I disagree with the resolution presented. I believe that the time
has come for the government to start taking some more drastic actions
in order to alleviate the problem of the National Debt. This resolution
might have worked back when the dabt wasn't so massive, but at this point,
I think that the only thing that will have any great effect is to start
making some cuts.
One of the biggest problems in dealing with the debt, by way of
the budget, comes in theform of entitlements. Entitlements, the biggest
of which beign Social Security, make up a majorportion of the national budget,
and are completely left alone when it comes to discussing whereto make budget
cuts. But it's very difficult to make cuts in Social Security, due to powerful
lobbying groups such as the AARP. Many politicians don't want to anger such
groups, becausethey make up a major portion of their constituency.
problem area is charitable donationsmade by the government. There are many
charities which recieve federal funding, and all of them feel that they should
be exempt from cuts. But the government needs to take a stand andstart cutting
from some fo these groups. One possibility could be taking an equal percentage
from each group.
So I oppose this resolution and favor other plans of attack, such as the
Concord Coalition's "Zero Deficit Plan". The Zero Deficit Plan calls for cuts in entitlements, but not cuts in entitlements to those families who have an economic
need for them. According to one of the Coalition's web page
(http://www.texas.net/users/andyn/deficit/zdpent.html), "About one-fifth of
entitlement benefits are provided according to economic need. These benefits should
not be the target of deficit reduction. But the largest entitlement programs pay benefits regardless of recipients' incomes." I agree that we should cut some of...