State of the Union - Part 4

This part deals with President Bush's proposals for his social issues. You can read part 1, part 2, and part 3 at the links. Also, you can read the transcript from CNN.com here.

President Bush abandoned his compassionate conservative moniker for the 2004 election. So you can imagine why this section of his speech is much shorter than his other sections. Plus can you imagine Laura Bush as the head leader for taking on gang life? This brings on the greater question of why First Ladies need to have a cause to back. This is just more causalty of feminism. It's pisses feminists off that the wife in the White House can't just host parties, or in fact just be a wife. Instead, they have to contribute something. I really don't see how Laura Bush is going to contribute anything to gang life. It would be much more improved if you had someone who had actual inner city experience to handle gang life. (Although, as I can testify, gang life is not limited to inner cities. My hometown of East Hampton, CT had their share of gangs, however not on the level as in Hartford or New Haven.) Somehow I doubt that government action will really "show young men an ideal of manhood that respects women and rejects violence". The economist in me knows that men will respect women and reject violence when the incentives are there to do it. Government action isn't going to serve as that incentive. As my public finance professor said, when you look at government programs, you have to ask, "Where's the distortion?" The first obvious distortion is the economic losses from young men killing each other. Still, I don't think that a three-year government program isn't going to do anything except suck money into a pit.

The other thing of note (Reauthorizing the Ryan-White Act to do something about HIV/AIDS, ho hum) is his proposal to increase funding for special training for counsel in capital cases. I would much rather see that money go into just funding better (or more) public defenders period. It's a shame to see criminals have their convictions overturned because of technicalities such as having insufficient counsel. So I think it would be better to make sure that these defendants, who can't afford solid defense to actually get good lawyers. And that brings up the last thing that Pres. Bush mentioned. DNA evidence. DNA evidence is not foolproof. Example numero uno: The Juice. That's an example of how DNA evidence isn't the cure all that President Bush believes. If trials were done by computer, then yes, we would have DNA evidence as more or less proof. But there's alwasys the human element of lawyers, judges and juries. Somehow, I don't see DNA evidence as overcoming those elements just yet.

So that concludes President Bush's social planning. Underwhelming? Sure, but that's if you see whether the federal government has a true role in actually affecting social policy. I really think it's a local issue and can be best dealt with using people in the community affected, not bureaucrats in Washington.