Bar Time For Big Spenders

Having a good time yet?

There is a political cartoon that shows Republicans and Democrats sitting at a tavern celebrating and toasting each other for working hard on this year's bloated Federal budget.  The celebratory mood is in stark contrast to a taxpayer who stands outside the Big Spender's Tavern with empty pockets and growing impatience.

As I've mentioned in earlier posts, the United States is currently running a Federal deficit of $14.3 trillion dollars. Just what does that mean?  In simple terms, it means that we owe a lot of money to creditors (individuals, businesses, governments and other organizations) who own U.S. government treasuries.  We are in this predicament because we have spent more than we take in.  And since we continue spending more,  selling more treasury bonds and increasing the deficit even further.  It's a never-ending cycle that feeds on itself.

This is important because Congress is about to debate raising the country's debt limit again (allowing us to borrow more).

Big Spenders

As you would expect, the political party currently in the White House (led by President Obama) will be voting to raise the limit, while Republicans will likely fight against it.  Not ironically, when Bush was in the White House, Republicans voted for raising it, and the Democrats against it -- with Senator Obama calling it a "failure of leadership."

In an early indication of the fight looming, House Speaker John Boehner said "It's true that allowing America to default would be irresponsible.  But it would be more irresponsible to raise the debt ceiling without simultaneously taking dramatic steps to reduce spending and reform the budget process."  The Speaker added, "Without significant spending cuts and reforms to reduce our debt, there will be no debt limit increase.  And the cuts should be greater than the accompanying increase in debt authority the President is given."

In simple terms, the Speaker is saying that he wants cuts in spending equal to the increase in the debt limit.  Is this even remotely feasible for the GOP?  They struggled mightily to pass a simple cut of $38 million a few weeks ago.  If the debt limit is raised $2 trillion dollars as Obama has asked, how are they possibly going to find the cojones to cut $2 trillion?

The response to Boehner's speech was predictable:  "Economic Armageddon!" as stated by the Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, allies on Wall Street and the mainstream media.  And Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said, "... failure by Congress to raise the debt ceiling is a risky approach that could result in an increase in interest rates that would worsen the nation's economy.  The worst outcome" he added, "would be that the nation's financial system becomes destabilized again."

So, like it has for the past five decades of debt raising, (the debt ceiling has been raised 78 times since 1960) one political party is preaching fiscal responsibility and the other is predicting catastrophic economic consequences.  When are these people going to stop putting their own re-election first and do something about Washington's out of control spending?

First off, this much I know.  Not raising the debt ceiling wouldn't necessarily lead to defaulting on U.S. obligations.  It would require Washington to use the money it's getting to pay toward that debt, but by itself wouldn't lead to defaulting on those loans.  The difficulty would be in paying for other things that are currently on the docket -- like defense, social programs and payrolls.

My hope is that a compromise (I know an ugly word these days) will be reached where Republicans force through significant spending cuts and raise the debt ceiling, but only to pay for existing obligations.  It would be like paying off debt before adding to it --no new furniture until the kitchen appliances are paid for.

Our U.S. Constitution (the 14th Amendment) prohibits us from defaulting on our country's financial obligations.  In particular, it must continue to make payments, interest and principal to countries like China and other holders of U. S. treasury bonds.  But this requirement doesn't mean we need to add new debt, and that's where necessary spending cuts could be made.

It is too early to say if Boehner and the House Republicans will be able to muster the courage to cut the $2 trillion mentioned earlier -- alright, it's not going to happen -- but I'd be happy with a smaller amount that could be reviewed periodically.  At least through the next year and a half until the 2012 elections are in the books, putting pressure on President Obama to stop his "change you can all believe in."  It would also remind the American people -- 60% who oppose raising the debt ceiling -- to demand more spending control from whoever wins the White House, Senate and House of Representatives.

It was recently announced by the government that Social Security and Medicare are running out of money sooner than the government had projected (shocking!).  When was the last time they were ever correct about anything?  Unemployment numbers?  Jobs?  Economy?

Medicare won't have enough money to pay full benefits starting in 2024, five years earlier than last year's estimate.  Social Security's cash to pay full benefits will run short in 2036, a year sooner than the 2010 projection.  Why not tie raising the debt ceiling to changes in both programs, forcing change to these entitlement programs that have been "off limits" for so many years?

House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, Republican from Wisconsin, has proposed serious budget cuts and changes to the way Washington spends our money.  The response from Democrats, with help from the liberal mainstream media, has been to mock, denigrate and dismiss such proposals as a budget "that rips apart the safety net" for the poor and elderly.  Their answer?  Raise taxes, a non-issue with Republicans.  The longer we wait to address this elephant in the room -- entitlement programs, the more painful it is going to be for us, our children and their children.

