GETTING OUR NATION BACK ON TRACK

OUR PRESIDENT HAS pointed out, correctly, that the cause of forest fires is
trees. The fewer the trees, the less the risk of forest fires. So many
presidents have failed to see this simple truth, with disastrous economic
results.

No one ever made any money off some darn tree just standing there in the
forest. Cut that same tree down and haul it away and cut it and mill it and
make it into lovely end tables -- you've an economic miracle.

In that spirit, I would like to propose to the president a method of
reforming our troubled health care system and getting Social Security back
on track, while simultaneously cutting wasteful government spending,
supporting our farmers and making yet another tax cut for the overburdened
rich possible.

We must begin by accepting this simple but rarely acknowledged fact: The
problem with health care today is too many people living too long.
Curiously, that is also the problem with Social Security. And the worst is
yet to come: Baby Boomers, with their anti-oxidants and their gym
memberships and their vegetarian snacks, are all probably going to live
beyond 100 unless they are hit by Volvos rather than driving them.

If we can reverse this trend, if we can start lowering life expectancy and
making sure that people die within mere minutes of their retirement
parties, we can live in a happier, freer and cheaper society.

I advocate a multipronged approach. First, let's end these misguided
anti-smoking programs. Indeed, let's provide incentives for restaurants and
bars to offer free "starter packs" of cigarettes to their patrons. Of
course, no one will be forced to smoke; this isn't Russia -- of course,
neither is Russia.

SEAT BELTS WOULD still be available in cars, but movie stars could go on TV
urging young people not to use them. "What are you afraid of?," delivered
in a taunting manner, is a good slogan.

We could knock off the War on Some Drugs, too; legalize everything. More
money for the pharmaceutical companies and more money for the U.S.
Treasury, too. The effect on mortality is uncertain (because researchers
have largely been prevented from studying these matters), but we do know
that recreational drugs can be dangerous, particularly in the bloodstream
of a smoker driving without a seat belt. Of course, we'd gain some lives by
cutting down on gang violence, but no plan is perfect.

Direct and indirect funding of emergency rooms should cease as well. This
would be the "one strike and you're out" policy: Get careless, get dead.
Naturally, the rich would quickly establish a parallel health care system,
strictly on a fee-for-service basis, so the president's basic constituency
would continue to live a long time while the poor would die sooner.

This resembles the current system, I acknowledge that. Still, I think we
can tweak the numbers in our favor.

THE BUSH DRIVE to cut funding for family planning is a good first step -- a
rise in septic abortions would be a double win for the Social Security
system - - but too much money is still being spent on research into exotic
diseases caused by, how shall we say, poor lifestyle choices. Let those
people stew in their own juices, so to speak.

Finally, let's institute a cutoff in Medicare benefits. What's fair? 82?
85? I mean, a person who is 85 now was born in 1917. Isn't that long
enough? Two world wars and Cary Grant and cell phones and pornography and
Dove bars -- isn't that enough for one lifetime? Shouldn't these people be
encouraged to make way for the next generation -- and, patriotically, to
protect freedom by saving valuable terrorism-fighting funds?

I think, Mr. President, that a note from you to the old people just as they
lose their medical benefits would be a lovely touch.

In which I save the world through simple common sense.