By His Deeds Shall Ye Know Him

A major part of Bush's pitch for the investment tax cut, as he outlined in a January 2003 speech , was that it would help cash-strapped retirees.

"Double taxation falls especially hard on retired people. About half of all dividend income goes to America's seniors, and they often rely on those checks for a steady source of income in their retirement."

But Johnston writes that "few taxpayers with modest incomes benefited because most of them who own stocks held them in retirement accounts, which are not eligible for the investment income tax cuts."

Bush also argued at the time: "The benefits of this tax relief will be felt throughout the economy. Abolishing double taxation of dividends will leave nearly 35 million Americans with more of their own money to spend and invest, which will promote savings and return as much as $20 billion this year to the private economy.

"By ending this investment penalty we will strengthen investor confidence. See, by ending double taxation of dividends, we will increase the return on investing, which will draw more money into the markets to provide capital to build factories, to buy equipment, hire more people."

Calculating the indirect results of the tax cut is, of course, more complicated than figuring out the direct results.

But Johnston writes that "the Congressional Research Service, an arm of Congress that analyzes issues, concluded in a January report that lower taxes on investment income may translate into lower savings because people need fewer investments to earn the same after-tax income. In another report, the research service showed how lower taxes on investment income can encourage investment outside the United States, creating jobs, but not for Americans."

Covering the President

At last night's "Opinion Awards," presented by The Week magazine and the Aspen Institute , a panel of journalists and pundits was convened to address the topic: "Covering the president: Are White House correspondents real journalists?"

The consensus, such as it was, was that White House correspondents are by and large great journalists -- behaving badly.

They are, in other words, highly talented reporters in the throes of a pack mentality, fearful of not getting their calls returned, trapped in a remorseless news cycle and in a room where almost nothing happens.

Huffingtonpost.com blogger Arianna Huffington called White House correspondents "real journalists who have lost their way." They have sacrificed their principles and self-censor themselves in an attempt to maintain their access to top White House officials, she said. "I think the problem is access, access, access."

Michael Massing, the author of two devastating critiques of the press coverage in the run-up to war in the New York Review of Books (here and here), argued that White House reporters put too much effort into cultivating high-level sources or "trying to get [press secretary Scott] McClellan to give them a tidbit." Instead, they should work mid-level federal officials who might actually tell them something of value.