Bad ideas inflate the budget

Re “Billions and billions dig a deeper hole,” Opinion, Feb. 6

Veronique de Rugy wonderfully described the government’s fiscal problems but ignored ominous future ones: Social Security and Medicare obligations. In 2024, Medicare is expected to grow larger than Social Security, currently the largest portion of federal outlays. Around that time, those entitlements will be running massive yearly deficits.

To make a bad situation worse, the 2003 Medicare Modernization Act added a prescription drug benefit.

According to generally accepted accounting principles, the U.S. government is bankrupt. Future fiscal obligations, without significant changes in policy, are insurmountably large. Although the current deficits and debt are worrying, they are paltry in comparison to the entitlement time-bomb.

Alex Nowrasteh

Washington

The writer is a research associate with the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

--

Concerning that proposed budget, two questions come to mind: How can such incredible sums of money be made available to be spent at the request of a president? How can such incredible sums of money ever be repaid? It must be clear that such use of huge amounts must result sooner or later in a huge financial disaster.

Wolfram Wolz

Long Beach

--

Re “Bush’s budget swells deficit,” Feb. 5

President Bush’s proposed $3-trillion budget blueprint, especially as it relates to deep Medicare cuts, is his most unrealistic yet.

The proposed $200-billion cuts to Medicare and Medicaid over the next five years would affect the quality of care and the services that providers deliver to vulnerable seniors and the developmentally disabled. These proposed cuts would affect the caregivers, who deserve to be rewarded for their hard work and dedication to the residents they care for.

As the quality of care we provide continues to improve nationwide, federal funding cuts of this magnitude can only cause greater concern about how states will care for vulnerable seniors and protect jobs for direct-care workers threatened by these cuts. We will aggressively fight the proposed cuts, and we predict that many will join us in standing up for the best interests of seniors and the workers who care for them.

Bruce Yarwood

President, Chief Executive

American Health Care

Assn., Annapolis, Md.

James Gomez

President, Chief Executive

California Assn. of Health

Facilities, Sacramento

--

The president’s 2009 budget plan cuts federal after-school funding by 27% and reorganizes the current program into a risky voucher scheme. Both are bad ideas.

Americans support after-school programs by a wide margin, and, as chief executive of a major L.A. County after-school provider, I know the difference these programs make. Recent evaluations link regular participation with fewer school absences, higher grades, better attitudes and more pro-social interests and behaviors.

In California alone, the president’s proposed cut will eliminate the opportunity for 40,000 children to have after-school care next year. His voucher proposal will undermine effective existing public, private and community partnerships and destabilize programs through even more precarious funding.

Congress should act quickly to replace these bad ideas with a real solution -- increased funding for after-school programs.

Cathie Mostovoy

Los Angeles