Adam Nagourney of the New York Times writes:
Stephen Moore, president of the Club for Growth, a conservative group, said Mr. Bush had been "one of the biggest-spending presidents we've had in 20 years." But, he added, "he has cut taxes, so politically that has protected him."
"A month ago, he passed this huge tax cut that I think is terrific — I mean, I'm thrilled by that — and now this month he's passing this preposterous prescription drug benefit, and I'm furious at him," Mr. Moore said. "But I can't get too angry with him because he passed this tax cut. That's the way this administration works."
So what possible meaning -- beyond the 2004 elections -- can the prescription benefit have? None: After the tax cuts for the rich, there's no money to keep the program going for the long term. First the bait: a (presumed) new entitlement. Then the switch: the next administration discovers we can't really pay for it! But that's OK -- we can privatize it (and another big chunk of Medicare while we're at it.)
Bait and switch: "That's the way this administration works."