# pitiful I think there is little hope



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Drunk With Power, Spending Out of Control

Thursday, August 25, 2005

By Radley Balko

The Washington Post reports that in 1987, President Ronald Reagan vetoed a transportation bill passed by Congress because it had 157 "earmarks"- money set aside for Congress members' pet projects that would ostensibly be considered too wasteful to pass as laws on their own merit.

Reagan made a show of his veto. It was a symbolic stroke against government waste, against the Democrats' tradition of, for example, diverting every federal highway through West Virginia, then naming it after Sen. Robert Byrd.

Fast-forward to 2005. Republicans control the White House and both houses of Congress. Early on a Saturday morning in August - the day of the week, and the month of the year, least likely to attract media attention - President Bush signed into law a highway bill passed by his own party with more than 6,000 earmarked projects.

Bush signed the bill after sternly telling his party he'd veto any highway bill that spent more than $256 billion. He promptly "adjusted" that figure to $284 billion after complaints from party leaders. The bill Bush ultimately signed came at a price of $286 billion, $295 billion if you count a few provisions disguised to make the bill look cheaper than it actually is. Not exactly holding the line.

The Republican Party's wholesale abandonment of limited government principles has been on display since President Bush took office. Government spending under the GOP's reign has soared to historic highs, any way you want to measure it. And in stark contrast to President Reagan - or even the president's own father-President Bush refuses to rein in spending. He hasn't used his veto a single time since taking office - the longest such streak in U.S. history.

What continues to amaze, however, is the sheer arrogance and hubris with which the Republicans have chosen to govern. As Congressman Jeff Flake - one of the few principled Republicans in Washington - told the Washington Post, "Republicans don't even pretend anymore."

Consider that highway bill. The bill calls for nearly half a billion dollars to build two bridges in Alaska. One will connect the Alaskan mainland with a tiny island called Gravina (population: 50). It will cost U.S. taxpayers $230 million. In fact, when it comes to pork barrel politics, Alaska is the new West Virginia. That's because Alaska Rep.Don Young chairs the transportation committee. The transportation bill is named after Young's wife. The second bridge the bill appropriates money for - another $230 million - will be called "Don Young Way."

Robert Byrd would be proud.

You'd think that a Republican like Young would at least be embarrassed about all of this. He isn't. He's shameless. Upon hearing that only one other lawmaker in the entire Congress had outdone him in securing pork barrel projects, Young told the New York Times, "I'd like to be a little oinker, myself. If he's the chief porker, I'm upset."

Consider the case of Sen. Tom Coburn, another of the few in Congress willing to stand up to unrestrained spending. After a six-year career fighting waste in the House, Coburn won election to the Senate, and began putting administrative holds on his colleagues' wasteful projects. That didn't sit well with his fellow Republicans. Coburn's own party soon filed an ethics complaint against him.

His transgression? Coburn continues his medical practice in Oklahoma in addition to his duties as a U.S. senator. That apparently, is a violation of Senate ethics. Diverting millions of taxpayer dollars to pet projects that bear one's name and help one get reelected is not an ethical violation, but practicing medicine is. The chairman of the Senate Ethics Committee who will hear Coburn's complaint is Mississippi Sen. Trent Lott. Lott recently told Roll Call that after 30 years as a U.S. senator, he has learned how to work around pesky do-gooders like Coburn. "I fold [pork projects] into bills where you can't find them," Lott boasted. "I've been around here long enough to know how to bury it."

But perhaps the single member of Congress most afflicted with arrogance-of-power syndrome is Virginia Rep. Tom Davis. Davis headed up the GOP's campaign to retain control of the House in 2004, and today chairs the House Government Reform Committee. Earlier this spring, it was Davis' committee that began investigating the use of steroids in Major League Baseball. Of course, Congress has no constitutional authority to tell a private organization what its rules ought to be. No matter. When MLB asked Davis what jurisdiction he had to hold hearings, Davis sent a letter in reply asserting that his committee has jurisdiction "at any time, over any matter." Any time, any matter. So much for limited government. And this from the chair of the committee in charge of keeping government in check!