A great president, Thomas Jefferson, once said, "no generation can contract debts greater than may be paid in the course of its own existence."  Let's hope that future presidents (and enough in Congress) feel the same way.

Always There

I was ten years old when my appendix needed to be removed.

I am always able to remember the day we landed on the moon because I was in the hospital for surgery when Neil Armstrong climbed down the Apollo Lunar Module's ladder and took "one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind."  The date was July 20, 1969.

I am also able to remember how scared I was to be spending time in the hospital, alone in an uncomfortable bed, connected to strange-looking medical equipment that kept beeping and clicking throughout the night.  I'm not too proud to admit that I cried for my mother and wanted desperately to go home.  My combination of emotions proved too much for the hospital's night nurse who stuck her head into the darkened room and said to me in no uncertain terms "THAT'S ENOUGH!"  Needless to say, I stopped my crying and feel asleep.

Sometimes you need to be held -- and other times told to get a hold of yourself.


The week of May 6 through May 12 is National Nurses Week, when those who are blessed with such memories can give thanks to the men and women who provide compassion, respect and care in healthcare settings.  Whether it's the birth of a new baby, battlefield triage or end-of-life hospice care, nurses are a critical component to providing the care we need most in times of need.

 

Every nurse takes a Hippocratic oath of sorts called the Florence Nightingale Pledge as a token of esteem for the founder of modern nursing.  It reads,

"I solemnly pledge myself before God and in the presence of this assembly, to pass my life in purity and to practice my profession faithfully.  I will abstain from whatever is deleterious and mischievous, and will not take or knowingly administer any harmful drug.  I will do all in my power to maintain and elevate the standard of my profession, and will hold in confidence all personal matters committed to my keeping and all family affairs coming to my knowledge in the practice of my calling.  With loyalty, will I endeavor to aid the physician in his work, and devote myself to the welfare of those committed to my care."

As the husband of a nurse, I can say that after more than 25 years, my wife still takes those words to heart.  While nursing has changed over the years (the white caps, capes and skirts have been replaced by multi-colored scrubs), the philosophy of patient care (using eyes, mind and intuition) hasn't.  Modern technology has made it easier to measure vital signs, record information efficiently, and to administer medications.   It has not however, replaced the need for nurses to perform diagnostics that cannot be managed by a computer or machine.

The word nursing derives its meaning from the Latin word nutricius which means nourishing.  Whether it is the mother of a newborn child needing instructions on how to nurse, or an older patient needing someone to talk to about missing his deceased wife -- nursing tends to matters of the heart.  Our fears, our sorrows and our physical limitations require special attention, and it is often given by nurses.

It's fitting that on the weekend we honor mothers for all they do for their families, we also honor nurses who serve a similar position in clinics, hospitals, schools and the home.  In recent years, nurses have moved beyond simply "following doctor's orders" to using advanced degrees for management positions at health care facilities and universities.  Today, nursing includes advanced practice nursing -- nurse anesthetists, nurse practitioners,  nurse midwives, and clinical nurse specialists.

It's been said that nursing is not a job, but a calling.  My wife seemed to know what she wanted to do much earlier in life than I did.  That's not to say that she's had it easy.  Early in our marriage, I would spend parts of Christmas and Thanksgiving at the hospital since she had the holiday shift.  Working weekends and nights was hard on raising our two boys and at times on our marriage.  But never to the point where I wasn't glad that she was a nurse.

My healing skills go as far as some soap and hot water, or an occasional band aid for cuts and scraps.  Once, when our youngest boy needed stitches for a deep cut to his finger, I was so nervous that I drove to the wrong clinic before realizing my mistake.  Cool under pressure?  Not me.

It's nice to know that if anything should happen to me or our boys, she will be there to help us through it.  Whether its a skinned knee, a persistent fever, fainting spell or something more serious like an appendix, she knows what to do.   She's always there when needed.

I, for one, am glad.

Your Majesty, King Barack

I can't help thinking about the Royal Wedding of Prince William and  Kate Middleton -- maybe it has something to do with the non-stop coverage on every channel from FOX, CBS, ABC and NBC, as well as a few mentions on ESPN and  PBS.

I've also been thinking about the relationship that exists between the Monarchy of the United Kingdom and the general public (commoners) who overwhelmingly support them in their elevated role. Legislative, executive and judicial powers are given to other parties, but the Queen of England and her lawful successors are given the "Royal Prerogative" to regulate civil service, declare war, make peace, direct actions of the military and negotiate international agreements and alliances.  Great Britain's Parliament, however, can override any power the Monarch holds by passing legislation.

