The Kokomo Tribune from Kokomo, Indiana • Page 5

Tribune Wayne K. Lowman Executive Editor-Publisher John Wiles Editor Jon Shafer Opinion Editor KOKOMO TRIBUNE OPINION callus Jon Shafer Opinion editor, 454-8566 or (800) 382-0696 Monday-Friday between 8:30 a.m.-4:30 p.m. Saturday Cheers Jeers The parade is coming back! Wow! How long has it been since downtown Kokomo became the hub of a Christmas parade and all the excitement that goes with it? It's been years, according to the Main Street Association. The resurrection of the Christmas parade, complete with bands, caroling and a live nativity scene is only the beginning. OK, throw in some fireworks.

Well, that's not quite confirmed yet, but a fireworks display is on the drawing board. And that's not The executive director of the Main Street Association, Jan Hendrix, also says the association is busily trying to entice downtown merchants to create holiday window displays. So put this on your calendar: Saturday, Dec: 6, with events planned between 3 p.m and 8 p.m. Oh yes, they figure 5 p.m. is a great time for the parade to begin.

Not only that, the festivities will be taking place during the weekend of the We Care telethon. Oh, gee, we almost forgot, that pleasantly plump guy in the red suit has agreed to drop by. You know, Santa! One other note: if you love parades, and REALLY love being in one, you can contact Deb Copeland, advertising sec- etary of the Kokomo Tribune. So watch for registration forms in future editions. High cost of vandalism Now to the bad With no thanks to whoever did it, a number of workers and their families may be pressed financially because of layoffs resulting from a bunch of thugs, or maybe just one low-life, who vandalized a construction site last weekend.

The damage to a retention pond project was, according to officials, considerable. Some person or persons, evidently with knowledge of heavy equipment, climbed aboard an excavator and demolished work in progress, including structures and equipment. The contractor, Kellam, was constructing two retention ponds for the Tudor Drain at County Roads 300 North and 100 East. The work was related to Chrysler new transmission plant. The physical damage, bad as it is, is one thing, said Jeff Kellam, the owner.

But what especially hurts, he said, involves the laid off workers. "We've got a lot of wives and children that depend on (income) from this project." There is a cash reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of those responsible. Anyone with knowledge about the damage can call Kellam at (219) 563-6723, or Howard County Detectives Steve Rogers or Don England at 456-2020. LETTERS to the editor Students reach out to family Northwestern High School has lost a very dear student, David Blackburn, in a car accident. From that loss some very special people banded together to collect money to help the family.

I was given the opportunity to witness all of the collection process at school as well as collections in the community. So many times we hear of all the bad news about what our children are doing. It was exciting to see something so compassionate and selfless from these young adults. David's friends gathered together the night he passed away and decided to raise money to help the family with medical and funeral expenses. The following day at school they collected $600, and by Thursday had over $1,500, from students, friends, faculty and staff.

The middle school was collecting also because David's little sister, Lacey, survived but remains in critical condition at Methodist Hospital, Indianapolis. The dollar amount did not amaze me as much as the "hearts" who gave it. I saw students giving their paychecks, lunch and gas money. These compassionate acts brought friends together and showed what they could accomplish if they set their minds to it. David's friends are still helping the family as much as possible while trying to cope with the loss of their friend and going on with their lives.

I could not let an opportunity like this one pass without telling the Howard County community just what fine people we have at Northwestern. Jennifer Faust EXCEL teacher Northwestern High School Thanks, mayor, for quick work Thank you, Mayor Trobaugh, and the responsible personnel in our traffic department for a very speedy response to my suggestion to improve the visual awareness of the stop signs at West Carter and Branded Boulevard. I was pleasantly shocked at how fast the pavement stop bars were painted. For all of my neighbors, and especially the parents in this area, I say "thank you." While I had not requested the stop signs be moved closer to the curb, that change is very effective also. It's nice to know that our government officials and employees listen to us.

Thanks again. Stan Shuey Kokomo Clergy right to be wary Francois Voltaire is credited with saying, "God created man in His image, then man returned the favor." Recent Kokomo Tribune articles (Oct. 29) respecting a grassroots petition to declare Jesus' mother Mary "Coredeemer, Mediator of All Graces, and Advocate for the People of God" attest to the accuracy of Voltaire's observation. The local clergy interviewed by the Tribune were correct to be wary of this, and to reject the deity of Mary. Jesus resurrected Himself from the dead, Mary did not.

The Catholic Catechism correctly identifies Jesus as sole redeemer of the world, and no petition of the people can alter this divine truth. The Tribune article referred to Sacred Scripture as being proof for the "Mariological" dogma. Applying this same method of interpretation will send a long, cold, shiver down the spine of anyone who depends upon the intercession of Mary, rather than the shed blood and finished work of Jesus Christand. This teaching of Jesus seems to preclude Mary from any extraordinary influence in heaven. However, this does not belittle the significance of Mary.