Davis later threatened sanctions against MLB if it allowed an ownership group, in which billionaire leftist George Soros held a minority stake, to purchase the Washington Nationals - a stunning, possibly illegal threat to impose legal sanctions against a private organization for doing business with someone Davis opposes politically. Just last month, Davis stuck a provision into a funding bill that would prohibit development of a housing complex in his home district. The congressman told Washington Post columnist Marc Fisher he feared "urban kind of people" moving into his district. This is exactly the kind of federal government edict over local affairs Republicans are supposed to oppose.

Local officials told Fisher that Davis has said privately he fears too much development in his district will attract too many Democrats, which could one day imperil his reelection.

Republicans swept into office in 1994 on a radical platform promising to dramatically scale back the federal government, bring accountability to Capitol Hill, and put a check on the power and arrogance that runs rampant in Washington. Today, they embody that power and arrogance.

If you'll remember, it was Hillary Clinton's plan for universal health care that inspired much of the backlash that put the Republicans in power. Today, the leader of the Republican revolution - Newt Gingrich - has publicly aligned himself with Hillary Clinton to call for a larger government role in health care. That's about as apt a metaphor for what's happened to the "Republican Revolution" as any.


----------



## arctic plainsman (Aug 21, 2005)

You don't know the half of it!!!!!

Look up Senator John McCain's website on pork. Alaska will horrify you. The American taxpayer, (you,) pay for sea lion research, cultural centers, monuments, brass name plates, and all kinds of other un believable stuff that you guys in Dakota, Ohio, Florida, and other TAX PAYING STATES, THAT YOU JUST SHOULDN'T!!

I gotta get outta here and get some work done, but come on fellas, write your legislators, and tell them they have to cut out the pork to places like Alaska.


----------



## Robert A. Langager (Feb 22, 2002)

Very interesting Bobm. You the man!


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Robert its frustrating stuff thats for sure. I've been trying to leave this alone it drives me so nuts. :lol: I would be better off if I left myself uninformed.....

By the way that article came off of the Fox news site....


----------



## Robert A. Langager (Feb 22, 2002)

Bobm said:


> By the way that article came off of the Fox news site....


That, within itself, is unbelievable!


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

If you read them you might find they actually are pretty balanced. They get on republicans all the time, especially when they spend like Democrats :lol: :lol:


----------



## Squeeker (Apr 1, 2004)

Thanks for the article. I actually feel a little better about our shameless Sponsorship scandal up here in Canada. Misery loves company...


----------



## BigDaddy (Mar 4, 2002)

> Republicans swept into office in 1994 on a radical platform promising to dramatically scale back the federal government, bring accountability to Capitol Hill, and put a check on the power and arrogance that runs rampant in Washington. Today, they embody that power and arrogance.


I see that arrogance of power every day of the ND legislature during the session, too. Don't get me wrong, the Democrats would be just as arrogant if they had both house of the legislature and the executive branch.

This abuse of power is exactly why control of both houses of Congress and the executive branch is simply not good government, regardless of whether it is at the federal or state level.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

It want do any good to complain to my democrat senators in North Dakota, that just looks partisan. I am going to rag on a couple of my favorite out of state republicans that I have given money to. I'm ashamed that I have been so busy I haven't paid better attention to some of these things. Thanks for the heads up Bob.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

> This abuse of power is exactly why control of both houses of Congress and the executive branch is simply not good government, regardless of whether it is at the federal or state level.


I agree and although it seems pointless I'm voting libertarian from now on. I might as well go with my heart 

Although John Linders (R Ga )Fair tax plan is a good idea for all of us


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I hope I can talk you out of that Bob. I think we have to vote for someone who has a chance. Don't forget it was Ross (Big Ears) Perot that put Bill Clinton in office with less than 50% of the vote. Democrats don't want to admit that he pulled nearly all his votes from Bush senior, but do you notice how fast the respond to the reverend (and I use the term loosely) Jesse Jackson when he talks about running.

