Dear Mr. Bush: I cannot support you in 2004

Your fiscal policies are irrational and dangerousHarvard Business-Open Letter to the President. In fact, your ratings have been almost universally poor amongst professional and academic economists. The Economist-Poll of EconomistsBut you didn't pay enough attention to the facts, and you continue to commit this sinCNN-Revised 2003 figuresMSNBC-2004 figures as of Sept. We have also witnessed a huge failure in nuclear non-proliferation (Iran/N.Korea). Instead of taking a balanced approach to our war on terrorism (i.e. dealing with already identified terrorist threats, strengthening rebuilding efforts in Afghanistan, and asserting a stronger anti-terrorist stance with regards to the regimes in Iran and Saudi Arabia), you focused our efforts almost entirely on Iraq, and you offered only weak evidence and a shifting rationale for the war on that country. You frittered away our political and moral capital. The unipolar dream, with a strong Amercian leadership of the world, has never been so distant since the cold war. We need to wipe the slate clean in this next election. Perhaps we can revive the dream of American world leadership, but the taint of this administration can only bury it.

3. Your treatment of internal dissent within your cabinet and agencies has not been healthy or productive. While you management style is refreshingly decisive, the downside of this decisiveness is that you appear to come to conclusions before you see the facts (or even the questions). Many have criticized your close-minded approach. Wash. Post-Bush's Leadersip Style: Decisive or SimplisticKnight-Ridder- Suppressing, Distorting Science; The Observer-Bush covers up climate research; CBS- W.House Edited Greenhouse Report. In keeping with the appallingly high-turn around in our agencies, Christine Todd Whitman left the EPA. It worries me that so many in your administration have resigned, been fired, or been muffled.

The clear message that you have sent to many (if not all) of the major agencies is "shut up or get out." To return to Mr. Reagan, he also had a strained relationship with his agencies, but this was partly because he intended to trim their budgets. Mr. Reagan had a coherent policy of deregulation. You have shown neither a desire to trim budgets nor any honest attempts to deregulate. Do you have any sort of coherent plan?

5. To conclude, let me emphasize this last part: You, Mr. Bush, are no Ronald Reagan. I don't know what you are. You're certainly not small government; you're not libertarian; you're not a Clintonian technocrat; you're not a uniter or a moderate (as you once claimed). You're a hodgepodge of incoherent policies, and you're unwilling to critically look at those policies.

I hope to see you on the ranch in 2005!

Yours Truly,
Steppenwolf