« Bridge Repair Funding Bills | Main | Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at Ground Zero? »
September 19, 2007
STOP PORK SPENDING!
by Jack Lee
It's an outrage! Earmarks also known as "pork spending" is another perversion of government. It is an abuse of power, yet it is commonly used by our state and federal legislators for their own pet projects and/or to buy votes. It is usually for something normally so far outside the scope of government priorities that it would never make it out of a committee as a stand alone bill. Common sense and good ethics says that all earmarks should be banned starting in 2008. Taxpayers are fedup.
If it's so worthy of our money, then I say, have the courage to put it in as a bill by itself and see what happens when it comes under full scruitiny!
Did you know in the first 6 months of their majority control in Congress Democrats issues 32,000 pork spending attachments to bills? Thousands are attached to bills in the state every year and every year it gets worse.
Pork or earmarking is a way to introduce spending for a legislator's home district project by writing it into a bill, often at the cost of getting his or her vote. For example, lets say Senator X would like to have a monument of himself built in his hometown and their is an important bill on tax reform coming up. He says he will only vote for the reform only if a trailer or addendum is included that will provide one million for a statue of himself. Because Senator X is very influential and his vote is necessary to have this bill passed, the Senators then concede and give him his million dollars for a statue. This is just an example I made up, but reality says there are more absurd reasons than this that get far more money! (see page 2)
If you said this was extortion, you would be right!
Let's say, if certain Senators seeking a favor offered to do something nice for Senator X in his home district, like a statue of himself, you could safely call THAT a bribe! In either case its perfectly legal and its also absolutely wrong!
1. It's wrong because of how it was done because often times these attachments slip in under the radar of the public.
2. It is wrong because it sets up more of the same kind of spending.
3. It's wrong because it creates the perception of dirty politics and it turns off voters.
4. It's wrong because it damages the credibility of elected officials and undermines the confidence of the people. It is wrong because it is an abuse of power!
5. It's wrong because it is wasteful and secretive spending.
How many more reasons do you need to say enough is enough? I wonder why legislators haven't tried to do something about this long ago? They fact that they haven't ought to raise serious questions about their competence and character.
STOP ALL PORK SPENDING NOW. Call your Congressman, Assemblyman, Senators and demand better! If enough of you demand better, we will get better or are you content with the way things are now?
Congressman Wally Herger (Chico, CA) 530-893-8363
Assemblyman Rick Keene (Chico, CA) 530- 895-4217
Senator Sam Aanested (Chico, CA) 530-895-6088
Forget Calling Boxer or Feinstien - they're lost causes.
From Fox News ..............
Pork — that is, excessive spending for members’ pet projects, which usually grease the skids for special interest and hometown support — increased 9 percent in fiscal year 2002 to $20 billion. The number of pork projects increased 32 percent to a total of 8,341.
For the second year in a row, Alaska led the nation in pork with $451 million in spending, followed by Hawaii with $353 million, and West Virginia with $215 million — all thanks to powerful members on the Senate Appropriations Committee, CAGW said.
CAGW categorizes more than 600 pet projects in the "2002 Pig Book" by committee and says every project meets one or more of the following criteria: they are unauthorized or unsupported by the president, proposed by only one member, and serve one special interest, are unhindered by any congressional hearing and are not competitively awarded.
Some of the latest "Pig Book" installments include:
— $62.4 million for commerce projects in Alaska, home of Senate Appropriations Committee ranking member Republican Ted Stevens, including $750,000 to prevent Atlantic salmon from escaping state streams and $4 million for sea lion recovery projects.
— $23 million in agricultural projects for the state of Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee ranking member Thad Cochran, R-Miss., including $800,000 for imported red fireants.
— $268 million in defense projects in the state of Defense Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, including $1 million for an alternative fuel program for the Hickman Air Force Base and $2 million for the state National Guard anti-drug program.
— $80 million for energy and water projects in the state of Senate Appropriations Chairman Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., including $7 million for a positron emission tomography facility at West Virginia University.
— $78.5 million in labor and health and human services projects in Iowa, home of Labor/HHS Appropriations Subcommittee chairman Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, including $100,000 to encourage children to hold fairs displaying their inventions and $3 million for the Iowa Communications Network.
Schatz said he is tired of hearing members of Congress squabble over anti-terrorism funding requested by President Bush.
"We would not have to go looking for that money if we didn’t have all of this pork — which is the greater priority right now in the minds of Congress, war or pork?"
Posted by Post Scripts at September 19, 2007 09:30 AM
Comments
1. It's wrong because of how it was done because often times these attachments slip in under the radar of the public.
Sometimes they are slipped into the bill just prior to the vote and the senators or house members don't even know it. the bills are hundreds of pages long and impossible to read and comprehend easily (if you've ever tried to read a contract or insurance policy you can relate.)
I'm reminded of the bill (or was it the budget) that Reagan brought before the news cameras. It was about a foot thick...and he was expected to sign it within hours or days of receiving it.
This is no way to run government. Jack, your suggestion, which I share, that an idea (bill) should stand on it's own is good for many reasons. Clarity & accountability are two good ones...the fact that they would have to write less legislation. Higher taxes, more regulation, restrictions or limitations, and loss of freedom all devolve from more legislation.
Posted by: Tina at September 19, 2007 04:39 PM