Bush to Fight for Defense Increase

President Bush challenged Congress on Friday to approve every penny of his proposed $18.4-billion increase in military spending for the coming year despite the shrinking federal budget surplus.

Calling education and defense his priorities, Bush said that funding his requested 5.7% increase in the Pentagon’s budget will not mean dipping into surplus Social Security money unless “Congress goes off on a spending spree.”

The sharp decline in federal budget surpluses has prompted powerful Democrats to announce this week that they will not support Bush’s request for the additional Pentagon funding. But Friday, with Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld by his side, Bush strongly defended his request for a raft of spending increases in Pentagon programs.

Bush’s forceful remarks, coming during an unusually animated news conference at the Crawford Community Center, signaled that he expects an intense battle with lawmakers concerning boosting spending on the military.

“My point is going to be, to the United States Congress and their constituents, that national defense ought to be a funding priority and I expect it to be,” Bush said. “Our position is [that the military has] been underfunded, and we expect Congress to respond.”

Bush announced his nominees for chairman and vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff: Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers and Marine Corps Gen. Peter Pace. If confirmed by the Senate, Myers in particular is expected to play a key role in the anticipated duel over the shape and size of the proposed $329-billion Pentagon budget.

Fielding questions from reporters who have accompanied him here for a monthlong “working vacation,” Bush then touched on a variety of topics, from the economy and national defense to stem cell research and the plight of the family of missing federal intern Chandra Levy.

Bush asserted that the economy, which has slumped severely in recent months, is going through a “correction” and should rebound.

“I think our economy has got very strong underpinnings,” Bush said. “We’ve certainly gone through a correction. But there are some signs we’re improving.”

In the meantime, “don’t go hog wild,” Bush told lawmakers, saying that congressional spending is the biggest threat to the budget.

But even before Bush spoke, Senate Democrats, and some powerful House Republicans, were questioning his assumption that the Pentagon budget increase can be funded without dipping into surplus Medicare and possibly Social Security money, which most lawmakers in both parties have declared off-limits.

Warnings of Tapping Social Security

Projections released Wednesday by the White House showed that Bush’s tax cut and the economic slowdown had whittled the surplus outside the Social Security system to virtually zero. That means that the government will spend nearly all of the surplus generated by the Medicare system and will avoid dipping into the politically sensitive Social Security fund, but only by the slimmest of margins.

“He’s not proposed any way to pay for it,” Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, said of the proposed Pentagon budget increase in a Wednesday conference call with reporters. “That means the money will come right out of the trust funds for Medicare and Social Security if his proposal were to be adopted.”

Andrew Krepinevich, director of the nonpartisan Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, said the new surplus projections leave even less money for the 2003 Pentagon budget, when the administration had hoped to fund major new weapon programs.

“They may be able to pull this off this year, but the most serious problem the Pentagon faces is down the road, when there will be no money for these types of increases,” Krepinevich said.

The Bush administration has come under fire from Democrats who have accused the president of squandering the surpluses with his $1.35-trillion, 10-year tax cut. The tax cut will cost $74 billion this year, according to government estimates, but a slowing economy also has reduced revenues significantly.

But Bush seemed eager to shift some of the burden for preserving the surpluses to Congress, which he said would need to tighten its spending.

“No question, the economy has slowed down,” Bush said. “And therefore, Congress must adjust its spending attitudes. The surest way to make sure that the recovery doesn’t happen in a meaningful period of time or a reasonable period of time is to overspend.”

Bush also defended his tax cuts as necessary in a slowing economy. “It was the right thing to do because it responded to economic circumstances that our nation now faces.”

But the president stopped short of ruling out any use of Social Security surpluses:

“I’ve said that the only reason we should use Social Security funds is in case of an economic recession or war.”

Standing Firm on Missile Defense Funding

Bush said defense spending is a national imperative, rather than a discretionary spending program. “This is money our military needs and money our budget allows.”

The president said he would not waver on his request for the additional money for missile defense. He argued that ramping up research and deployment of a high-tech national missile defense system, to be based on not-yet-developed technologies, is critical to prevent U.S. vulnerability to nuclear attacks from “rogue states.”

The administration has proposed an $8.3-billion budget for missile defense in the coming year. The request represents a $3-billion, or 57%, increase over current spending on the program.

“We’re going to stand our ground and say the $8 billion--I believe it’s $8 billion, if I’m not mistaken--is the right amount of money,” Bush said.

Speaking of the drained surplus in a statement Wednesday, Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.), chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said, “What a fall! The surplus fell like Lucifer in ‘Paradise Lost.’ The tax cut chickens are coming home to roost.”

Byrd said he was hesitant to support the increase in spending on missile defense because he fears the system will always be of limited use. Democrats on the House Armed Services Committee recently tried to shift $1 billion from missile defense to conventional military programs. Byrd said he might try something similar.

“Most of all, we must avoid haste,” Byrd said. “We cannot afford to embark on a quixotic quest that could damage our national security and waste billions of dollars in the process.”

The president also renewed his plea to Israelis and Palestinians to show restraint, noting that “terrorism is prevalent now in the Middle East.”

“My attitude is, if they are that interested in peaceful dialogue, they ought to do everything they can to stop the terrorist activity that has accelerated in recent months.”

Bush also said the U.S. “will have no representative” at next week’s United Nations Conference on Racism in Durban, South Africa, if participating nations “pick on Israel” by equating Zionism with racism.

“If they use the forum as a way to isolate our friend and strong ally, we will not participate,” Bush declared.

At his news conference Friday, the president appeared unusually energetic, often gesturing with his hands and leaning into the dais for emphasis. He became downright jovial when he recognized and called on a statehouse reporter from Austin, Texas.

“Root, good to see you, my boy,” Bush greeted the reporter, Jay Root of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

As Root began to ask his question, the president interrupted with a query of his own.

“How are you?” Bush said, and then explained to others their relationship. “[Root] used to cover me as governor,” the president said. “Fine lad. Fine lad.”

The crew-cut Root had no better luck as he tried anew to pose his question.

“Little short on hair, but a fine lad,” Bush remarked.

*

Times staff writer Edwin Chen in Crawford contributed to this story.