I may have to reconsider on Fred. I liked him to start with, but his talk about subsidizing ethanol made me cool to him. This kind of talk, however, can make me warm back up quick, fast and in a hurry:
In the hyperpartisan atmosphere of the 2008 presidential campaign, the topic of entitlement programs is also a matter of dispute between parties. Former Sen. Fred Thompson (R) of Tennessee, the most impassioned candidate on entitlement spending, suggests that it’s the nation’s most important domestic problem – and, alone among the top-tier Republican candidates, is willing to take the risky step of discussing cuts in benefits.
Ok, Fred. That’s a good start. But what are the specifics? What are the cuts?
Thompson intends to unveil a plan for entitlement reform in the coming weeks, according to his spokesman, but he has already been floating ideas, such as slowing the rate of Social Security benefit increases – a move that would, in effect, cut benefits. On Medicare, he suggests increasing fees for upper-income beneficiaries. To imply such moves puts Thompson in danger of touching the so-called “third rail” of politics – and he acknowledged that risk in a speech last month he gave to The Club For Growth.
Let’s hear it for Fred. He is taking a big risk here talking about cutting benefits, but a lot of fiscal conservatives are going to like that kind of talk. I know I do. Let’s hear more of it. And let’s hear of getting some big cuts on the table. The Department of Education is a good start. Or the Department of Energy, which produces no energy. Wasn’t that started to reduce our dependancy on foreign oil? How’s that coming along after throwing billions of dollars at the problem?
If Fred continues down this path, he’s probably got my vote. But it’s still early and this is a marathon, not a sprint.
Related posts:
