Bush used selective data in his address, critics say
Incomplete picture is alleged by some on Iraq and jobs
WASHINGTON -- President Bush's State of the Union speech painted a rosy picture of his administration's foreign and domestic accomplishments. But the president's selective use of information -- and, critics say, some exaggerations -- obscured the troubles plaguing the economy at home and democracy-building efforts overseas.
Bush accurately reported growth in the economy and an increase in productivity, but he failed to mention that some 2.5 million jobs have been lost since he took office and that job growth in December was flat. And while the president noted the US military's capture of Saddam Hussein and the writing of a new constitution in Afghanistan, he left out that investigators have not found weapons of mass destruction, which was the stated justification for invading Iraq.
Instead, Bush noted that investigators have "identified dozens of weapons of mass destruction-related program activities" -- a reference to plans and equipment that could be used toward building an actual arsenal.
Bush's carefully crafted language did not include the pointed accusations he made last year, when he reported that British intelligence had obtained evidence that Hussein was seeking nuclear material from Niger. Nor did he suggest direct ties between Iraq and the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist organization Al Qaeda, as he did in the 2003 State of the Union address.
On Tuesday night, the president boasted that "this economy is strong, and growing stronger," noting that "the pace of economic growth in the third quarter was the fastest in nearly 20 years," and that "jobs are on the rise."
Those statements are true. Nevertheless, the economy produced an anemic 1,000 jobs in December. And while unemployment dropped from 5.9 percent to 5.7 percent last month, economists say the slight decrease is due to the fact that long-term unemployed people have stopped looking for work.
The president made only a passing reference to the burgeoning budget deficit, and said he could cut it in half over the next five years. But the president's own domestic agenda -- including making the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts permanent -- would make it difficult to slash the deficit, analysts say.
"All the additional political promises the president has made will make cutting the deficit nearly impossible," said Keith Ashdown of Taxpayers for Common Sense.
Administration officials say they are confident that the growing economy will produce more jobs. Chad Kolton, a spokesman at the Office of Management and Budget, said the White House has been ratcheting down growth in discretionary spending as part of its deficit-reduction plan. Fueling economic growth by making the tax cuts permanent will also help reduce the budget shortfall, he said.
"This is something the president has been talking about for some time," said Kolton. "If you keep spending under control while pursuing a high-growth policy, we can cut the deficit within five years."
Bush praised his No Child Left Behind law, and pledged to increase funding for Pell Grants to help students pay for college. But he neglected to say his budget did not include full funding for the No Child Left Behind initiative -- a direction the Republican-controlled Congress also took -- and that his previous budgets have limited eligibility for Pell Grants.
He touted the new Medicare law, saying seniors will be able to save 10 percent to 25 percent on prescription drugs with a discount card to be issued later this year. But he failed to note that the card does not guarantee any discount, and that it may not cover all drugs.
On foreign policy, Bush once again praised the international coalition he had marshaled, calling by name 18 countries that have sent troops to Iraq, and alluding to 17 others. "Some critics have said our duties in Iraq must be internationalized," Bush said. "This particular criticism is hard to explain to our partners."
Yet the total of 35 force-contributing countries can be deceiving. While the United States has roughly 130,000 troops in Iraq, there are about 25,000 troops from other countries. The United Kingdom has contributed roughly 11,000 troops, making them easily the second-largest source of military forces. While a few other countries -- Italy, Poland, the Netherlands, Spain, and Ukraine, for example -- have made contributions that number more than 1,000 troops, most have made only token contributions, according to a compilation by GlobalSecurity.org, a defense-oriented think tank in Virginia. Norway, for example, has contributed 104 engineers. Macedonia has contributed approximately 28 people.
A spokesman for US Central Command, which oversees Iraq operations, said that the threshold to be considered a force provider is having contributed at least one unit.
"Even with the Brits, you've only got maybe four battalions that can be considered combat battalions and the rest are engineers and logistics," said Patrick Garrett, a defense analyst with GlobalSecurity.org. "You see that across the board."
Robert Schlesinger, Stephen Glain, and Farah Stockman of the Globe staff contributed to this report.
