Ithaca, NY - Here's the scenario: The deficit is at the half-trillion-dollar level. Almost 150,000 soldiers, sailors and aviators are risking life and limb in a war in Iraq that was fueled by faulty information. Our health care system is reaching the point of dysfunction due to high costs, litigation and regulations. The economic recovery is struggling against steadily rising energy prices. Our air grows more polluted, energy supplies are more tenuous and our civil liberties are on the defensive.

Translation: It's time for a change -- and given the two major candidates for president, the Democratic candidate John Kerry is the agent for change.

Why not Bush? President Bush began a lackluster term after the tumultuous 2000 election against former Vice President Al Gore. He was criticized for spending too much time on the ranch and too little time on the economy. Then, less than a year into office, President Bush showed true leadership in his handling of the terror problem during the months immediately following the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.

George W. Bush's firm response at that time was clearly in the national interest. He was correct to go after the al-Qaida leadership and its growing infrastructure in Afghanistan. The president also did the right thing by seeking to cut the revenue sources that fed the terror organization.

Then came Iraq.

If Saddam Hussein's Iraq had clearly threatened the United States as al-Qaida did -- and still does today -- the war there would have been justified.

The Bush Administration never adequately proved that Iraq posed a clear, undeniable threat. Instead, the president committed American and other allied troops to a war that has cost thousands of lives, billions of dollars and continues to fuel anti-American sentiment.

On the home front, President Bush has allowed the federal deficit to balloon to the half-billion-dollar mark. Even as the deficit swelled, the president pushed for tax cuts that would further limit the federal government's ability to pay down that deficit. In all fairness, Kerry also supported the tax cuts, but the president was the driving force behind them.

President Bush has rolled back clean-air regulations, which hurt Americans in general and Northeast residents in particular. Federal laws that required power plants to upgrade their anti-pollution "air scrubbers" during major renovations have been rolled back. The result is that Midwestern power plants continue spewing pollutants that literally are killing forests and lakes in the Adirondacks and other parts of this region.

Kerry differs from the president on several key issues. Such differences place Kerry in a better position to lead. He advocates multilateralism -- rather than unilateralism --in foreign policy. Kerry has vowed to reverse Bush's efforts to weaken clean air regulations and to take more aggressive legislative action against acid rain. He would enhance tax incentives for automakers that produce more fuel efficient cars -- and for consumers who buy such vehicles. Moreover, Kerry would make deficit reduction a top priority, promising to cut the deficit by as much as half during his first term.

Whoever wins the election Tuesday will face a tough set of challenges for the next four years: A half-trillion-dollar deficit that must be paid down, the Iraq war, questions about Social Security solvency, growing problems of outsourcing jobs and rapidly climbing energy costs. The next president also must address an unaffordable health care system that will require a time-consuming overhaul that must include everything from tort reform to insurance reform.