In his State of the Union Address before Congress last night, President George W. Bush focused largely on the Middle East and on his plan to reform Social Security.

Bush began the address by hailing “the privilege of democracy,” which the United States now shares with Afghanistan, the Palestinian territories, Ukraine and “a free and sovereign Iraq.” This opening was met with cheers and applause from both parties, but Bush quickly moved on to the more divisive domestic policy issues.

Promising to cut government spending, Bush said, “My budget substantially reduces or eliminates more than 150 government programs.”

The funds saved from these and other cutbacks will be funneled into the health care system, tax relief for small businesses and into his controversial education initiative, the No Child Left Behind Act.

On his domestic agenda, Social Security was clearly Bush’s main concern. Bush discussed the roots of the social security system in the post-Depression economy of the 1930s, arguing that the “very different” needs of today’s economy call for drastic reforms.

Bush promised that these reforms would not cut benefits for Americans over the age of 55. But for younger citizens, the “Social Security system has serious problems that will grow worse with time,” and by 2042, the “entire system would be exhausted and bankrupt,” Bush said.

At the core of Bush’s reform plan are “voluntary personal retirement accounts,” which would urge younger workers to invest their own money in a “conservative mix of bonds and stock funds.” According to the plan, the interest from these personal investments would provide for workers when they retire, largely replacing the retirement checks that today’s retirees get from the government.

As Bush outlined these reforms, Democrats booed him from their side of the hall. In the official response to the State of the Union Address, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada lashed out against Bush’s plan, saying “it’s wrong to replace the guaranteed benefit that Americans have earned with a guaranteed benefit cut of up to 40 percent. Make no mistake, that’s exactly what President Bush is proposing.”

There was also some divergence with regard to the war on terror. Bush praised American armed forces for confronting “the enemy abroad, with measures that are determined, successful and continuing.”

Yet he did not suggest a timeframe for when armed conflict in the Middle East would end. “There are still governments that sponsor and harbor terrorists,” Bush said, citing Syria and Iran in particular. “We will stay on the offensive against [terrorists] until the fight is won,” he added.

In response, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California said, “Despite the best efforts of our troops and their Iraqi counterparts, Iraq still faces a violent and persistent insurgency.”

The Democratic response called for a plan to bring American troops home.

“We have never heard a clear plan from this administration for ending our presence in Iraq. And we did not hear one tonight,” Pelosi said.

The Stanford Democrats held an event last night to watch the president’s address. Sophomore Josh Wiener, a Stanford Democrat, was disappointed with what he described as fear-mongering on the part of the president.

“All the talk about freedom from fear seemed hypocritical at best,” Wiener said. “Because the rest of the speech kept saying how much we must still fear terrorism.”

Bob Sensenbrenner, president of the Stanford Republicans, approved of Bush’s agenda for the war on terror, as well as his proposed reforms to Social Security.

“I’m very glad that the president was aggressive in promoting Social Security policy, which will really help college-aged students when we come to retirement age.”

Sensenbrenner said he was disappointed with the Democratic response.

“If [Democrats] really want to suggest a policy, they need to come up with some of their own ideas, and not just be the party that’s not Bush.”