Bush's habit of cutting the budgets of organizations he's used for photo ops is making him an easy target for Democrats.
Apr 14, 2001 | So you head up a domestic program that relies on federal money, and you're looking for a way to avoid the Bush budget ax. What do you do? For one thing, says the Democratic National Committee, don't invite the first family over for a photo op.
In the last few weeks, either President Bush or his wife, Laura, has visited a total of three domestic organizations whose work they heralded -- a children's hospital in Atlanta, a public library in Washington and a Boys and Girls Club in Wilmington, Del. All three would have their funding slashed in the budget Bush proposed last Monday.
"It's just more examples of Bush's illusion of inclusion," says Democratic National Committee chairman Terry McAuliffe. "It's politics at its worst, it's cynicism at its worst. He uses them for photo ops and props and then he axes them out of the budget."
White House spokesman Jimmy Orr, however, refuses to take the bait. "I'm not going to engage in any political back and forth" with the DNC, he says. "This administration is about changing the tone in Washington. We're going to focus on the issues and what the president's priorities are. The budget is compassionate, it's responsible, and its goals are funding for important priorities like education, healthcare and children's programs."
But McAuliffe counters that the disconnect between the president's priorities for photo ops and his priorities for funding is precisely the point.
On March 1, for example, Bush visited Egleston Children's Hospital in Atlanta, which he declared "a place full of love."
"There's a lot of talk about budgets right now," Bush said at the time, "and I'm here to talk about the budget. My job as the president is to submit a budget to the Congress and to set priorities, and one of the priorities that we've talked about is making sure the healthcare systems are funded ... The point I want to make in this haven of love, a place of deep concern about children's health, is that we can fund priorities."
But, Democrats slam, the "haven of love" is clearly not a presidential priority. In Bush's proposed budget for next year, federal funding for a pediatric training program that benefits hospitals like Egleston would be cut from $235 million in fiscal year 2001 to $200 million.
David Tatum, director of government affairs for Children's Healthcare of Atlanta, the parent organization of Egleston Children's Hospital, comes to Bush's defense: "I don't feel that this is as bad as it's being portrayed."
After all, Tatum says, "When the president came to visit Egleston, the rumored amount the president was going to put in the budget for the pediatric training program for medical residents was only $40 million. And last Monday he announced $200 million. So we see that as a significant improvement from what it was rumored to be."
Moreover, Tatum says, President Clinton "only asked for $85 million (for fiscal year 2001) but Congress gave us $235 million." Thus, while Bush is proposing a $35 million cut -- which Tatum is confident Congress will restore -- he is, in fact, proposing $115 million more in funding than Clinton requested for the program a year ago. "This is the most we've ever gotten out of the White House in terms of a budget request to Congress," he says.
McAuliffe dismisses these arguments as spin. "It's a cut," he says.