It's a relationship (however symbolic) that I can't fully understand, because our first president, George Washington, made it clear he did not want to be king.  He believed the United States would be a stronger Republic if led by its free and independent citizens.  It was a controversial position taken by our commander in chief, who resisted the masses and military might who deeply desired a sovereign ruler.

Our First President

Over the years, his way of thinking has been diminished by the power elite in Washington and a welfare state needing more and more assistance (tax payer money).

George Washington said in his first inaugural address in New York City:  "The magnitude and difficulty of the trust to which the voice of my country called me... could overwhelm with despondence one who... ought to be peculiarly conscious of his own deficiencies."

His modesty and abhorrence of power set a standard for American presidents that lasted for more than 150 years.

We need government's help

The fierce independence and self-reliance that George Washington envisioned for the United States eventually succumbed to the political scheming of powerful leaders who took advantage of an economically-weakened American populace.

With the "Great Depression" of the 1930's and presidency of Franklin D Roosevelt, the United States was introduced to our first organized system of welfare, joining the ranks of Germany, Great Britain, and the rest of Europe.  Roosevelt's power grab led to The New Deal, which meant a drastically new and intrusive role for government.

"I pledge you," he said at the 1932 Democratic National Convention, "and I pledge myself to a new deal for the American people."  Roosevelt and his "brain trust" of political advisers -- arrogant and opportunistic -- convinced millions of U.S. citizens that he was their savior in their time of need, or as the New York Times editorialized on June 18, 1933, "the heaven-sent man of the hour."

President Roosevelt

In truth, President Roosevelt was nothing more than an opportunistic politician who succeeded in revolutionizing the institutions of American political and economic life -- and as a result, diminished our economic and individual liberties.

In the 1950's President Lyndon B Johnson's desire to create the Great Society took the New Deal policies to even greater heights through public broadcasting, Medicare, Medicaid and federal education spending.  The power and arrogance that Johnson seized was made possible by the assassination of President Kennedy, who had had his own initiatives known as the New Frontier.

President Johnson took advantage of Kennedy's assassination and the idealistic 1960's to push his utopian views on poverty and discrimination.  Instead of ending "the war on poverty" Johnson led the country into further dependency and political/racial/military unrest.

The Great Society's programs expanded further under Presidents Nixon and Ford.  With President's Bush Clinton, and now Obama, welfare has continued its spread into the lives of children, seniors and even working class citizens.

While the goals of these social programs was originally honorable -- ending poverty and racial injustice -- the result has been much less:  a loss of  freedom and a growing dependency on our country's leaders to provide everything from food, childcare and healthcare.

The New Deal

The Man Who Would Be King

As Barack Obama ascended to the presidency in 2008, our country was once again reeling from the aftermath of a severe recession.  Once again, America mistakenly looked to Washington and its political royalty to find salvation.

Obama's historic victory caused some people to view him as a messiah, as this quote from Rep Jesse Jackson Jr shows:  "I cried all night.  I'm going to be crying for the next four years.  What Barack Obama has accomplished is the single most extraordinary event that has occurred in the 232 years of the nation's political history... The event itself is so extraordinary, that another chapter should be added to the Bible to chronicle its significance."

And with this view firmly entrenched, Obama has proceeded to launch one of the greatest assaults to our freedoms in modern times:  passing Obamacare despite the objections of the American people and lower courts who have called the bill unconstitutional, attempting to change the Second Amendment (gun control), and bypassing Congress to name czar positions overseeing healthcare, climate change, the auto industry and urban affairs.  President Obama has also passed two massive economic stimulus programs that are bankrupting our economy.   And let's not forget how quickly he nationalized auto companies, financial institutions and banks.

The results?  A country with over $14 trillion of debt, over 9% unemployment, one in seven on food stamps, a three year low for the dollar, gasoline prices over $4 per gallon, and more than 50% of our population receiving some type of income from the government.

Based on his first two years in office, I'm convinced our Lord and Majesty, King Barack would be at home in Persia, Alexander's Greek Empire, Rome, Egypt, the Inca and Maya empires, and the Soviet Union.  They were all pyramid-building empires made up of welfare-like programs commanded from the top.

Let's hope that with the election of last fall's conservative agenda, America sees the error of their ways.  In less than one-hundred years, we have seen the rise of government that would shock our founding fathers to the core.  Unless we are willing to stop our dependency on government welfare -- and restore the presidency to the time of George Washington -- the United States of America is doomed to go the way of prior empires.

God save the president.