Bob, the problem as I understand it is that only 18% of the budget is discretionary.
The rest is committed to interest on the debt (20% now) and entitlements and military related components....with some of these areas overlapping.
Whole departments, like commerce, transportation, etc. could be eliminated and not make much difference.
Eliminate earmarks? Yes, but it's a drop in the bucket.
I don't think we can 'cut' our way into solvency. For example, to remain solvent Medicare benefits need to be cut by 51%. For retired people to pick up the difference would impact the economy hugely.
I have, however, seen some really interesting projections on how much could be done by tackling Medicare fraud, tax evasion
and military procurements.
But you have to have someone interested in these things. No one in the Bush admin. has made these kinds of efforts, including McCain. I don't recall him piping up except about earmarks.
As for Barrack, he is 'promising' much more than I like. All I can do, though, is hope once in office reality sets in and he charts a different course.
Do you have a problem with leaving Iraq and raising taxes on the top two brackets? Or do you think cutting can restore balance? |
