Saturday, March 23, 2013

Bishops State Budget Priorities


For John, BLUFThe first job of Government is to protect the People from their enemies.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

In this week's edition of The [Boston] Pilot we have an article by Reporter Dennis Sadowski, "Bishops remind Congress that poor must be first in budget priorities".

The needs of poor and vulnerable Americans must remain at the top of the country's spending priorities as Congress debates the federal budget in the coming weeks, the chairmen of two U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops committees said.

Holding firm to earlier stances, Bishop Stephen E. Blaire of Stockton, Calif., chairman of the Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development, and Bishop Richard E. Pates of Des Moines, Iowa, chairman of the Committee on International Justice and Peace, told members of Congress in a March 18 letter that budget expenditures reflect the priorities of a nation.

"As Catholic pastors, we continue to emphasize that these choices are economic, political and moral," the bishops said.

"While we lack the competence to offer a detailed critique of entire budget proposals, we do ask you to consider the human and moral dimensions of these choices," they said.

On the other hand, Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution reads:
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
Provision of a common defense is vital to being able to provide for the general welfare of these United States.  Even the Bishops recognize that, as is show in the last paragraph of the article:
"Our nation has an obligation to address the impact of future deficits on the health of the economy, to ensure stability and security for future generations, and to use limited resources efficiently and effectively," they wrote. "A just framework for future budgets cannot rely on disproportionate cuts in essential services to poor persons; it requires shared sacrifice by all, including raising adequate revenues, eliminating unnecessary military spending and addressing the long-term costs of health insurance and retirement programs fairly."
In sum, if the answer fits on a bumper sticker, it is probably not the correct answer.  We do need to take care of those less fortunate, of those suffering in this current economic downturn.  But, we also need to provide military and police forces to protect all of us from enemies foreign and domestic.  Further, we owe it to the less fortunate to help them not become dependent upon government for their support, but rather to help them become functioning and contributing members of our society.

Regards  —  Cliff

1 comment:

  1. I don't think the phrase "...general welfare......" refers to general welfare as we now know it today. The FIRST rule of helping the down and out get up and in is to NOT turn them into a government project. The care and support of the poor and just plain broke lies within the responsibility and the power of the local community...and the more we allow that responsibility to rise within government levels, the greater the danger of creating permanent programs with permanent recipients. Gee....like we have right now.

    If welfare programs were actually designed to reduce welfare requirements, why is it that the needs have grown so much...and NEVER been reduced???

    ReplyDelete

Please be forthright, but please consider that this is not a barracks.