Last week,
WKMG's
Lauren Rowe invited me on her wonderful Sunday morning program
Flashpoint, along with Dick Batchelor, to discuss some of the budgetary and other issues facing our Legislature this session.
If you missed the show, here's a link to the video:
Flashpoint | WKMG | April 10, 2011
Dick Batchelor, a former Florida State Representative, is one of my favorite local Democrats. As you'll see, we had a good laugh several times because Dick and I kept agreeing over and over. Lauren's not looking to host a drag-out screaming match, but usually when she invites a Democrat and Republican to appear, there's a little more difference of opinion between the guests.
Go ahead and call me a RINO (I've been called worse, ha), but some things are just common sense...or at least, some things
should be common sense. Everyone knows that treating poor and uninsured people in the emergency room is the worst solution possible - it's more expensive, more stressful, and less effective in actually making people healthy. Preventative care
is the best solution for both uninsured patients
and taxpayers footing the bill, and Dick and I naturally agreed on this point (note also that he agreed with me on what's normally viewed as a conservative position, that deregulating certain businesses is a good idea as long as safety is not impacted).
I do have to say, regarding the topic of this year's budget cuts, both in Florida and around the country, I am disappointed in the tone the debate has taken.
 |
| I want moooooore money! |
There's been too much hysteria and hostility from liberal interest groups this year. Anyone who suggests that even one penny might be cut from schools or any program that serves the poor, children, or the elderly is met with wailing and gnashing of teeth. "You can't cut that program! It's for the
children!" "You denied our funding request? Why do you hate senior citizens?"
Our problems with government overspending are caused in large part by treating far too many issues as sacred cows.
I've made the analogy before that far too often, supporters of a government program will do the equivalent of holding up an adorable little puppy and then arguing that the cuteness of the puppy is, in and of itself, an argument for increased funding. Go ahead and call me heartless, but especially in tough budget times, I want to hear specifics on how the money will be spent and what exactly is going to be done to help the puppy. Does the puppy actually need assistance? Is there another way to help the puppy?
Or is the puppy just being used as a cute and fluffy form of budgetary blackmail?
 |
If you cut the budget, that means this puppy will die.
Yeah, this puppy. We're whacking him first. |
