Budget discussions

There is a distinct absence of common sense in today's federal budget discussions. Two glaring examples deal with spending on social safety nets and defense:

First, some people call much of Medicare and Social Security spending discretionary entitlement spending. That proposition is debatable, given the reduced economic circumstances many find themselves in after they retire.

I would take a different tack and ask how much of current "defense" spending is discretionary? Certainly, the large amount spent on the Iraq War was discretionary in that, with the benefit of hindsight, President George Bush's war was falsely imposed on the American people by pressuring the CIA to slant intelligence data.

Does the U.S. need such a large network of military bases around the world? I also think there are far less expensive and more effective ways to deal with terrorist threats than trying to give a country a modern democratic political system.

Second, can President Barack Obama be serious about reducing payments to Medicare providers to pay for Obamacare? Medicare providers already receive payment for services far less than what they charge for privately insured patient services. If Medicare payments are reduced from today's levels, providers simply will stop accepting Medicare patients.

There are common sense ways to reduce Medicare spending,for example, increase the age at which people become eligible for Medicare.

My two points are basic common sense, but common sense does not always prevail in public affairs due to the difficulty of changing the status quo and the political influence of cash "campaign contributions" from the business sector.

Surely effective leadership from all three branches of our government can be expected to change the status quo when it does not serve the interests of this country and its citizens.

- Jim Sullivan,