This will be another Change election. 2004 was an election about disappointment with the Bush agenda. 2006 was a second election about the direction of the Republican administration and congress.

2008 was certainly a change election, again voters opting for an entirely new direction with the election of Barack Obama to the presidency.

And now, in 2010, voters will once again demand a government that responds to their interest in jobs, financial stability and economic growth.

But will the voters get what they demand, or will 2014 be yet another “change” election?

We can only hope.

The country got in this position because of major mistakes made by our leaders. Two wars paid for by debt; Medicare Part D added and paid for by debt; the Alternative Mminimum tax paid for annually to protect middle class taxpayers, paid for by debt; and tax cuts paid for by debt.

The net result was a reversal of a budget surplus to a huge annual deficit.

But then the financial crisis got even worse.

At the very end of the Bush administration the U.S. banking system, interconnected with world banking, neared total collapse.

The nations’ chief financial officers suggested a worldwide depression if our government did not immediately, within days, bail out our financial system. TARP was born. It was supported by the incoming president and both political parties only because the threat was real and compelling.

Now, three years after TARP it looks like the money spent will be returned to the treasury, with interest, with the exception of the Freddie and Fanny expenditures.

Americans hated TARP and bailing out the rich and corrupt bankers on Wall Street. And still today many Americans resent that bailout.

Then came the Obama administration and the stimulus, hated by many too for its failure to end the recession while creating additional debt. One third of the stimulus was a tax cut, another third support for unemployment and state government teetering on severe fiscal danger from the recession. The final third was spent on longer term infrastructure improvements and Democratic pet projects.

Following this was the auto bailouts, protecting nearly one million jobs in our deepest recession. Yet another unpopular choice.

Finally, treasury revenue fell from the recession.

There is how we found ourselves here, but how do we turn it around?

First, fixing Social Security is pretty simple…just eliminate the ceiling on earnings subject to tax, currently at about $107,000. That single change will protect the program for an additional 20 years.

With Medicare and Medicaid, where the problems are far more serious, legislators could begin a premium of Part A in exchange for a reduction in the current coinsurance contribution from approximately $1,100 to $800.

The coinsurance only matters when there are claims, but the premium would be universal, increasing the program income from covered individuals with even a modest premium of $25 per month. The savings from ending the payments to insurance companies for the Medicare Advantage program, approximately $500 Billion, should remain. Corporate welfare is simply too expensive right now.

The government could use a broad brush and impose a 5 percent across-the-board cut in all federal spending for 24 months and review the effects again at the end of that period.

The Bush tax cuts, if made permanent, will result in a $4 trillion deficit if made permanent, according to the politically neutral CBO. Those cuts should be extended 12 months and then eliminated in a staggered series, beginning with the top 2 percent of earners.

Will the new congress accomplish any or all of these targets? To be perfectly honest, there is scant evidence that they will do so.

Jim Crawford is a contributing columnist for The Tribune and a former educator at Ohio University Southern.