This Is Too Important To Ignore

I read a very disturbing story in USA Today today titled “Democratic candidates Duck Tough “Boomsday” Choices.” The disturbing part of this story states that currently, 62% of the Federal Budget is taken up by entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare, and by 2025 – just a scant 13 years from now – that number will be 93%, assuming that these programs are left as they currently are.

Now add to that a universal healthcare plan that so many candidates on both sides are touting, and it is conceivable that we could see the ENTIRE Federal budget eaten up by these programs inside of a decade.

The article goes on to say that no candidate on the Democratic side is addressing this issue, and in fact few on the right, with the exception of Thompson and McCain, are addressing this issue either. The article further states that, while the “old line” has been that Democrats are “tax and spend” and Republicans are for smaller government, that hasn’t been the case for the last 15 years. Bill Clinton did bring down the deficit, and George Bush has spent like Paris Hilton with a new credit card. True, Bush had a war to pay for that Clinton didn’t, but even if you take that out of the mix, it’s still not even close.

This is a terrific opportunity for the Dem’s. The opportunity to say that government spending is out of control, and in recent history they are the ones that have the ability to do something about it. So why the silence?

None of the major candidates — Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards — has a credible plan to balance the budget and keep it balanced. On their websites, Clinton lists 11 important issues, Obama 16 and Edwards 34. Not one of them is devoted to solving the nation's troubling fiscal problems.

The three candidates assert they will make health coverage affordable and available to all, to be funded by some combination of higher taxes on the wealthy, mandates on companies and requirements that people buy insurance. But they make few tough choices on containing Medicare's exploding costs, such as higher co-payments or more means testing.

On Social Security, at least Obama and Edwards have plans to shore up the retirement program by raising the income ceiling on individuals and employers paying into the system. This isn't ideal, but at least it's a viable approach. Clinton ducks the issue altogether, saying merely that she would appoint a commission.

The message from the left is that all of these fiscal difficulties of America are Bush’s fault. All that they need to do is roll back his tax cuts (even though those tax cuts have led to record revenue), end the war, and make a few modest and painless policy changes. And while Bush’s financial policies haven’t exactly been successful, the truth of the matter is that Bush did not invent the baby boomers that are retiring now. It is not Bush’s fault that people are living longer, and while health insurance is rising at nearly 10% a year, it actually rose faster during the Clinton years.

The real reason we are in this mess is a simple one: A political culture that refuses to act responsibly. And the fact of the matter is, the next president, of whichever party, is going to have to prepare the nation for some difficult choices, and s/he is going to have to be able to work with both parties to get things done.

The good news is, there is a TON of waste in our current government, but the bad news is that our elected officials are the ones who are protecting that waste. Did you know that last year the government paid subsidies of almost $200 million to make sure sheep and goat ranchers made a profit. Why? Because in 1954, nine years after World War II, congressmen argued it was crucial to “national security” that America have enough wool to make soldiers’ uniforms. Never mind that today military uniforms aren’t even made out of wool, the Agriculture Department still gives the farmers the handouts.

Did you know that no insurance company will give you flood insurance if you build a house on the edge of the ocean. Actually, they will, but it will cost you more than your house payments. So, the government sells these people insurance through the National Flood Insurance Program, putting the taxpayers on the hook for over $640 billion in property. But someone has to help these people out, because we know that those who build beach front houses can’t really afford to……. Oh wait...

The bottom line is that we don’t need candidates that are offering to fix all of our ills, but rather a candidate that can lead a nation to take responsibility for our own actions. 46 years ago, JFK, in his inaugural address said “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.” Pretty good advice. Maybe we need to keep that in mind as we prepare to elect a new president next year. Too bad that none of them are laying out a plan to address this crisis to we could intelligently choose between them.