John Stossel: What Congress Did Is Disgusting

Creator's Syndicate ^ | October 26, 2005 | John Stossel

[RWR8189]

What Congress did is disgusting.

You heard what the Senate did to Tom Coburn's attempt to impose some sanity on spending.

How do they live with themselves?

Years ago, interviewing economist Walter Williams for a show ABC News called "Greed," I was perplexed when Williams said, "a thief is more moral than a congressman; when a thief steals your money, he doesn't demand you thank him."

That was silly hyperbole, I thought, but watching Congress spend, I see that I was naive and Williams was right.

When the Democrats held power, I confronted Sen. Robert Byrd about wasting our money on "Robert Byrd Highway"-type projects in West Virginia. His answer was as arrogant as he was: "I would think that the national media could rise above the temptation of being clever, decrepitarian critics who twaddlize, just as what you're doing right here."

"Twaddlizing?" I asked.

"Trivializing serious matters," he explained.

I persisted, "Is there no limit? Are you not at all embarrassed about how much you got?" Byrd glared at me in silence, and finally demanded, angrily, "Are you embarrassed when you think you're working for the good of the country? Does that embarrass you?"

The Republicans promised to change the culture. Democrats sold panic. "Don't vote for them! They're going to shrink government and take away your favorite programs!" They needn't have worried. The Republicans got elected, but if the Democrats' goal was to expand the government, they were the real winners.

Once Republicans were in power, they started spending money even faster than the Democrats did.

Big spender Ted Stevens responded to Coburn's good suggestion to kill a "Bridge to Nowhere" with a tantrum on the Senate floor: He threatened to resign and "be taken out of here on a stretcher."

Good! Sen. Stevens, please go. I'll even help carry the stretcher.

Unfortunately, Congress has an unwritten code: "Don't threaten the other congressmen's loot." The Senate reprimanded Coburn by voting 82 to 15 to save the Bridge to Nowhere.

The Ketchikan, Alaska, bridge is particularly egregious because it's a bridge to a nearly uninhabited island. Yet it will be monstrous -- higher than the Brooklyn Bridge and almost as long as the Golden Gate. Even some in Ketchikan laugh about it. One told us, "Short view is, I don't see a need for it. The long view ... I still don't see a need for it."

Last week, Alaska's other senator, Lisa Murkowski, said it would be "offensive" not to spend your money on her bridge. When she first became a senator, I asked her if Republicans believed in smaller government. She was unusually candid: "We want smaller government. But, boy, I sure want more highways and more stuff, whatever the stuff is."

I'll say. Alaska's pork projects spanned 67 pages. They get much more than other states. "Oh, you need to come up," she said. "You would realize it's not pork. It's all necessity ... People look at Alaska and say, 'Well, gee, they're getting all this money.' But we still have communities that are not tied in to sewer and water. There are certain basic things that you've got to have."

But my children shouldn't have to pay for them. If people want to live in remote areas of Alaska, why can't they pay for their own sewers and water, through state or local taxes, or better yet, through private businesses? Why should all Americans pay to run sewer lines through the vast, frozen spaces of Alaska? Because Alaska has no money?

Don't believe it. Alaska has so much money, it has no state income tax or sales tax. Instead, it gives its citizens money from something called the Alaska Permanent Fund.

Stevens, Murkowski and Don Young, who once told critics of the Bridge to Nowhere that they could "kiss his ear," are not unique. Republican politicians talk about limited government, but the longer they are in power, the more they vote to spend.

Spending your money, they want "more stuff."

©2005 JFS Productions, Inc. Distributed by Creators Syndicate

[RWR8189]

Tom Coburn is a true patriot.

We could use 50 more like him in Washington.

[peyton randolph]

I'd be delighted with a Senator Stossel as a start.

[flashbunny]

---Unfortunately, Congress has an unwritten code: "Don't threaten the other congressmen's loot." The Senate reprimanded Coburn by voting 82 to 15 to save the Bridge to Nowhere---

I will await the free republic "don't question your betters in office" contingent to tell us how lucky we are to all these great (R)epublicans in charge!

[Rumple4]

How many of the 15 is up for re-election in 2006 ? I'm not counting Mary Landrieu's vote since I think she wouldn't have voted for it if it hadn't had benefited her state. DeWine is up for re-election and I think this makes up for his betrayal earlier in the year.

[ajolympian2004]

Click here for more info at Amazon

[carumba]

Tax, tax, tax. Spend, spend, spend. Tax and spend. See the taxman tax. He is taxing us. We do not get to spend our money. Put the check in the mail.

[Brimack34]

"Once Republicans were in power, they started spending money even faster than the Democrats did." No they did not John!
It was 7 years before they spent like democrats. Let's get ot straight.

[flashbunny]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1508181/posts

Number of Pork Projects in Federal Spending Bills

2005 - 13,997
2004 - 10,656
2003 - 9,362
2002 - 8,341
2001 - 6,333
2000 - 4,326
1999 - 2,838
1998 - 2100
1997 - 1,596
1996 - 958
1995 - 1439

[Just Lori]

John Stossel: proof that you CAN recover from the disease of liberalism. Well I sent a note back to the RNC instead of a check. My itty bitty 2 cents doesn't mean much, but I told them what I thought anyway. These guys are forgetting about the voters who put them in office. We need to give them a few reminders.

