President Bush has made broad reforms and took drastic actions during his first term, these measures in my belief, were taken to benefit those other then the American people. The Bush Administration has hyped up issues such as Iraq's W.M.D. and the countries energy crisis, these have since unraveled. As our laws undergo dramatic changes, and our troops are overseas his camp is publicizing only the lighter side of such issues. At home as well as in Iraq, the problems which cause the federal government to intervene are left unresolved. Many of the President's cabinet members are linked to various energy industries, this raises questions of his policies integrity. With his actions in Iraq and at home why are the energy corporations consistently benefiting more then those the programs are designed for?

While President Bush has been CEO of several oil companies and his cabinet is comprised heavily of people connected to energy corporations, Vice President Dick Cheney is the most conspicuous as former CEO of Halliburton. Although Cheney is no longer working for Halliburton he still holds stock options in the amount of eight million dollars. All dividends of these stocks do go to benefit charity, but he is still receiving severance pay from Halliburton. When he left the company in 2000 it was agreed that he should receive severance payment for the next five years on a varying scale. In effect Mr. Cheney is still a stock holder and a benefactor of the profit his company may incur in the future. (James Martinson, Guardian) Halliburton has received lucrative contracts in Iraq on a no-bid basis. The Bush Administration says that these were to speed up reconstruction in Iraq. The contracts in which Halliburton received could have gone to Iraqi corporations to help their economy, it may have been more economical as well. Halliburton is importing fuel from Iraq at the current rate of $1.59 per gallon, $.98 is the price the Iraqi National Oil company would charge us for the same service. (Newsweek Nov. 3. Pg. 28&29) The defense department has also given contracts to Kellog Brown and Root which is a subsidiary of Halliburton. (James Martinson, Guardian)

The funds which Bush allocates to different programs are not necessarily reaching those in need. As we are investing billions into Iraq, Iraqi's who are comparably skilled to American's are unemployed or being paid a pittance. Iraqi security guards employed by American corporations are paid $8.33 a day, this compared to a British or U.S. security guard who is paid $1,200 shows the staggering inequality. Skilled laborers such as engineers are also juxtapose, an Iraqi engineer is paid $1,000 a month while an American is paid $900 a day. (Newsweek Nov. 3 Pg. 33) In the continental U.S. things are not much different. Allen Smith, director of the Alaska programs for the wilderness society said "Drilling in the Arctic Refuge will destroy wilderness and harm wildlife while doing almost nothing to address the nation's energy situation." (qtd. Margot Higgins, ENN.com) Alaska holds merely 2% of the worlds oil, experts say that drilling in Alaska will not impact our dependency on foreign oil. Also, the choice to drill in Alaska was made part of a budget proposal, preventing a filibuster in the senate. (Associated Press, ENN.com) The only parties who stand to benefit from such a transaction would be those who are providing the oil.

The most devious new policy yet is the energy plan. Only 1.2 billion is being allocated towards more fuel efficient forms of energy such as hydrogen and solar power, in turn "Big Oil" receives 55 billion a year in federal subsidies. (Robert Kennedy Jr., Rolling Stone) John Heilprin reported "Most of the tax incentives and other financial benefits, loan guarantees, royalty relief, or direct government spending would go to energy industries." (Associated Press, ENN.com) These policies are being put into action because of hyped concerns on unrealistic problems. In Iraq no W.M.D. have yet been found, also such a find seems unlikely in the future. With no significant evidence to back himself on Bush is hard pressed to justify his war. This war preyed on the publics frenzy for safety post 9-11. As of now we must find room in our budget for Bush's 87 billion dollars. The Tax Policy Center, an expert on the subject said, "we could raise close to 87 billion dollars a year with a 5.25% surcharge on income-tax bills." "Tax rates would still be well below their 2002 levels." (qtd. Newsweek Nov. 3)

The Bush Administration has put much of its attention on the nation's energy crisis. Dick Cheney has said "today [California's] got rolling blackouts, because they don't have enough electricity; they've got rising prices; they've got a whole complex of problems that are caused by relying only on conservation and not doing anything about the supply side of the equation." (John King, CNN.com) he aims make us believe the crisis in California is foreshadowing what shall occur nationwide. Enron has since been found to have caused the energy crisis in California as a means of raising prices. State investigator Gary Cohen has said "There was enough [electrical] capacity to avoid almost all of the blackouts." (CBSNEWS.com) Much information of detailed planning has surfaced from many California energy corporation, one Enron lawyer even wrote this in a note "The net effect of these transactions is that Enron gets paid for moving energy to relieve congestion without actually moving any energy or relieving any congestion."(associated press, CNN.com) I mean to make no link between information trafficked between Enron and the white house, but only to make clear a point that the California Energy Crisis was manufactured. This crisis as it were has spurred the Bush administration to consider reneging on it's promise to "limit CO2 emissions from power plants." Dick Cheney has since said "Well, I think the mistake was the campaign pledge. Nobody paid much attention to it at the time." "It was a mistake, because we aren't in a position today to be able to do that in terms of sort of capping emissions, CO2 emissions." (John King CNN.com) This shows the Bush administration unwillingness to protect any environmental standards it once claimed to value. The simplest choice to reduce fuel consumption would be to separate S.U.V. emission standards from those of small trucks, sport utility vehicles currently receive tax breaks, and encourage wasting fuel. Our own Secretary of Energy, Spencer Abraham, "led the charge to scuttle fuel-efficiency standards for S.U.V.'s- and created incentives to buy gas guzzlers." (Robert Kennedy Jr., Rolling Stone) Attitudes like this aim to raise the necessity for more energy at inflated prices.

We have had a lack of press since the beginning of the Bush administration. We still receive the news, but hot issues are sometimes covered. The President still refuses to discuss his knowledge of W.M.D., our energy crisis, and his need to drill in Alaska. In many of these cases it is hard to see the humane benefit. While I cannot prove that Bush is acting solely on behalf of energy corporations, I can show they consistently benefit from all of his policies. Our energy plan is little more then emission code revisions and tax breaks, but we applaud the trifle allocated towards hydrogen research. In Iraq we have not made a significant improvement in reconstruction except for the 1,595 schools that have been rebuilt. Newsweek visited five of these schools, they reported "None had enough textbooks, desks or blackboards. Most had refuse everywhere, nonfunctioning toilets and desks made for two kids were accommodating four." (Newsweek Nov. 3, Pg. 30) If we only look at the good news Bush presents us with we only see the school's finished frame not the decay within.

Bush approaches all issues of interest to him with a fevered zeal. These issues when analyzed never seemed to be of importance before he came to power. The only protagonist and benefactor present throughout all of his policy are energy corporations. The corporations which benefit most have one of their own in his cabinet. The American people have little to show for our foreign policy, economy and ecology since instituting Bush's energy plan, tax cuts and Iraqi invasion. The energy corporations on the other hand continually reap large rewards. President Bush's sacrifice of America's environment, lives, and economy to benefit those who sit in his cabinet and contributed to his campaign is broadly apparent, by increasing our awareness of his policies we may better protect our interests.