|
This is a short editorial from my local newspaper, The Erie Times-News, from Wednesday, May 11, 2005. I thought I'd share it here because it got me thinking about who the Senate Democrats could be. I've never heard about this, I don't think. Can anyone fill in some details? Thanks.
"Our first reaction to Rick Santorum's brainstorm: Where in the world did this come from? Pennyslvania's junior U.S. senator is working with Senate Democrats on legislation to give every American child a savings account at birth. We're not kidding.
Under Santorum's legislation, the federal government would provide the $500, which would be repaid by the account holder at age 30. The idea is, families would then add to the fund. So what Santorum and others basically propose is, "If Americans won't be responsible and save their money, the federal government will entice them." Why should the federal government do this? If responsible savings aren't a basic family and personal responsibility, name some others.
...
Americans might deserve a stern lecture. But the federal government has no business making what amounts to social policy-making. We're not questioning Santorum's good intentions. But this is do-gooding legislation that ultimately won't do any good. Once again, the federal government attempts to seduce Americans into good behavior. They usually do so by tinkering yet again with the tax code, but here they toss money at us.
Another objection to this proposal is, it would probably have no effect. We suspect most families would never contribute annually. So what is the point?"
BTW, this paper endorsed W, Specter & Phil English in 2004 even though the editorial board decided that none of the three had really come through with anything good for the area. So I guess with my local paper, you win some...you lose some.
So, any thoughts? I'm right to read this as a criticism, right?
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
