Temu BrownTo the delight of some, but to the chagrin of most Wash. U. students, George W. Bush has begun his second term in office. He’ll push for big things-social security reform, a victory in Iraq and probably more tax cuts for his donors-claiming the American people gave him a mandate to restructure the country. At best, that’s a gross exaggeration.
Sure, Bush won with a majority of the electoral and popular vote. He’s the rightful president, but it’s not like the whole country supports him like it did after 9/11. The latest AP poll shows his approval rating at 49 percent, the lowest rating of any second-term president in 50 years. It’s like getting a ‘D’ in a class. Marginally, that’s a pass, but it doesn’t confer any right to boast about mastery of the subject. Similarly, Bush won, but not by much, and not for his domestic policy. He may have a mandate to stay the course in Iraq, but he doesn’t have a right to shape the country according to his ideals.
So what should Bush do on the domestic front? As far as students go, he should start by not cutting Pell grants, which help the neediest youth attend college. New rules his administration enacted last year mean that, in the near term, thousands of students will lose their Pell grants. Those rules should be changed back. Though Bush recently proposed increasing the maximum Pell grant by $500 over five years, that increase doesn’t even match inflation. In real terms, then, the Bush administration plans to cut Pell grants.
And while we’re on the subject of education, perhaps the administration can find better uses for $241,000 than as payment to journalist Armstrong Williams for “educating” minority communities on the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLBA). Both Democrats and Republicans called this “covert propaganda,” which is exactly what it was. How about really spending that money on education, either on Pell grants or primary education? Especially since the NCLBA wasn’t fully funded.
Finally, students need to get involved with the debate on Social Security. It’s not just an old-folks problem, since our parents will be retiring sooner rather than later. The alternative to some sort of solid social net is having parents move back in with their children upon retirement. And remember: given politicians’ tendency to spend money the government doesn’t have, this generation will end up footing the bill of any Social Security reform.
We need to let our Congressmen know that, whatever solution they eventually come up with, they can’t pass the buck to our generation. Our generation didn’t cause the crisis (if it even exists); we shouldn’t have to bail out the previous generations. Toward this end, we need to lobby Congress to stop deficit spending, which is essentially them spending our future earnings. Perhaps we should remind Congressmen that their long-term job security depends on us more than the AARP.