vc318

Lately we've been hearing more and more about budget cuts that are happening due to the tightening of finances all over the country. People have lost their jobs, schools are raising the cost of tuition, and even electricity is being cut off in offices to offset the rise in the price of electricity. So my question to you this week is:

Are these budget cuts necessary? If so, what steps should be taken for this to happen effectively?

Here are my thoughts:

I can understand the need to reduce things but it seems like the only things being reduced are the important things. For example, my eyes almost fell out of my socket when I saw this:

State may limit paying for some kids' drugs - 06/26/2008 - MiamiHerald.com

State may limit paying for some kids' drugs

The state's healthcare agency is considering limiting payments for strong drugs prescribed to young children for illnesses such as autism and bipolar disorder.
Posted on Thu, Jun. 26, 2008

TALLAHASSEE --
Florida's massive healthcare agency may cut back on paying for powerful drugs now prescribed for young children, although a final decision could be weeks or months away.

Since late April, the Agency for Health Care Administration has required doctors to obtain permission before the state's Medicaid program will pay for drugs prescribed to children under the age of six for autism, bipolar disorder or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Any new prescriptions must be evaluated by psychiatrists at the University of South Florida in Tampa.

The reason for the change: the increase in the number of children prescribed the drugs in the past several years, especially since the U.S. Food and Drug Administration does not recommend anymore the use of what are known as ''atypical antipsychotic'' drugs in young children. Previous published reports have said that the number of children in Medicaid getting such drugs has grown from more than 9,000 kids in 2000 to more than 18,000 in 2006.

A state panel met Wednesday to consider whether Florida should craft a more detailed policy to decide when it should pay for such drugs. The meeting drew a smattering of attendance, in person and on the phone, including a representative of the Citizens Commission on Human Rights, an offshoot of the Church of Scientology, who said the state was violating its own rules by paying for drugs not recommended by the FDA.

Dr. Jerome Isaac, a Bradenton pediatrician on the panel, questioned whether the state was pushing the issue to save money, saying that Medicaid should pay for a medication if it is recommended by a doctor.

''I see this as a cost-containment measure by putting obstacles in the way of physicians,'' Isaac said.

Others on the panel disagreed, saying that at a minimum the state should consider refusing to pay for any new prescriptions unless the child has previously been evaluated by a psychiatrist.

Anne Wells, the Medicaid Pharmacy Services bureau chief, said state officials were ''parents'' and ''pharmacists'' and that the right policy for children is a ``bigger issue than cost containment.''

I don't get it! How can they do this to children? I mean, you can't give a child with autism or bipolar disorder an aspirin and send them on their way. No wonder children walk around without having any proper shots and so forth. It's such an injustice to them! Not only that, I read that in our county our superintendent is going to freeze the raises for teachers that we negotiated on and signed a contract for no more than a year ago. So ridiculous. Finally, my local library actually had notices posted that they were going to cut their hours of operation and even close down a few locations. Um, aren't these the things we need?! Maybe it's because these factors don't bring in any money, I guess.

ceilirose

It's priorities now. We spend so much money on the war, that we don't really have and everything else suffers. The war is a part of it, tax cuts for the very wealthy, building bridges in Alaska to an island that has a population of 50.

We're so inundated with sound bytes and catchy terms like "wasterful spending' and "cutting the pork out of the budge" that we don't even focus anymore.

Jen Jaree

On a war that never should of happened in the first place. There is so much focus overseas that the government doesn't see the damage done back home. Healthcare, education, and the job market seem to be hurting the most. Which in my opinion are bigger issues.

sunnykerr

This is the first time in the history of the United States that the country's been at war and taxes haven't increased.

We can talk till the cows come home about whether or not the country should be at war. I think most of us are in agreement on Iraq at any rate.

The point is, though, that once the country is at war, it's still not an excuse for dumping every governmental program out there. But, yeah, you can't maintain an already unpopular war if people realize how much it's costing them. So this administration didn't increase taxes (quite the opposite, as we all know).

And this is where it's gotten them/all of you. And they won't be the ones to pay the price either, because they're all taking a hike come January. So, yeah, fantastic legacy.

vc318

Sunny, with how tough things really feels these days, I wonder how much tougher it would have been if taxes had gone up (again, it sure feels like it has though).

Hmm, it looks like Bush just signed another bill for war spending that he says will carry even after he leaves office.

sunnykerr

Well, not that I'm any expert or anything, but the point of raising taxes is to spread the burden, so to speak, isn't it? My guess, and I'm (again) seriously no expert in this, is that part of the reason why it's so tough right now is that there is no equal share of the taxes. So, in not raising them across the board, it's actual put a greater proportion of the burden on the middle class and the working poor.

Also, had the taxes been raised from the get-go, there might be a better "war chest," if you will, right now and, so, the costs of war wouldn't be carried over.

More to the point, perhaps, is that you guys owe money in the trillions to China, Saudi Arabia and Japan right now. Money that's gonna have to be paid at some point. So, while I absolutely wouldn't want it to be any worse for you guys right now, this isn't a situation where real solutions have been implemented. And so it's not likely to get any better any time soon.

None of this is very cheerful, and I may be full of crap, seeing as I don't know very much about this at all.

But the point of raising taxes in times of war isn't necessarily to make it worse on everyone, though I'm sure the prospect isn't a happy one; it's to share the burden and create a more sustainable economy over the long term. Things this administration either knows nothing about or does not care about.