We need more people in the U.S. Senate like Warren Rudman: an intelligent, tough conservative who was willing to work with people on the other side of the aisle.

PLEASE, the deficit is not 16 trillion. Read the US Comptroller financial statements where the footnotes clearly indicate that over 60 trillion more is owed TODAY for obligations on Medicare, social security and other programs that are unfunded. We are already off the cliff in a free fall, as are most governmental entities, due to governments fraudulent methods of accounting and budgeting which the press seems incapable of understanding, let alone reporting. Today, this so - called balanced budget, would need to eliminate nearly everything except entitlements or about 1.7 trillion to be balanced and interest on the unfunded debt of entitlements would continue to grow. There is really no way out financially unless the economy grows dramatically( which is doubtful with Obama as President), taxes are increased for everyone, spending is cut dramatically, entitlements become need based and governments are required to present accurate budgets based on revenues realized and obligations incurred, not just cash in and cash out. Right now the trough is being filled with borrowed funds and empty promises on future entitlements and sadly, we hear nothing about the true calamity that our elected politicians have brought us to, thanks to an uniformed press and Americans who should have known that there entitlements were nothing more than a Ponzi scheme that makes Madoff look like a pillar of integrity.

I have no doubt Mr Rudman and his friends at the Concorde Coalition are nice fellows, well intentioned I'm sure, but this idea that we have to slash spending to balance the budget is just totally wrong. This article talks about Rudman's two terms in the Senate, ending in 1992, and then of George W Bush's tax-cuts and huge spending increases. All sorts of mentions of Reagan, and Grahm, and Tsongas, "both sides to blame," yada yada yada. Has everyone forgotten 1993 to 2000? I find it amazing (and incredibly frustrating) that President Clinton is not mentioned in the article even once! Started off with huge deficits, projected to rise and continue forever, and ended with budget surpluses! By many measures, the greatest, sustained, prosperity this country has ever known. Ever. And with higher tax rates than present.

Yes, our long term debt is bad.  Health care costs contribute enormously to this, and we absolutely need to move to a better overall system to slow the growth rate. Social Security is relatively simple to resolve, there are just a couple of inputs and a handful of outputs. Sensible defense spending will be possible now that the Cheney/Bush follies are ending. But slashing our budget won't increase growth, which is the only way we'll be able to prosper.

PL, Remember Clinton was pushed by a Republican controlled Congress to address cuts, directly aided by Bush 1's courageous tax increase and most importantly he benefitted from BUSINESSES' Internet and technology boom of the 90's. The economy truly grows when businesses expand or develop and hire more people and generate more profits to invest, not when government increases its spending. While you can say we need to control the growth of healthcare costs, the only way to do this is to stop the boomers from living past 65. It simply can't be done in an amount that makes the unfunded liability go away. Obama's plan does nothing to increase the number of providers (doctors, nurses and others), open up other avenues for lower cost patient care, shield providers from obscene malpractice insurance costs or allow consumers to establish consumer unions to deal effectively with the lobbyists of the drug and insurance monopolies that were given special deals to go along.with it. Clinton was not a profile in courage on any matter I can remember and don't forget the true stories on his treatment of women and his full frontal lie to the American people.