| The Harvard Salient | November 4, 1996 |
| Cover Story | |
n this election year, I've often heard the candidates say that they will
not touch Medicare or Social Security. These two icons of the American political
landscape seem to have transcended the realm of public policy debate. Until
recently, I'd never really thought about them. To me they had been a pair
of government programs that would be there for me when I was old and retired.
But after listening to former Colorado governor and Reform Party candidate
Richard Lamm at the ARCO Forum on October 24, I'm beginning to doubt that
I will actually get a single cent of my Social Security taxes back. 
Lamm outlined the future of the Social Security and Medicare systems and showed that if we continue on our present fiscal path, we will be unable to support the federal budgets of the future. He predicted that by 2030 federal tax revenue would only cover entitlements such as Social Security and Medicare, leaving nothing at all for defense, education or any other discretionary spending. The present medical systems will bankrupt future generations, Lamm argued. He was most provocative when he asked whether we really want a medical system that keeps irreversible coma victims alive for 42 years while Washington, DC has a higher infant mortality rate than Guatemala.
amm believes that our system can be saved, and
that we must not give up hope. Nonetheless, we must begin to think about
these problems in different terms. He said that we need to ensure justice
a-cross generations. We must stop the current "generational malpractice"
that even in the most conservative, trimmed-down Republican budget left
the next generation with a $1.8 trillion debt. There needs to be an open
dialogue on this issue before the baby boomers begin to retire, lest our
generation's economy be broken by unmanageable debts. There needs to be
a change.