It has become a cliche to call the Bush administration a failed Presidency.  The evidence for that — a war (or maybe two wars) that didn’t go so well, out-of-control budget deficits, an abysmal approval rating — seems pretty strong.  But I would argue that looked at another way — starting from the position of what the administration was actually trying to accomplish — Bush can be viewed as one of the most successful presidents in American history.  Perhaps only FDR and James Polk were as successful in advancing their agenda as Bush has been.
Domestically, Bush can be credited with the following fairly sweeping accomplishments:

  1.  Extensive expansion of the power of the executive branch of government.
  2.  Strong shift to the right in the Federal judiciary.
  3.  Vast increases in the state security apparatus.
  4.  Increased military expenditures.
  5.  Skewing of the distribution of wealth toward the highest strata.
  6.  Pre-emptive attack on any future social initiatives through the bankrupting of the Treasury by staggering deficits.

Internationally, granted, there is less of a sweeping record of success, but there are still some signficant developments:

  1.  Weakening of the rule of international law
  2.  Doctrine of pre-emptive war
  3.  Establishing the prerogative of American military to act without approval of any international organization.

A new president may try to undo some of these achievements, but, especially in the domestic sphere, this will not really be possible.  I don’t see how any major policy initiatives of a progressive bent can be attempted with the current budget deficit.  The new president will be inheriting an economy either in or near a state of recession; tax increases, under the circumstances, will not be an option.  The hands of the future administration will be tied from the start.  And no current social programs or regulations are safe from being overturned by a strongly motivated right-wing judiciary.

It is almost needless to say, but none of these successes could have been possible without Democratic support or acquiescence.

0 0 votes
Article Rating