In his speech in Detroit, President Bush said, “The first pillar of sound economic policy is spending restraint in Washington, D.C.”

FACT: The federal budget deficit will reach a record $448 billion this year, exceeding last year’s record of $412 billion. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), “the long-term outlook for the US budget deficit has deteriorated since the end of last year.”

FACT: Bush has turned a $5.6 trillion surplus into $5.2 trillion deficit: a fiscal decline of $10.8 trillion in just three years. The turnaround represents the worst fiscal deterioration in at least the last half century. The CBO estimates President Bush’s fiscal policies, rather than external factors, “account for much of the reduction.”

In his speech in Detroit, President Bush said, “Now, all budgets have got to be based on priorities, and mine are clear: The government’s most solemn duty is to defend and protect the American people. In a time of war, we will always provide our military and homeland security personnel with the tools they need to do their jobs.”

First of all, the president probably should not reference the 2006 budget in the same sentence as the current wars as neither the cost for Iraq nor Afghanistan military operations are in the budget.

In terms of first responders, Bush is seeking to decimate vital funding for police officers and firefighters. For example, the administration’s budget “would slice a $600 million grant program for local police agencies to $60 million next year.” Grants to local firefighters would be cut by $215 million dollars.

With regards to funding homeland security, “the bulk of increased Homeland Security discretionary spending derives from fees such as hefty airline passenger security charges, rather than government coffers.” Looking only at “the department’s net discretionary budget authority,” President Bush in actuality only called for an extremely modest one percent increase in funding for the Department of Homeland Security. Also, the budget decreased funding for intelligence, infrastructure protection and grants to cities and states.

It is not just the initial response that will be lacking in necessary resources. The budget will cut a “range of public health programs, including several to protect the nation against bioterrorist attacks and to respond to medical emergencies.” Funding for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) would be reduced by 9 percent under Bush’s plan. Specifically, “the public health emergency fund of the [CDC], which helps state and local agencies prepare for bioterrorist attacks, would be cut 12.6 percent.”

In his speech in Detroit, President Bush said, “I’m a big believer in tax-free health savings accounts. If you’re a small business owner, or a sole proprietor, I urge you to look at health savings accounts.”

FACT: A survey of data from 4,000 adults with health insurance found that about half of patients with a high-deductible plan, coupled with Health Care Savings Accounts, “racked up medical debt and were faced with other billing woes, compared with 31 percent of those with more traditional health plans,” according to the research group Commonwealth Fund, which studies health policy issues.

FACT: And because of their adverse effects on employer-based coverage, HSAs could swell the ranks of the uninsured.

FACT: “Widespread adoption of [HSAs] could drive up the average annual deductible paid by workers, which is now about $300 for single employees and $600 for families, according to data from Mercer and the Kaiser Family Foundation.”

FACT: The creation of HSAs provides an “incentive to shift more costs to workers, who may be asked to ‘match’ their employer’s contribution to a HSA with its high deductibles and high co-payments.” Workers “in the higher tax brackets would secure large deductions for deposits into HSAs.” As a result, they will “weaken traditional employer-based insurance” and “place older and sicker workers at risk.” Experts believe premiums for comprehensive employer-based health insurance could “more than double.”

President Bush said America must reform unnecessary lawsuits, including asbestos claims.

FACT: The president may want to rethink classifying asbestos claims as frivolous. The AP reports a Columbia, MD, corporation, W.R. Grace and Co., “knew a Montana mine was releasing cancer-causing asbestos into the air and tried to hide the danger to workers and townspeople.” According to federal prosecutors, “more than 1,200 people became ill, and some of them died.”

President Bush said, “I would call it a disciplined budget…It keeps us on track to cut the deficit in half by 2009.”

FACT: The president’s budget leaves off transition costs for his proposal to change Social Security ($2 trillion), war costs for Iraq and Afghanistan (over $100 billion), changes to Alternative Minimum Tax.

FACT: “Despite cuts to scores of domestic programs, the Administration’s budget increases rather than decreases the deficit over the next five years…A main reason for this outcome is the tax-cut proposals the Administration has included in its budget.”

