In 1999 the GASB issued Statement No. 34, Basic Financial Statements - and Management's Discussion and Analysis - for State and Local Governments, which required governments to issue "full accrual" "government-wide" statements in addition to the traditional "modified accrual" "fund" statements. However, since 1999 the GASB has made no fundamental changes to the government fund statements. Among proposals for change some would narrow the measurement focus of the fund statements to "near-term" financial resources (such as cash, short-term investments, receivables and payables, but excluding inventories and prepaid items). Others would broaden the measurement focus to include capital assets not financed with long-term debt and certain liabilities such as those relating to pensions.

Do you think that the modified accrual government fund statements should be changed? If not, then state why not. If you do, then argue in favor of one of the two suggested alternatives or propose and defend some other option.

It has to be related to the objects of GASB accounting.