Getting trickled on

As your readers know, President Bush supports only a very small increase in the SCHIP program. He has stated that he wants to continue “letting the markets work” to provide medical care. A few weeks ago, the president announced his opposition to federal programs that would aid home buyers who face mortgage foreclosures.

Yet to help cope with the ongoing financial crises in the housing market and the stock markets, the Federal Reserve has injected tens of billions into the banking system. Last week, the Fed cut a key interest rate. President Bush has expressed no qualms about these actions (yes, I know that the Federal Reserve System is a public-private entity that is independent of the president. But the Fed was established by federal law, and the president chooses its board of governors).

The benefits of good health care for children are demonstrable. Aid to persons facing the loss of a home helps those in a truly catastrophic situation. The economic effects of manipulating monetary policy are far less clear.

So we now are witnessing “trickle down” economics in the midst of great economic uncertainty. Helping those at the top may help those at the bottom; direct aid to those in need provides them with immediate relief.

As former Sen. George Mitchell said when he was Senate majority leader in the late 1980s and early 1990s, “Mr. President, we’ve been trickled on long enough.”

Alan Ginsberg

Corea