When George W. Bush was campaigning for the presidency in 2000, he criticized the Clinton administration for allowing an erosion of this country's military might. In late 1999, the military revealed that two of the 10 Army divisions were ranked at the lowest readiness level, C-4.

But in these final months before the Nov. 7 midterm election, Demo-crats have ample justification for voicing the same criticism of Bush. It was on Aug. 1 that the top National Guard general revealed that more than two-thirds of the Army National Guard's 34 brigades are not combat ready. That was after Army officials, analysts and members of Congress disclosed that two-thirds of the active Army's brigades are not ready for war.

With the threats to peace that exist on numerous fronts — in the Middle East but also places like North Korea — it is in the best interests of America that its military forces be at a top state of readiness. Instead, as hundreds of billions of U.S. dollars keep flowing into Iraq, not only for the war but for rebuilding the war-torn country, military readiness on the domestic level is taking a back seat.

That must not remain unresolved.

For obvious reasons, it isn't in this country's interests to publicize the domestic state of readiness and perhaps too much has been revealed over the past month. But hiding the unresolved issue isn't in the nation's best interests either.

Thus, while Army officials won't specify how many units are at which levels — units are generally ranked from C-1 (the best) to C-4 (the worst) — they are being more open regarding the overall declining state of at-home readiness.

The Army insists that despite the situation at home, all active Army units serving in the war zone are "100 percent" ready.

Equipment shortages, which are at the root of the problem, will cost up to $21 billion to correct, said Lt. Gen. H. Steven Blum, the National Guard's top general.

"I am further behind or in an even more dire situation than the active Army, but we both have the same symptoms,"Blum said. "I just have a higher fever."

"Backlogs at the depots, budget issues and the timeliness of receiving funds to conduct training are all critical to the Army's ability to keep their force trained, ready and at the highest readiness level posible," said Lt. Col. Carl S. Ey, an Army spokesman.

During the Vietnam era, many forces at home also were not combat ready, but this is a much more dangerous time.

Bush needs to address the current readiness situation in line with his thinking prior to being elected.