In his March 27 article for AP, Tom Raum notes that while there’s little enthusiasm for government bailouts in general, voters are increasingly demanding immediate government relief as the economy ebbs. And Democratic presidential candidates, quick to recognize potential votes, are fanning the flames with promises of government aid for homeowners facing foreclosure. Clinton wants a $30 billion fund to assist those at risk of foreclosure, while Obama’s “plan” includes $10 billion to help homeowners avoid foreclosure.

I’m afraid I have to agree with Senator McCain: “It’s not the duty of government to bail out and reward those who act irresponsibly, whether they are big banks or small borrowers.”

Sure, the Fed orchestrated a bailout, if that’s you want to call it, for Bear Stearns. It reasoned that allowing a major investment bank to fail could so adversely affect the nation’s economy that helping shore it up, even with some detrimental economic effects of its own, would be the lesser of two evils. But now homeowners facing foreclosure want a slice of bailout pie as well, and both Clinton and Obama want government (read “taxpayers”) to serve them one. But is that such a good idea?

Not as I see it. I’m a believer in the philosophy that if you make a mess, you’re responsible for cleaning it up. And in this case, we taxpayers didn’t make the mess. So who did?