2003 Year in Review

Jus' Wanna Be Your Teddy Bear...

Yesterday, January 21, Senator Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts gave his annual state of the union address before an august assemblage of news persons at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. Kennedy, at 70 the Grand Old Man of the Democratic Party, usually delivers a major speech each year, but this speech was timed to precede the president’s State of the Union address before Congress later this month. Much of his speech was critical of President Bush’s domestic and foreign policies, but at the same time, he seemed to be launching the official Democratic Party race for the 2004 elections.

The news services, print and television, did not do the speech justice. While some news reports concentrated on Teddy’s opposition to Bush’s Iraq policy, other reports touched on the senator’s opposition to Bush’s tax proposal, or “rebate to the rich.” But, in truth, Kennedy took issue with practically every administration policy

Iraq is not a clear and present danger, said Kennedy, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee. The Bush Iraqi policy “will distract America from the two more immediate threats to our security — the clear and present danger of terrorism and the crisis with North Korea." The discovery last week of empty chemical warheads in Iraq is a sign that further inspections, not war, are the wisest course of action.

On the legal front, Kennedy attacked Bush’s “attack on affirmative action." Criticizing the president for supporting a Supreme Court case in which white students accuse the University of Michigan of practicing reverse discrimination as engaging in "inflammatory and blatant distortions equating affirmative action with quotas…An administration that takes such a course, whether out of conviction or political calculation, is no friend of minorities and no force for civil rights," As if he feared the present Court would find in the student’s favor, Kennedy looked ahead to future Court vacancies and added, "The Senate must refuse to confirm judicial nominees who are hostile to the core values of a diverse democratic society." He did not address the constitutional merits of the case, however.

"Most Republicans want more tax cuts targeted primarily on wealthy individuals and corporations," Kennedy said. "Most Democrats want more resources for education, health care and other key domestic priorities." Here the senator went into a litany of causes for which Democrats have advanced since the McGovern years of the seventies.

He called for health care for all Americans on par with that “enjoyed by members of Congress.” He affirmed his support for Bush’s No Child Left Behind initiative in education by calling for greater appropriations. For senior citizens, he advocated expanded medical care and prescription drugs benefits. For the terrorist-impaired, he called for greater homeland security measures, but not at the expense of denying anyone or any group their constitutional rights.

Kennedy made no reference to how these extended programs with new expenditures would be funded. Indeed, he seemed to be in a quandary, but offered a solution that contradicted much of his criticism of the Bush tax cut: “We should first determine how much we can afford…then allocate half to tax cuts and the other half to important priorities.”

Teddy has never had the personal composure or command of the language possessed by his brothers John and Robert. His delivery on this occasion showed signs of incoherence and lack of organization that indicated he himself did not have a clear picture of the nation and its needs. But he is Ted Kennedy. And the nation listened and the press reported his ramblings, if not completely, at least those parts which it deemed gave the Massachusetts senator a decent showing.

Incidentally, he intends to back Massachusetts senator John Kerrey for the Democratic nominee for president.

by William Driver, Guest Columnist
January 23, 2003