White males represent one of the most important groups in the American
electorate. Forty-five million strong, these men - dubbed NASCAR Dads by
the skeptical liberal media - have been among George W. Bush's most
dependable supporters.
In 2000,
60% of
the white male electorate voted for Bush -- now there's
a real gender gap. So as
President Bush puts the final touches on his Thursday night acceptance
speech, no doubt he will be thinking how to strengthen his appeal with
the NASCAR Dads.
So let's ask, What has Bush done over the past four years to help
struggling men?
Men are usually the primary breadwinners, so we should first examine
Bush's track record in reviving the economy. Shortly after taking
office, Bush had to deal with some formidable challenges: the downturn
of the stock market, the corporate accounting scandals, 9/11, and the
War on Terror.
So last year Bush passed the Jobs and Growth Act which reduced personal
income taxes and created new jobs. And in the past year, the economy
grew an impressive 4.8%.
Giving a boost to male breadwinners - that's a biggie. So score three
points in the plus column.
In recent years, men have faced an unprecedented effort by radical
feminists to marginalize their social and legal standing in society. A
prime example: thanks to the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling, fathers lost the
legal right to participate in decision-making on keeping their own
child.
Last year, Bush signed a law banning the gruesome procedure known as
partial birth abortion. Although the law did nothing to address the
reproductive disenfranchisement of dads, it was a step in the right
direction.
One point.
But in other areas, Bush has kowtowed to the radical feminist agenda.
Take the Violence Against Women Act. VAWA spends $1 billion of taxpayer
money each year based on the faulty assumption that only women are
victimized by domestic violence. Sadly, Bush has done nothing to rectify
the obvious unfairness of VAWA.
Subtract one.
The second area of concern is the child support program, administered by
the Office for Child Support Enforcement.
If you want to see how an expensive do-gooder program can actually make
things worse, you will find no better example than the OCSE. According
to a recent
Census Bureau
report, the percentage of mothers
who received child support has dropped in recent years. In 1994, the
figure was 76.1%. Eight years later, it was down to 74.7%.
The reason for this decline is simple. When you start putting thousands
of low-income fathers behind bars for child support arrearages, it
becomes pretty hard for these guys to earn money and make payments. The
Bush Administration has done nothing to blunt the
squeeze-blood-from-a-turnip mindset of the OCSE bureaucrats.
Take away another point.
Shortly after George W. Bush won the 2000 election, his Administration
issued a Statement on Responsible Fatherhood. The document
acknowledged
the fact that "research shows that a large portion of fathers who do not
pay child support are themselves poor."
Fatherhood advocates were hopeful they would see an end to the midnight
raids on so-called "deadbeat" dads.
True, Bush did continue the
Fatherhood Initiative
which the Clinton
Administration had started. But under the rubric of "responsible
fatherhood," the Bush Administration has linked fatherhood promotion
with child support collection.
Think about it: first you're going to talk about being a caring,
involved dad. And then you're going to throw him in jail if he loses his
job? PLEEEEAASE.
Sorry, the mixed-message Fatherhood Initiative doesn't win my vote.
So let's tally up the numbers. Four points in the plus column, two in
the minus. Final score: two points.
If we did a similar tally on John Kerry's
radical
feminist platform, the
number would fall in the negative range.
Overall, Bush comes out ahead. But not very much to get excited about.
So white males likely will continue to vote overwhelmingly in Bush's
favor. Or on second thought, maybe they'll decide to sit this election
out.
