One of the most costly - and least often reported - casualties of September 11 has been the neglect of nearly all federal programs not directly related to the war on terrorism. The education and health programs on which President Bush rode to office are seen by some as road kill on the highway to what the Vice President calls a “global war without end.” Can we brace for hardship without economic security and social stability?

Mr. Bush calls his campaign a “new kind of war” where heavy forces will yield to more mobile and innovative systems. But the lion’s share of next year’s Pentagon budget goes to massive weapons: $8.3 billion for missile defense against a dubious enemy; a record $200 billion contract for 3,000 jet fighters costing $5,000/hr to fly.

As the Senate debates the House and administration backed stimulus package - intended to rescue an imploding economy that lost nearly half a million jobs last month alone - critics claim that the plan would reward the corporate elite and ignore consumers whose spending stimulates the economy most. The package would:

• Funnel $70 of the $100 billion total to the top tier of big business, with just 30% to individuals.
  
  
• Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax, rebating the country’s largest corporations for the past fifteen years of sub-par contributions to the nation’s tax base. IBM alone would receive a $14 billion rebate.
  
  
• Provide tax shelters that encourage U.S. banks to shift their profits to tax-free foreign havens.

As the bear market digs its claws into U.S. and world economies, we face these critical questions:

• How much of our national wealth should be committed to the war on terrorism and how much reserved for rebuilding our ailing health and education systems and preserving Social Security?
  
  
• How can we rebuild our national and global economy on a sounder basis that meets basic needs and reduces the poverty and desperation that are the breeding ground of terrorism?