Tuesday, Oct. 11, 2005 | 9:30 a.m.
Because of recent national disasters and the Iraqi war, the national budget seems to soar out of control.
I try to draw a parallel between my personal household budget, which I think is pretty much the same as millions of others and the budget of the U.S. government.
If I had lost my job or encountered some other serious financial burden when I was working, I would have had to cut out the nonessentials in order to stay afloat.
Why shouldn't the same rationale be used by the federal government in times like now when we have a very serious financial dilemma?
The pork spending for the 2006 federal budget is like $260 billion. From what I hear and read most of this amount is going to nonessential programs.
Why couldn't the government either cut out nonessential programs or reduce them dramatically to help the budget crunch? I realize pork spending is politically motivated by both parties, but couldn't this outrageous cost be reduced like the average household is forced to do in troubled times?
Clarence Lanzarth Las Vegas
archive
