Under the specter of an impeachment trial last week, President Bill Clinton delivered a State of the Union address with an ambitious agenda. Contrary to media hype, this speech was similar to ones before it. The State of the Union, as in years past, was littered with positive ideas, yet still left the public wondering about their execution.

Clinton’s plan, a potpourri of delectable domestic goodies, had something for everyone. For the old, Clinton proposed a method to extend the life span of Social Security to 2052 through budget surpluses.

For the young, Clinton offered a package of family assistance programs ranging from a $250 tax credit for stay at home parents of children age 1 or younger to a $1,000 tax credit for Americans with long-term health-care needs and family members who care for them.

His proposals might have been uplifting and popular, but as many State of the Union proposals, the problems were evident.

Social Security: When a president outlines a proposal to save Social Security -- a failing yet vital government program -- few will argue his intentions. The methods behind this rescue, however, must be called to question. Clinton requested that a 25 percent of a proposed $2.7 trillion-budget surplus to aid Social Security invested into the stock market. This procedure is inherently problematic in the light of constantly fluctuating stock market.

A stock market crash or even a decline in the market could be disastrous for the Social Security investments. Social Security funds should be invested into Treasury Bonds, which may not have the potential for as high returns as the stock market, but the bonds will provide the necessary protection.

Family Assistance: A $250 tax credit is a mere pittance for most parents grappling with a career and raising a child. The credit, designed to aid parents who choose to stay home with their children one years old or younger, will do little for parents actually in need of financial assistant while raising young children.

The money should be directed toward companies that employ those parents. The companies through tax credit incentives can provide benefit packages for parents. With the companies providing an acceptable leave of absence program, employees will have greater job security after the leave is over.

Both proposals ignore larger problems, such as national health care and other welfare programs. And these problems require more than quick fixes.

The goodie bag of positive ideas have been presented to Americans; now it’s time for Clinton to act.