John Kerry claims that America was better off four years ago before Bush took office. If he's right, he should be president. Let's think about this. Al Qaeda, emboldened by a lack of response to the Embassy bombings and the attack on the U.S.S. Cole, was planning a nightmare in New York and Washington D.C. The economy was slipping into recession and many companies survived by faking their revenues. North Korea was making nuclear weapons, though we naively assumed it was keeping its promise. America seemed prosperous, but actually was on a path to disaster, painstakingly charted by eight years of neglect and inaction. Maybe America isn't doing so badly right now, comparatively speaking.

But we have a choice to make. Don't misunderstand me: Kerry would be fine as chief executive. Politicians don't reach the high echelons of American politics without being smart and capable, and Kerry certainly is both. America will win the War on Terror regardless of which man is elected. However, I prefer George Bush for a few reasons, and I look forward to a second Bush term. Bush will increase economic freedom and support democracy abroad. The president plans to simplify the tax code, create private Social Security accounts, increase free trade and protect doctors from harmful lawsuits. All these actions will benefit ordinary Americans.

Bush will make the tax code more fair, by making it less confusing. Simplifying the tax code will help everyone. The loopholes that the very rich exploit will disappear, replaced by a more transparent system. Revenue from the closed loopholes will increase government coffers and can be spent on more public services. Everyone will benefit, that is, except for those who were wealthy enough to hire tax lawyers.

Bush also will lower health care costs through privatization and reduction of lawsuits. Everyone can understand that if people are forced to repair something themselves they will keep that thing in good condition. The president will apply that bit of common sense to health care, encouraging young Americans to take better care of their bodies in exchange for lower health costs. This personal-responsibility approach especially helps our generation, who must pay for our parents' retirement.

The president will also cap awards in medical malpractice cases against OB/GYN doctors. If you are planning to give birth, marry someone who will give birth or have a friend who will give birth, than you should enthusiastically support this proposal. Some states are currently facing a critical lack of these doctors due to soaring insurance costs. Some doctors in Connecticut, for example, have seen their insurance rates rise by $30,000 annually. Doctors are quitting and retiring early at an alarming rate. This problem can be fixed by capping the so called 'pain and suffering' portions of jury awards, while leaving economic damages intact.

President Bush also is strongly committed to a free trade policy which has many benefits. More than 20 million new jobs have been created since America signed the North American Free Trade Agreement. Americans enjoy lower consumer prices than if we imposed excessive tariffs. But the greatest benefits of free trade are to other countries, especially in the third world. A mutual lowering of subsidies allows laborers, like poor cotton farmers in northern Africa and fishermen in Vietnam, to compete in the world economy. Support of free trade demonstrates compassion and common sense, and improves relations with our trading partners.

Bush's foreign policy stems from a belief that America should promote democracy around the globe. Afghanistan is holding peaceful elections and Iraq is training troops. India and Pakistan are at peace. John Kerry vows to "hunt down the terrorists," but his record suggests a reluctance to using American force. He voted consistently against Ronald Reagan's foreign policy agenda, which is widely credited with winning the Cold War. He opposed the first Gulf War. He proposed severe cuts in intelligence funding. Kerry would probably get along with other countries better than the current president, but would he be able to take unpopular stands? He, along with Europe, opposed Ronald Reagan's combative posture toward the Soviet Union. As president, Kerry probably would not have confronted such murderous regimes as the Evil Empire or Iraq, unless of course they began stealing our telemarketing jobs.

In all seriousness, there is much to be said for Senator Kerry. He is a true war hero. His criticism of the Bush Administration as disrespectful to our allies is completely on target. He is experienced and cares about ordinary people. He is more willing than Bush to admit mistakes. Personally, however, I prefer Bush's aggressiveness and assertiveness. I would rather America be hated by France and Germany than be a sitting duck. Passivity and agreeableness will buy us a false sense of safety, but not true security.