John Kerry did a nice job yesterday of using recent events to highlight one of the more serious problems with Bush’s approach to governing.
Kerry said Tuesday that the [377 tons of explosives at Al Qaqaa] were evidence of broader problems with Bush’s presidency, accusing him of plotting to cover up the missing explosives until after the election, a charge the White House denied. In recent weeks, Kerry also has charged Bush with concealing plans for draft and a secret call-up of reservists and members of the National Guard. He pointed Tuesday to a report in The Washington Post detailing the administration’s plans to request $70 billion more to fund military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan to suggest a systematic plan to deceive.
“Mr. President, what else are you being silent about?” Kerry said. “What else are you keeping from the American people? How much more will the American people have to pay?”
Great point. Bush is “being silent” and “keeping from the American people” lots of key information, even about his own policy agenda. The Wall Street Journal reported today, for example, that the president remains committed to a major overhaul of the federal tax code as part of his “vision” for a second term. Bush, however, won’t tell anyone what the overhaul might include.
Amid new criticism for his handling of the Iraq war, President Bush moved to sharpen contrasts with Democratic challenger Sen. John Kerry on the economy, reviving his call to overhaul the tax code.
Mr. Bush raised the notion at the Republican convention this summer, saying if re-elected he would create a commission to study tax-overhaul options and push the panel’s recommendations through Congress. He didn’t outline any options, but they are expected to include making the current system less complicated or scrapping the individual income tax and replacing it with something along the lines of a national sales tax. […]
Some Bush aides worry that tax overhaul isn’t a winner with most voters — in part because the president isn’t spelling out his plans — but Mr. Bush returned to the theme on a swing through rural Wisconsin yesterday, vowing to “bring people together” in Washington to make the tax code “pro-growth, pro-family, and fair.”
This is ridiculous.
If Bush wants to radically re-shape the federal tax code, the least he could do, as a candidate or as president, is tell us how. He throws around a few inviting phrases — who’s against a “pro-growth, pro-family, and fair” tax code? — but expects us to just trust him on the issue. He’ll overhaul the system in a positive way as long as we take his word for it? In what reality has he built up this kind of credibility?
In August, Bush described a suggestion to “get rid of the current tax system and replace it with a national sales tax” as “an interesting idea…that we ought to explore seriously.” Less than 24 hours later, however, Bush aides quickly backpedaled, saying Bush would not consider a national sales tax.
So what is in Bush’s plan? No one knows. I’d be great if voters could consider the details, or even a broad outline, but for now, it’s a big secret. Unfortunately, this is part of a trend.
Want to know how Bush will take $2 trillion out of Social Security without cutting anyone’s benefits? Too bad; he’ll explain it after the election’s over. Want to know who helped shape the administration’s energy policy? Sorry, that’s secret too. How about Bush’s military service records, which he claims to have already released? No, they’re sealed. Or maybe the records that show the White House’s cost estimates for Bush’s Medicare scheme? Don’t ask; they’re off limits. Have a question about correspondence between the Pentagon and the White House regarding the no-bid contracts for Halliburton? The administration could tell us, but then they’d have to kill us.
It’s governing-by-secret. The information we learn — such as new Iraq spending and extended troop deployments — only comes by way of leaks; it’s not as if the White House was actually sharing information with Congress or the public.
When Kerry asks, “Mr. President, what else are you being silent about?” it might be the most interesting rhetorical question of the campaign.