. . . The Democrats can argue -- and do -- that the tax cut has put the
government back in a fiscal bind that threatens all manner of worthy
undertakings, from adding a drug benefit to Medicare to building up the
defense budget to increasing aid to education. But that turns out to be a
greater constraint on them than on the president. They favor a generous drug
benefit; Mr. Bush favors a narrower one. The tax cut having been granted, he
can argue that only his is affordable.
He proposes a defense increase; they say there isn't room in the budget
unless other spending is cut. But do they really want to be the party that
says no to defense, he asks. And it isn't clear the answer is yes. Last week
President Bush threatened to veto, as a budget-buster, $2 billion in extra
farm aid that Senate Democrats wanted to grant. It was they who blinked. He
likes the tight budget the tax cut has helped create. They, having rightly
argued that the tax cut was irresponsible, are now forced to choose between
busting the budget themselves and abandoning pet projects. It's not clear
who ends up winning this argument. . . .
Editorial, Washington Post
August 5, 2001