FACT: It is the 2004 deficit that Bush is promising to cut in half, but he’s not starting with the actual 2004 deficit of $412 billion. Instead, his benchmark is the projected $521-billion deficit that his Office of Management and Budget estimated a year ago, when the fiscal year was four months old. Using half of that figure, Bush’s goal is to reach a deficit of $260.5 billion.

President Bush said: “we need to focus on progrowth economic policies to create jobs and increase wates.”

At a time when overseas outsourcing has left many American workers — especially in the manufacturing sector — out of work, President Bush will propose cutting federal spending on job training by a half-billion dollars. Federal job training programs, including dislocated-worker training, will be cut by $200 million. Federal aid to states for job training, including funding to train veterans, will be cut by $300 million.

“In the budget for fiscal 2006, which begins Oct. 1, the White House will propose combining four Labor Department jobs programs and reduce spending to $3.9 billion from the $4.1 billion appropriated for the current fiscal year. The programs cover adults, youth and dislocated workers, as well as employment-service centers.

A few days ago, in response to a question about the difference between personal and private accounts, Secretary of the Treasury John Snow purported, “The President has always referred to personal accounts, but some often mischaracterize them as ‘private accounts.’”

However, President Bush continues to interchange the words private and personal when discussing his plan for Social Security investment accounts. A day after Snow’s retort, the president used the term “private accounts” when stumping in Florida.

So, once again the question must be asked: what is the difference between personal and private accounts?

Polling numbers.

In an e-mail message, a top director of communications working for Congressional conservatives stated, “Every day, we fight [others] for using the term ‘privatization’ b/c [sic] every poll worth its salt shows it frightens the public.” Additionally, in their Social Security talking points memo, conservatives in Congress highlight the need to make a concerted effort to use “personalization” if one hopes to win over the public:

“Personalization” not “privatization”: Personalization suggests increased personal ownership and control. Privatization connotes the total corporate takeover of Social Security; this is inaccurate and thoroughly turns off listeners, who are very concerned about corporate wrongdoing.

Personal accounts are private accounts; the only difference is salesmanship semantics. So if they insist on sailing this sinking ship, conservatives might want to make sure their captain is onboard.

Times the phrase “spending restraint” was repeated by Scott McClellan at yesterday’s briefing on the budget: 13

Percent of overall spending, including homeland security, national defense and entitlements, not covered by budget: 81

Number of domestic programs to be “eliminated or dramatically reduced” in Bush budget: 150

Percent of overall spending these cuts represent: less than 1

Projected 2005 deficit, minus war costs: $368 billion

Projected 2006 deficit, minus war costs: $390 billion

Surplus Bush inherited in 2001, when he took office: $236 billion

That surplus, projected over ten years: $5.6 trillion

Major costs left off the Bush budget: President’s proposal to change Social Security ($2 trillion), war costs for Iraq and Afghanistan (over $100 billion), changes to Alternative Minimum Tax.

What Bush said about his first budget, in 2001: “After paying the bills, my plan reduces the national debt, and fast. So fast, in fact, that economists worry that we’re going to run out of debt to retire. That would be a good worry to have.”

What he says about this one: “It’s a budget that is a lean budget. People on both sides of the aisle have called upon the administration to submit a budget that helps meet our obligations of — our goal of reducing the deficit in half over a five-year period, and this budget does just that.”

Rolling back massive tax-cuts for millionaires is off the table, but the Bush administration has no qualms about raising taxes on average Americans. The 2006 budget President Bush submitted to Congress yesterday imposes $5.3 billion in new, regressive taxes. (They are conveniently listed in table 18-3 on page 317 of the Analytic Perspectives supplement to the budget). The administration’s budget contains new taxes that will increase the price of a six-pack of beer, an airline ticket and prescription drugs for veterans. Meanwhile, the budget cuts funding for education, public health and environmental protection and includes $1.4 trillion in new tax cuts for the wealthy. Welcome to Bushonomics.

Update: table 18-3 appears on page 317 when viewed with Adobe Acrobat, but on page 305 of the actual document.