large measure the problems of border states. This administration hasn't really been much different, forcing Bush and each of his modern predecessors to adopt a foreign policy toward Mexico.

Bush was public and firm in his criticism of Pete Wilson, the former governor of California who pandered to xenophobic sentiment in securing passage of the infamous Proposition 187. The proposition unconstitutionally restricted immigrants' access to social services.

Bush stood firm against the forces in his party who wanted to adopt similar anti-immigrant legislation in Texas. It was not only right, but a smart financial move. Texas got most of Mexico's trade. Billions of dollars of it.

Judicial appointments

We've said it before, and we're saying it again: There is nothing in Bush's record of appointments to indicate that he selects judges based on ideology. The governor made a reference to favoring judges such as Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas that left many thinking he would use his appointments to undo Roe vs. Wade.

But Bush's record on judicial appointments in Texas is pretty clear. While he has leaned toward what's called ``pro-business'' jurists, nothing about his appointments indicates hostility toward a woman's right to choose whether she will or will not have a child.

The Texas record

Bush has shown strong and impressive leadership in education. As governor, he kept his promises, helping to raise performance of Texas students. Bush led the fight to increase state and private spending on reading academies in public schools. Those academies aim to get all children reading by third grade. He has used his bully pulpit to call for higher academic standards and decry the ``soft bigotry'' of low standards that historically has relegated too many minority kids and economically disadvantaged students to low-paying or menial jobs.

Under his leadership, Texas public schools have made significant progress on state and national achievement tests. Those gains have been particularly impressive among minority students. A national study released this summer by nonpartisan Rand, a California think tank, showed Texas' African American and Hispanic students leading their peers nationally in reading and mathematics. Bush championed publicly financed charter schools to offer parents more choices in their children's education and signed legislation to expand Head Start programs in Texas. He fought for and won tougher accountability measures for Texas public schools. Bush has incorporated many of those initiatives into his presidential campaign plank, calling for failing public schools to forfeit federal Title One dollars if they don't show progress within three years.

Certainly, we wish that Gov. Bush had made children's health a higher priority. We've written that and stand by it. But we've also written that the gloomy statistics passed around by the governor's critics could use some context.

Our percentage of uninsured children is consistent with other border states. Unfortunately, no one in Washington talks about impact funding or special needs for states with high concentrations of recent immigrants from Third World countries. Whatever the benefit of having the labor pool available, there is a social cost.

Bush's record on the environment doesn't gleam. Truth told, however, no Texas governor has been able to push aggressively on this issue.

On the environment, Gore talks a good game, but . . .

The vice president ducked Bush's question about whether he supports the destruction of dams in the Northwest in order to protect the environment. Salmon populations are declining. But Northwestern states hold many votes that would be lost if Gore backed proposals that effectively would shutter an economy partly dependent on hydroelectric power and a style of living tied to dammed lakes and rivers.

It's easy for Gore to oppose exploring for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. There are not many votes in Alaska.

Could Bush have done better on environmental issues in Texas? Of course. Is he capable of learning from the pounding he's been taking on the issue? Absolutely.

Gore's Tennessee is hardly a model of progressive social accomplishment. It would be easy to criticize either Arkansas and Tennessee. Like Texas, they are relatively poor states, carrying special burdens (in Texas, the border; in Arkansas there is profound poverty of the Mississippi River Delta and Tennessee is no stranger to poor people either).

Be intellectually honest about those situations and the political and social conditions that led to them, we urge.

Bush has the right combination of judgment, political ability and personality to lead the nation and world.