Orange County Voices : COMMENTARY ON BUDGET DEFICITS : When the Choices Get Tough, No One Wants to Make Them : Politicians don’t want to be unpopular or upset special interests. It’s up to all of us to ensure democracy’s survival.

“We are unable institutionally to do what has to be done.”

That statement in March, 1992, by then-Sen. Warren Rudman (R--N.H.), in announcing his retirement, got my attention. He was referring to Congress’ inability to address what he saw as the overriding issue: successive annual federal deficits of more than $300 billion, piling up a federal debt of more than $4 trillion--and now nearly $5 trillion.

“There is no easy way to address the federal deficit,” he said, because “if you address the issues honestly, you will lose votes.” And he laid the blame on us--Democrats, Republicans, Congress--all of us.

I had recently retired from California State University and was poking around, looking for ways to get involved with a longtime interest in public policy. Thus I was alert to the later joint announcement of Rudman and former Sen. Paul Tsongas (D--Mass.) initiating a grass-roots effort dedicated to achieving a balanced federal budget: the Concord Coalition. Some months later I found myself as the newsletter coordinator of the Orange County chapter.

Many difficulties complicate understanding our federal budget. First is the magnitude of the numbers. Just how big is $5 trillion? The staggering amounts involved exceed our ready comprehension. Further, the size and complexities of the budget make things hard to grasp. And C-SPAN watchers witness the fights over the 13 appropriation bills dealing with “discretionary” spending, none of which customarily touch the largest part of federal spending--the so-called “entitlements.”

So it’s tough to understand. It takes work. We devote much of our lives to making a living, raising a family, enjoying a few moments of recreation. When is there time to study such arcane stuff as federal budget authority and outlays? Don’t we have representatives to do that for us? Isn’t that what we--at least the minority of us who went to the polls--voted for? Who has the time to read several newspapers, news magazines, opinion journals, special reports, government documents--especially when diverted by the struggles of the California Angels or the sensational judicial proceedings of celebrities?

What can any one person do? “Nothing I can do about that, Ralph,” one of my good friends says repeatedly. But that cannot be true and have our democracy survive, for in our republic, the ultimate source of authority is us, the people. We have to be more involved, each in his or her own way. For there are those with interests--and with big money--who are doing all they can to keep the money flowing from us to them.

The Concord Coalition has developed a Zero Deficit Plan that addresses all parts of the federal budget, including military spending and Social Security. The plan recommends things many of us will find hard to accept. But if we, as the ultimate authority, want a balanced budget, we must prepare ourselves to provide informed opinion to our representatives about which programs that affect us we are willing to cut--or what new taxes we are willing to pay. And we must support those representatives who are willing to make the hard decisions or get reform-minded representatives who will.

Struggling with the issues brings one up against a central question: What is it we want from government that we are willing to pay for? Or as Orange County CEO Jan Mittermeier put it, referring to the aftermath of the county’s bankruptcy: It has “caused people to focus on how their governments operate.” At whatever level--local, state, or federal--what is it we want? Is it what Congress is doing now--providing money the Pentagon did not seek to build more B-2 bombers? Is it to reduce outlays by over $400 billion for health services while at the same time providing $245 billion in tax cuts, much of which will benefit the already affluent? Do we continue corporate subsidies while at the same time cutting benefits for the working poor, the elderly and for children? And in Orange County, do we go to the local districts and agencies to cover the results of the county’s failure to oversee properly the former treasurer? The questions abound.

As I write, nearly two months into the new fiscal year, the Congress has passed few of the 13 required appropriation bills and is hung up on the overall budget bill to reconcile spending and tax measures to reach a balanced budget by 2002.

Further, the congressional leadership and the President have hardened their positions. Speaker Newt Gingrich, talking before Republican governors last week, said: “We will not compromise.” “Crybaby,” say the Democrats.

The polarizing going on makes “it impossible for the warring parties to become compromising when compromise becomes necessary,” said Martha Phillips, executive director of the Concord Coalition.

“We have met the enemy and he is us,” said that marvelous cartoon character Pogo several decades ago. That may have been a different way of saying what Rudman meant when he said we are institutionally unable to do what needs to be done.