[bobbyd]

Hey CONgress.......your fired

[LibertarianInExile]

"DeWine is up for re-election and I think this makes up for his betrayal earlier in the year."

I don't think it makes up for it at all. I think it is BECAUSE of his betrayal--and his son's subsequent spanking--that he is now running scared prior to the 2006 election. He wins that, he'll change his stripes back from pork hater to RINO faster than you can say McCain-Feingold.

[Rumple4]

Yeah but I don't think there's going to be any republican opposition for him, so it's DeWine or Hackett? Springer? Hagan?. Ohio had decades of Glenn and Metenbaum, DeWine and Voinovich might be as the best they can do here.

[ALWAYSWELDING]

The Pres. and the Pubs are going to have to be taught a lesson from the conservatives in this land. The GOP had better get their act straight.

I'm sick of paying taxes for these pork projects. This is the party of limited government or it's not. If they decide not, they're in hurting electoral shape.

The free market will bring in some politicians who will respect it again when the need is evident.

[LibertarianInExile]

I am not at all surprised there is no GOP opposition. But though it's a long time before next November, right now, I think it will be the Rat winning. Too many pissed-off locals won't carry water for DeRINO any more.

[Hank Rearden]

Anybody else tired of these useless parasites? The Republican Party can shove itself, from Big Government Bush (who happily signs any crap that hits his desk) on down.

Anybody who falls for their lies in '06 is dumber than a democRat.

[Razz Barry]

He must not drink the water in DC. Democrats put something in the water that makes people want to waste money that is not theirs. Or 99.9% of them were lying just to get into office.

[Anthem]

I will await the free republic "don't question your betters in office" contingent to tell us how lucky we are to all these great (R)epublicans in charge!

They never show up on threads like this -- too many inconvenient facts.

[LibWhacker]

Are you embarrassed when you think you're working for the good of the country?

Oh, THAT's what he was doing when he joined the Klan!

[goonie4life9]

Having lived in Ketchikan for a while, I can offer a little insight. First, without arguing whether the bridge is good or bad, the reason the bridge is so expensive is it has to be built so as to allow cruise ships to pass underneath it (a simple bridge would not due). With the timber industry (in Ketchikan, thanks to enviro-whackos) gone, and the fishing industry declining, tourism via cruise ships (a community- town and borough- of 13,000 gets 900,000 to 1,000,000 tourists on cruise ships every June through August) is what is keeping the town alive.
I have to say, a lot of the people up there do not always have the best idea of what is good for the long term. I agree pork spending is out of control, but these same people who say the bridge is worthless just voted down a proposition to expand the waterfront (to be fair, only the people within the city limits voted- the city has approx. 8,000 residents (and maybe 30% voted- but hey, if you are not going to vote, you sort of loser the right to bitch), out of the 13,000 that live in the Ketchikan-Gateway Borough. People who live in the borough would also be affected by expanding the waterfront), with the money for it coming solely from a $6 dollar per passenger port fee for all incoming cruise ships.
Further, the part of Revilla Island Ketchikan is on can not hold many more homes or people. Opening up Gravina island for sustained, "mass" living (a few people already live there, but it is not feasible to have a mass migration because the only way to get to downtown Ketchikan is via a water taxi, or one's own boat) is a viable option for bringing more revenue to the area, thus helping to sustain Ketchikan. The bridge is not necessarily the wisest choice, but calling it a "bridge to nowhere" is failing to recognize the importance (for sustaining the area) of expanding to Gravina. That said, clearly, wiser decisions could have been made, but something needs to be done. I wish the people and businesses could have made the decision (i.e., the high priced bridge is a clear example of governmental ineffectiveness). However, when given the chance, the people and businesses chose to ignore the problem, and so the government (in its every growing nanny stateness) decided to step in and make the complete decision for them.
In conclusion, I do not agree with the theatrics of Ted Stevens nor the refusal of Congress to cut their pork to help people who need immediate help, but I think it is necessary to have all the facts out in the open before labeling something completely useless. After all, standing by the facts (and pointing out and accepting the facts) is what separates conservatives from the deceit and knee-jerked ness that has become liberalism.

[goonie4life9]

I forgot to mention that expanding the waterfront would allow more cruise ships to dock (i.e., on a busy day, 5 or more cruise ships would be in Ketchikan. If they are all very large, at most three could dock, with the other two (or more) having to anchor in the channel, whch makes getting passengers to Ketchikan difficult. This does not make the passengers or cruise companies happy). Some cruise companies were threatening to bypass Ketchikan for other places that could handle the load. Losing this revenue would be devastating. On the other side, expanding the dock would allow even more than 6 cruise ships to be docked (i.e., not anchored in the channel) in Ketchikan (while I was there, the most cruise ships I ever saw at one time in one day is 6- my girlfriend tells me that is usually the most Ketchikan will get in one day). This would not only sustain current revenue, but increase it, without higher taxes (What a novel idea! I wish Washington state would realize there are more ways to get revenue than simply raising the taxes- but I guess that would be counterintuitive to the socialists "government is the provider of all" mentality).