She is a most blessed example of the magnificent work which God can do through us, when first we humble ourselves in faithful obedience to His word. Greg Fridholm Kokomo POINT counterpoint Privatization, flat More spending is tax is the answer not the answer By DANIEL J. MITCHELL Scripps Howard News Service Thanks to a reasonably strong economy and a very modest degree of fiscal discipline in Washington, the federal government in the near future actually may experience a budget surplus for the first time since 1969. All too predictably, this news has triggered a feeding frenzy among Washington interest groups, each arguing that the excess revenue should be spent on their favorite programs. More spending, however, would be the worst way to deal with surplus.

Instead, politicians should give the money back to the people. More specifically, America faces two major burdens, both of which can more easily be solved by using future budget surpluses. Problem number one is our unfair, complicated tax code that punishes success, and it desperately needs reform, preferably by junking the entire IRS Code and replacing it with a flat tax that treats everyone equally. To overcome all the special interest groups, however, policy makers will have to reduce the tax burden this news has triggered a feeding frenzy among Washington interest groups on the middle class. In all likelihood, that means a flat tax rate of less than 20 percent.

This is where the surplus would come in handy, since legislators could enact a flat tax that lowers almost everyone's taxes without a deficit. Problem number two is rescuing the Social Security. The government's own projections show that Social Security is bankrupt, with future benefit obligation exceeding expected tax revenues by trillions of dollars. Compounding these fiscal woes is the fact that the system has become an absolutely wretched deal for workers, promising them only meager retirement income in exchange for the huge amount of taxes they pay into the system. The solution is to privatize.

Once again, the surplus will be very helpful, allowing the government to maintain its commitment to current retirees, allowing workers to shift to a new approach that will make them much better off. The battle over the surplus, however, is not confined to the big spenders and tax-cutters. A third option is advanced by those who argue that the extra tax revenue should be used to pay off some of the national debt. This is a good news-bad news proposition. On the positive side, proponents of this view correctly recognize that it would be wrong to let politicians spend the money.

On the negative side, however, keeping taxes at record levels to pay off a portion of the debt probably means we'll miss opportunities to both wipe out our disgraceful tax code save the Social Security system from bankruptcy. Finally, politicians can choose to do all three. Republican Mark Newmann of Wisconsin is promoting a plan to earmark one-third of the surplus to tax cuts, one-third to paying off debt, and one-third to new Washington spending. To paraphrase the Clint Eastwood movie, this is the fiscal equivalent of "The good, The Bad, and the Useless." The Good By dedicating one-third of any surplus to tax cuts, the Newmann bill acknowledges that taxpayers deserve at least a modest break. Unfortunately, by returning only a fraction of the surplus to taxpayers, the plan fails to appreciate how oppressive the tax burden has become.

The Bad The Neumann plan devotes one-third of the surplus to special interest groups. The Useless The final third of the surplus would be used, although in a very convoluted way, for debt reduction. Neumann's bill provides use of the surplus to exchange one type of IOU in the Social Security Trust Fund for another. Given the serious problems that bedevil both our tax code and Social Security, policy makers would be wiser to use any surpluses to implement the flat tax and Social Security privatization. Then, after these two fundamental reforms are accomplished, we will better be able to afford paying off the debt.

(Daniel Mitchell is a senior fellow in political economy at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C.) By SANDRA BUTLER Scripps Howard News Service Washington is still basking in the afterglow of the budget deal. Those who crafted it say the budget will perform miracles and wonders, not the least of which is a balanced budget. But ask yourself: If the budget is balanced, why will the national debt continue to grow? Since 1983, the government has been collecting more for Social Security than it is paying out in benefits. The money was supposed to go into the Social Security Trust Fund to help pay for future retirees, including the heavy influx of baby boomers who will begin retiring around 2010. Unfortunately, Social Security surpluses are being used to pay for current government programs.

In short, there is no trust fund, just a stack of government lOUs. So even though Congress and President Clinton say they have balanced the budget, the government will still be going into debt to the tune of tens of billions every year. Legislation introduced by Rep. Mark Neumann, R- the Social Security Preservation Act and National Debt Repayment Act, would change all that and reduce the burden America would otherwise heap on the backs of its children. These bills are not popular with many politicians because they would require honesty and discipline.

The Social Security Preservation Act is based on honesty. It would end the misuse of the Social Security Trust Fund, stop masking the true size of the federal deficit, and begin properly recording the debt owed to Social Security. It would require that surplus Social Security revenues be invested in real assets, such as marketable Treasury securities or Certificates of Deposit. This is much closer to the concept most Americans have in mind when they think of a trust fund. The National Debt Repayment Act would force Congress to do something equally remarkable: be disciplined.

