Dems Not Serious About Reducing Pork
Attention Taxpayers: Rhetoric Not Matching Reality
As Popularity Plummets, Senate Dems Express Concern Over “Wasteful” Spending But Bill Continues To Grow Every Day
FACT BOX
Only 1 Amendment To Reduce The Size Of The Bill Has Received More Than 4 Democrat Votes
SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV): “[T]he President, the Democratic leaders, the Republican leaders certainly have every intention of moving forward to getting everything out of the bill that causes heartburn to a significant number of senators.” (Sen. Reid, Press Conference, 2/3/09)
SEN. BEN NELSON (D-NE): “I’m very committed to making sure that we get it scrubbed cleaned of many of these programs.” (CNN’s “State Of The Union,” 2/1/09)
SEN. EVAN BAYH (D-IN): “If there is wasteful or silly spending, or spending that does not, you know, create jobs, that that sort of stuff needs to be pruned out.” (Fox News’ “Your World With Neil Cavuto,” 2/3/09)
SEN. JIM WEBB (D-VA): “People filling up buckets with projects … we found more than $100 billion of items that really don’t meet those [stimulus] criteria.” (MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” 2/5/09)
SEN. ROLAND BURRIS (D-IL): “We are seeking not to let this thing get loaded up with all these other pet projects and pet programs…” (Fox News, 2/4/09)
SEN. KENT CONRAD (D-ND): “I’d have a very hard time voting for this package as it stands.” (CNN’s “Newsroom,” 2/3/09)
SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY): “We’re trying to keep — keep things down.” (Fox News, 2/3/09)
SEN. MARY LANDRIEU (D-LA): “I don’t think this bill is perfect. And it needs some work. It needs some surgery.” (CNBC, 2/2/09)
SEN. JEFF BINGAMAN (D-NM): “Each senator will have the chance to offer amendments on the floor this week, to improve on the proposal, to delete things that they think are inappropriate that are in the proposal. I expect to vote for some of those amendments, because I think there are ways we can improve the proposal.” (MSNBC, 2/2/09)
SEN. KAY HAGAN (D-NC): “‘We have to do things in the right way,’ Hagan said. ‘We cannot be putting debt on the United States’ books in a frivolous way.’” (“Sen. Hagan Settles In,” Greensboro News-Record, 1/11/09)
###
Burning the midnight oil: The Sellout Amendment is here (Michelle Malkin)
February 8th, 2009 at 10:25 pm
Why on earth would they be serious about reducing pork? It’s “free” money for their States. Just imagine if the federal government couldn’t tax individuals in the first place, but had to instead tax the states based upon their population. Pork would go away in an instant.
A lot of the pork projects would never be implemented under such a scheme. As it is, pork costs the States nothing, and is a resume enhancement for federal Representatives and Senators with little or no connection to the taxes (upon individuals) that pay for it.
Even the majority of Republicans favor pork barrel spending. There are very few that actively fight against it. Pork wins elections (sadly).
February 8th, 2009 at 11:00 pm
as longs as ACORN gets big bucks my friend..this is a nightmare that I wish we could awake from!
February 8th, 2009 at 11:20 pm
Perri, although many of the Congressional member’s websites feature pork for their states prominently in their content the notion that it is ‘free money’ suggests manna from heaven which it is not. Those who directly benefit from those taxpayer dollars understandably would favor it. But the average taxpayer is a rube if they think it is a good deal. Distributing wealth from public funds collected from all 50 states to individual states means someone wins and someone loses.
Yo Angel, is that ACORN stuff still in the pork package? I thought it was removed. But then the shell game changes so often it is hard to keep up. Another reason to stop the porkulus bill.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:49 am
Oh I know it’s not really free. From the perspective of state governments it is though. It’s money the state doesn’t have to tax from its own citizens. Never mind the fact that the people pay for it through federal tax dollars, it’s disconnected from the politicians. The thing about the money isn’t that it’s collected from all 50 states, it’s collected from the individual taxpayer. The states aren’t involved in the collection at all. This is why states favor pork. It’s also why the Senators and House members feel they can flaunt their pork with impunity.
The average taxpayer doesn’t even have to be a rube, since the average taxpayer is in the minority in the country. Close to 40% of wage earners pay no federal taxes at all (other than social securiity and medicare taxes). For them, the money their “representatives” bring to the states is “free”. The vast majority of the people that actually PAY taxes pay relatively minor amounts, leaving the top two or three percent to pay for almost all of the pork.
February 9th, 2009 at 12:51 am
SEN. MARY LANDRIEU (D-LA): “I don’t think this bill is perfect. And it needs some work. It needs some surgery.” (CNBC, 2/2/09)
No Mary Landeiru, it does not need surgery, it need to be EXECUTED immediately. DOA
February 9th, 2009 at 4:16 am
Perri, what I meant by money from all 50 states is residents of those states contribute and how pork is scattered among the 50 from federal revenue is not equitable. So one state resident’s federal tax paid may in fact be helping another state more than his own. Whereas money spent on something like defense may be more equitable but again, if one state has a defense contractor getting massive contracts, you know what I mean.
The rube comment is for those who get all happy when the fed gives a state money. My point on that is all the funds are public funds. Everyone trying to get some of it back by special interest defeats the purpose.
February 9th, 2009 at 4:18 am
Debbie, I’d sooner have the whole porkulus thing fail rather than spend a trillion or so the way it stands right now.
The sad thing is the very people ‘constructing’ the stimulus were asleep at the wheel or worse to get things to this point to begin with. That is truly bipartisan, they all f—-d up.
And the public, including us, gets some of the blame for letting them be so useless.