The only prayer the democrats have next election is if they can split the conservative vote.

Reserve your heart for your family and friends, and let the politicians face cold hard logic.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

When the republicans start actaully doing what they claimed they would do, less spending, smaller government, ect. They will get my vote. So far it appears they lied to all of us. I'd expect this from Democrats and I know in the same position they would be much worse, but its kind of like a child molesting priest when your represent yourself as one thing and do another,dispicable. The Republicans need a serious spanking, the only thing they are doing well is war on terrorism, on every other issue the have done the opposite of what we elected them for. 
So what are our choices
A) Republicans spending like Liberal democrats
b) Democrats spending like liberal democrats and appeasing terrorists
c ) libertarians (who have no chance of getting elected) that are going to ACTUALLY give us a smaller less intrusive govt. but are also terrorist appeasers.
NOT MUCH OF A CHOICE
Unfortunately things will have to get a lot worse in this country before the public will wake up, 90% of the people reading this post have never talked to their congressman. That congressman is making decisions that will affect them for the rest of their lives. We are a country of apathetic political idiots, with a government that knows it and takes advantage of it daily at our expense. Our media is infested with anti capitalist leftists with an anti American bias. The situation worries me, but Plainsman at our age I doubt we will ever see any change. The republicans have their chance and they are blowing it.


----------



## deacon (Sep 12, 2003)

It is really sad and very true, politicians are our country's biggest criminals. Thank god they don't know who any of us are or our tax returns would be audited.

We all work so hard for the little money we make and the politcians waste billions of dollars like it is a ten spot to you and me. I wish we could change things. Yes I know get involved but it seams everyone that gets involved and succeeds eventually gives into the greed.

The rest of us just need to keep funding these bastards projects and independently wealthy life styles.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

I found this interesting good old smaller govt Republicans uke:

http://watchingwashington.blogspot.com/

*A $500,000 ALASKAN KING SALMON -- AND GUESS WHO PAID FOR IT?*
You've heard about this one, haven't you? The taxpayers of the United States have forked over $500,000 to paint a giant Alaskan King Salmon on the side of an Alaskan Airlines Boeing 737. This money came from a $20 million grant of taxpayer's money to a marketing board in Alaska to promote Alaskan fish. The money was requested by Alaska's *Republican Senator Ted Stephens.* :eyeroll: You might be interested in knowing that Ted Stephen's son is the chairman of the board of the marketing board that got the money and spent it on this fish painting.

If the average tax burden in this country is $5000 per household (and that's just a guess) then this is the total federal tax payments of about 100 American households. Every one of these households has needs. Every one of these households has dreams. Senator Ted Stephens has essentially told these households -- every one of them -- that he believes that it was more important for the federal government to seize their $5000 and spend it painting a fish on an airplane than it was for them to use it for medical expenses, education, job training, to pay off bills, to pay the down payment on a new home, or just to enjoy a nice family vacation. This is totally and completely unconscionable. It should be punishable as a crime.* Remember, please, that embattled House Majority Leader Tom Delay said that there is no fat in the federal budget*. So ... he doesn't think that money appropriated to paint a fish on an airplane is fat? :******: :******: uke:

Just how long are we going to let these people in congress get away with these outrages? How many similar spending measures /don't/ we know about?


----------



## arctic plainsman (Aug 21, 2005)

If it makes a difference, even most of us Alaskans don't favor that kind of foolish spending. Alaska is the absolute poster child for pork barrel spending, just look at Senator John Mccaine's website for some more horrifying examples.

I think I've had enough of the idea that govt. is there to provide,........transportation (Amtrack,) disaster response, (Katrina,) sea food marketing, (see above,) and a host of other things not in the constitution, and not their responsibility. I wish our federal representitives would focus on their mandated and vital responsibilities, and leave the rest to others to sort out.


----------