Future government spending increases would be limited to one percentage point less than revenue growth, creating a surplus which would then be used to begin paying back the national debt and reducing taxes. If enacted, the two bills would have significant benefits. The Social Security Preservation Act, for example, would ensure that the Social Security Trust Fund contains real assets. Current projections show Social Security will start paying out more benefits in 2012 than it collects in taxes. If there is no money in the Social Security Trust Fund, the government will have to cut benefits, increase taxes, borrow more money, or a combination If the budget is balanced, why will the national debt continue to grow? of the three.

With a trust fund holding real assets that can be tapped, Social Security is expected to be solvent until 2029, giving Washington time to reform the system. Surprisingly, it is not the Democrats who are criticizing these fiscally conservative ideas, but some Republicans. They invoke the memory of Ronald Reagan to "choose tax cuts over austerity." There is nothing in the National Debt Repayment Act that would stop Congress from lowering taxes. In fact, the act would mandate tax relief every year, something the Gipper would strongly favor. Another Reagan idea in these two bills is the reduction in the size of government.

Even many Republicans don't have the will to shrink the size of government: it is easier to keep spending the money. The truth is the balanced budget, as agreed to by Congress and the president, will rely on more than $100 billion from the Social Security Trust Fund to balance the books in 2002. The national debt, however, will continue to grow. Many people in Washington consider the Social Security Trust Fund to be just another slush fund. Because of this mindset, the 1983 changes to Social Security have not "saved" the program, as predicted.

Instead, the changes have allowed them to increase the size of government and the national debt. Neumann should be commended for his efforts. For these bills to pass, however, the American people need to tell Washington enough is enough. (Sandra L. Butler is president of the United Seniors Association in Fairfax, Va.) Men and women equally dumb or every unbalanced femi- nazi ranting about equality, there's an equivalent mas'- cudork whining about the 1 sexist double standard.

What, pray, have we wrought? I feel like Florence King when she said a mastectomy wouldn't be that bad she'd get a better fit on her shoulder holster. Like every other commentator in the country, I wrote a column' about the so-called nanny trial. For those just awakening from a coma, a British au pair was convicted of second-degree murder for shaking a baby and banging his head with such force that he died. Court TV viewers, who are only semicomatose, have been writhing on their couches in the wake of the verdict. Americans are feeling KATHLEEN PARKER SYNDICATED COLUMNIST guilty about then- child-care arrangements; Brits are worried', that one of their own was convict-, ed of murder when all she did was kill someone.

Without rehashing the whole story, I suggested that those look- ing for someone else to blame for this tragedy (no one seems to want to blame the nanny) might look inward at our mistaken assump- tion that anyone can care for a baby. As in, babies are nothing but little flesh balls fed and changed every few hours; anyone can do it Pithily, I said, we should reex-l amine these assumptions. ly, I said: "No matter how you cut- it, the best caregiver for an infant, is his mother." You'd think I'd questioned Princess Di's sainthood. The femi- nazis and mascudorks scurried from under their respective rocks like cockroaches on a moonless night. I realized I'd offended' feminazis, mascudorks, breast cancer victims, and but I don't care.

I can't remember when I uttered my last politically correct statement but trust me, it was my last. Don't get me wrong. I love hearing from readers. Herewith, a couple of sample responses to my blasphemous statement: Feminazi: "It is completely false that the best caregiver is naturally the mother. You have made it very plain that you consider it the mother's duty to be the stay-at- home parent." While you attempt to diagram those sentences, we'll hear froni'' the male counterpart.

Mascudork: "Good fathers have little chance even against bad mothers in getting custody of their parent who got custody went months for that first two years where she didn't change or feed our child." OK, boys and girls. Sometimes fathers are better parents than mothers, and sometimes men can' stay home happily while mothers" go to work. But as a rule, now ten carefully, the best caregiver for an infant is his mother! So saith the inventor of mammary glands and other parts unmen- tionable. Anyone who thinks otherwise hasn't borne live Staying home with one's baby; by the way, isn't a duty it's a joy, a privilege, a basic instinct in the pre-Sharon Stone sense. I don't care who stays home with the baby, but for pity's somebody do it.

The media onslaught from femi- nazis and mascudorks has con- vinced a generation that babies don't need their mothers, that careers and incomes matter more. But inconvenience and bad choices don't change the truth. Just because you can't stay home with your infant doesn't mean you shouldn't. Children's needs haven't changed just because our lifestyles have. (Kathleen Parker, an Orlando Sentinel columnist, can be reached at.