I assume you've never flown into, or out of, Charleston, WV...
Posted on 10/29/2005 11:26:41 PM PDT by Tom87
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."
Carolyn
You've never been to NC, have you? They may have some breezes, like us, but they don't have to dodge iceburgs. Do you really think it will be easier to drive across a high level bridge in the wind and icy snow?
I beleive their underlying premise is that an airport exists on the island, which needs better access. IMHO, it would be better planning, AND EXPENSE, to look for a mainland site.
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I do not have a better friend than my colleague from Oklahoma, but it does not mean we always agree with each other. I have had a policy in voting for amendments on bills that I have adhered to for a long time, and it is if a Senator has a bill or an amendment that takes authority from an elected official and places it in the hands of an unelected bureaucrat and it does not save money, then I think it is not good policy. Unfortunately, I think that is what this does.My good friend Senator Coburn and I have talked about this. I know it is a difficult thing for a lot of people to understand. Many people are watching this. I happen to be the person with the No. 1 most conservative rating in the Senate and yet I am not about to put myself in a position where I am going to take authority away from someone who has to stand for election in a particular State and give it to someone who does not have to stand for election, period.
I do not think that is a good idea. If it were something that saved money, I would have a different position on it, but in that respect I will oppose this. ...
Mr. COBURN. I would say to my friend, whom I love dearly as a friend and a brother, this amendment is about changing the priorities in this country. We can reject that or we can accept it. I gave a speech this morning about the rumble that is out there in this country. We need to listen to that rumble. The rumble is the American people want us to start doing a better job of prioritizing how we spend money. I respect his position on this. I have no ill feelings that he will oppose me on this amendment.
This is an amendment that is good for the country. ...
Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, the Senator from Oklahoma who has just spoken, who is the author of this amendment, has indicated we need to be making sacrifices. I do not think anyone in the State of Alaska feels we should not be contributing, but we do not feel in the State of Alaska that it should be coming entirely from one State. This amendment puts the sacrifice on one State.
I urge rejection of this amendment. ...
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I would add to my colleague's comment to say this concept is a concept that every State should think about because if it can be done on a bridge, why not do it on any type of event where a Senator would like to have money for their State, but they say take it from another State because they do not need it. I made a statement earlier today that in my 37 years I have never seen this. I have never seen a request that money for a disaster be taken solely from a project in one State to help a disaster in other States.
We are a disaster-prone State. We have more disasters than any other State in the Union. Remember our 1964 earthquake. We have tsunamis. We have all types of disasters. But we have never tried to take moneys from other States to meet our costs.
I urge the Senate not to start this process.
I yield back the time.
Mr. BOND. I ask for the yeas and nays. ...
YEAS--15 Allard Allen Bayh Burr Coburn Conrad DeMint DeWine Feingold Graham Kyl Landrieu Sessions Sununu Vitter NOT VOTING--3 Corzine McCain SchumerRoll Call Vote 00262 | On the Amendment S.Amdt. 2165 | Oct 20, 2005Mash here -> 109th Congress - Senate - October 20, 2005
Navigate to: 9 . TRANSPORTATION, TREASURY, THE JUDICIARY, HOUSING ...
From now on, I'm voting for divided government.
My senator, and damn proud of him. He may impose voluntary term limits on himself, like he did in the House, but he doesn't need to worry about being reelected here in Oklahoma.
This IS truly disgusting.
The only way to get this one fixed is to stop sending money all the way to DC just so they can devalue it and send a portion back to the states. That's socialism right there.
If your state can't support the people in it, then your state and citizens should deal with it, period.
That's why gridlock is the best we can hope for.
Somebody yesterday made the observation that instead of that Alaskan Bridge To Nowhere, Uncle Sugar could instead buy each of the inhabitants of that island their own Lear Jet and still come out ahead!
You got that right.
It really boils my pot when slobs on welfare get to vote on raising property taxes to pay for schools, bike trails and other socialist garbage.
RE: The shame of the Alaskans - if I recall correctly most ALASKANS don't see the point of the bridge. What Stevens is doing is blatant pandering. Supposedly, the bridge will be built high enough to allow cruise ships to go under it and the bridge will somehow encourage investment - it seems to me that the building on the MAINLAND would be the better investment. This is an example of a congressional boondoggle at its finest.
But they do provide so much entertainment.
The Ketichikan Aiprort is located on Gravina island. Ketichikan and a couple of smaller villages are on the mainland peninsula. The bridge isn't intended to give the island residents easier access to the mainland, it is to give the peninsula's residents access to the airport.
It appears the terrain on the peninsula is too mountainous for an airport.
It appears that there is no land route to the entire peninsula, the only way to get there is by ferry.
Disgraceful.
I think the Capitol building is cursed.
Can't confuse the people with the facts. So much nicer to keep shrieking about a bridge to nowhere without any facts at all.
bttt
I assume you've never flown into, or out of, Charleston, WV...
U.S. NATIONAL DEBT CLOCK
The Outstanding Public Debt as of 30 Oct 2005 at 03:01:17 PM GMT is:
$8,021,937,159,120.05
The estimated population of the United States is 297,571,752
so each citizen's share of this debt is $26,957.99.
The National Debt has continued to increase an average of
$1.63 billion per day since September 30, 2004!
Man,...I like Walter Williams!!
...and tarring and feathering.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.