By ALAN FRAM, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - President Bush's goal of halving this year's projected $500 billion deficit by 2009 distracts from the more serious crunch the government faces later as the huge baby boom generation ages, critics say.

"Is it achievable? Yes," said Robert Reischauer, former head of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office who is now president of the Urban Institute. "Is it likely to occur? No. Is it sustainable? Probably not, because the world turns worse" at the end of this decade. That is when the 76 million baby boomers will begin drawing on Medicare and other costly income support programs, likely pushing federal deficits ever higher.

Administration officials say they want a deficit in 2009 that is half of this year's level, which White House budget chief Joshua Bolten has said he expects to hit $500 billion.

Achieving a $250 billion deficit in five years, however, could take hundreds of billions in savings, a difficult political task.

Bush will seek to cut the deficit in his $2.3 trillion budget request for 2005. He will send it to Congress in February, nine months from the presidential and congressional elections.

White House officials deny talk on Capitol Hill that they might define their goal as halving the deficit's percentage share of the U.S. economy in five years. This year's $500 billion deficit represents 4.4 percent of the economy. That would make their target 2009 deficit 2.2 percent of that year's economy, or about $320 billion, leaving their task $70 billion easier.

When the budget year ended Sept. 30, the deficit was $374 billion, the highest ever in dollar terms. Administration officials say a more important measure is how the shortfall compares with the size of economy, with last year's 3.5 percent share far below the 6 percent post-World War II peak of 1983.

"We can cut the deficit in half by 2009 by any number of standards, though we feel the deficit as a percentage of" the economy "is the most economically relevant measure," said White House budget office spokesman Chad Kolton.

White House officials say Bush will rely chiefly on two strategies. He will propose extending tax cuts that would otherwise expire, which they say will spur the economy, and seek to limit the growth of spending that Congress must approve each year, probably to 4 percent or less.

"We're working with Congress to hold the line on spending," Bush said Monday. "And we do have a plan to cut the deficit in half."

The goal is backed by many Republicans, at least as a starting point. But conservatives want a bolder move against the record deficits and big spending increases that the administration has run up.

"It's a rather anemic goal, actually," said Stephen Moore, president of the conservative Club for Growth. "We should be talking about how to balance the budget."

Democrats say that even if Bush achieves his objective, he would leave huge shortfalls because he has driven deficits so high. Bush took office when large surpluses were projected for the foreseeable future. But the forecast has since been dashed by recession, the costs of fighting terrorism and wars, and tax cuts.

"Now that they've created the biggest deficits in American history, they say we'll have half a hole rather than a full hole, and they want credit for a victory," said Thomas Kahn, Democratic staff director of the House Budget Committee.

A $250 billion deficit would be the fifth highest on record in dollar terms. A $320 billion shortfall would be the second worst.

With projections that the economy will strengthen, deficits are expected to gradually improve after this year.

The Congressional Budget Office projected in August that after peaking at $480 billion this year, the gap would drop to $170 billion by 2009 — if new tax cuts are enacted and spending grows only at the rate of inflation.

Those assumptions already have proved false. Since August, Congress has expanded Medicare, creating prescription drug coverage and improvements in veterans' benefits. They are expected to add $52 billion to the deficit in 2009.

Other costly proposals in the works include Bush's plan to extend expiring tax cuts; a revision of the alternative minimum tax to prevent middle-income earners from paying it; and energy legislation already passed by the House.

If, along with those items, spending controlled by Congress grows at the average 7.7 percent annual rate seen since 1998, the resulting 2009 deficit would be $666 billion, G. William Hoagland, budget aide to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., warned senators in a recent memo.

That would mean $416 billion in budget savings would be needed to reduce that year's red ink to $250 billion.

If congressionally approved spending grows only at the rate of inflation, the 2009 deficit would be $432 billion, Hoagland wrote.

Lawmakers have shown little taste for such a small increase. If they did — and that would mean no unforeseen expenses like new wars — it would still require $182 billion in 2009 savings.

Acknowledged House Budget Committee Chairman Jim Nussle, R-Iowa, who supports Bush's goal, "It's not an easy lift."

Copyright © 2003 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press. Copyright © 2003 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.

Commentary:
Even when Bush blows a hole in the budget the size of the Grand Canyon the press makes it look like a projection of cutting the deficit in half by 2009 is a sign of success. It's not. Bush has already created more debt in his first term than any president in US history. He's not fit to be president and we all know it. The media needs him in office as long as possible so they don't have to pay taxes. Of course deficits are really unpaid taxes and the media is too stupid to figure that out. Bush and our modern media fit well together. Being stupid and pushing spin is all they do and they do it well.

If there's still one person who thinks there's a single fiscal conservative in Congress guess again. Republicans have become the kings of pork (IE: GOP should now be called KOP (kings of pork)).