etting off 'Techfare'
My immediate reaction to your article "Tech Programs Face New Risks" [WT., Feb. 24] was, "How typical!" Clinton and his henchmen always consider everything other than welfare programs to be funded on an "as available" basis. He feels this way, of course, because he considers his political base to be anyone other than "the rich" (redefined after the election for tax purposes as anyone with a family income greater than $36,000 per year). It is interesting that another Democrat with the initials LBJ suddenly decided that Social Security funds should be dumped into the federal budget coffers so that it would appear that he was presiding over a balanced budget (of all things). This change, of course, allowed for these funds to no longer earn interest. Then suddenly 20 years later, it was discovered that the Social Security program was in financial trouble.
It was enlightening to discover while reading your article that the discretionary funds portion of the federal budget is $530 billion. I think I have just discovered how we can retire the national debt in a very few years and more than balance the federal budget at the same time.
We must have a balanced-budget amendment and a line-item veto in order to get the responsibility (or blame) properly placed so that this "tax and spend" government can be brought back under control.
Max H. Beasley Jr.