Posted on 02/10/2006 1:27:57 PM PST by neverdem
Sen. McCain and I are serious about getting spending under control.
John McCain and I recently delivered a letter to our colleagues announcing our intention to challenge every individual earmark on the floor of the Senate. Many senators, staff and reporters have asked if we are serious. The answer is yes.
I am convinced that forcing hundreds or, if necessary, thousands of votes to strike individual earmarks is the only way to produce meaningful results for American taxpayers. Bringing the Senate to a standstill for as long as it takes would be a small price to pay for shutting down what Jack Abramoff described as Congress's "earmark favor factory." The battle against pork is crucial. Pork is the root cause of the unholy relationship between some members of Congress, lobbyists and donors. Inside Congress, the pork process is effectively a black market economy: Thousands of instances exist where appropriations are leveraged for fundraising dollars or political capital. It is delusional to claim Congress can redeem its relationship with K Street without eliminating earmarks. The problem is not lobbyists. The problem is us.
Those who argue that fighting pork distracts members from the more costly challenge of entitlement reform don't understand human nature. Earmarks are a gateway drug on the road to the spending addiction. One day an otherwise frugal member votes for pork, the next day he or she votes for a bloated spending bill or entitlement expansion: A "no" vote might cut off their access to earmarks.
The most vocal opponents to a zero-tolerance approach toward pork are, sadly, the bipartisan leaders of the House and Senate. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, to his credit, has issued only a mild defense of earmarking...
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
Of course. He's the "maverick".
(never mind the fact that Coburn is probably the most independent-minded Senator of them all; all McCain ever does is triangulate)
as long as McCain pledges to serve only 1 term and lets Coburn decide on judicial picks...
Bravo, Senator Coburn, bravo!
Regards, Ivan
But given that mandatory spending has rocketed sky-high with Bush's Medicare boondoggle, that makes it all the more imperative to get discretionary spending under control, especially since the debt isn't getting any smaller over time.
This of course is all aside from the fact that pork creates problems far beyond the number of dollars wasted.
Hmmmm...I really was considering from 1962, the data I referred to.
I wouldn't doubt the figures, but you would have to treat that as an aberration. By '36, we were deep in the throes of the recession, and probably in the midst of the CCC and WPA programs. (Just going on memory, I'm not sure)
There was literally no source of money except the mint.
I have the feeling that a lot of what used to be discretionary is now defined as mandatory.
Table 10 shows mandatory spending total at 10.7 percent, a high yes, but nearly matched in '81 and at 10.4 in 92. Skyrocketed it hasn't.
Mandatory spending will have to be cut...Bush tried to reform SS..but this was was about discretionary spending.
As far as the pork, it all goes back into the economy one way or another. The power is in directing where it goes, and I would rather have the Republicans doing it than the Dems. I, probably like you, would like to see overall spending cut....
Medicare has certainly spiked according to your table, and is likely to continue doing so. And this all ties in to the discussion on discretionary spending, because the more that gets taken up by mandatory spending, the more urgent it is that discretionary spending get reined in.
As far as the pork, it all goes back into the economy one way or another. The power is in directing where it goes, and I would rather have the Republicans doing it than the Dems.
It needs to be done away with. It corrupts the system beyond recognition regardless of who's in charge. It turns Republicans into Democrats. It has to go - period.
I'm sure a lot of congressmen feel that way...I am no expert, I do not know if the definition one way or the other has changed. I wouldn't think so though.
In a democracy, how do you limit the ability of a citizen, business, or special interest group to lobby their Congressman, without favoring some other form of influence. Bribery is already illegal, but just how, if you are businessman, are you supposed to get a Senator's attention without lobbyists?
You think people would have learned when McCain tied the Republican's hands with his CFR because of "concerns", and gave the Dems the opportunity to get unlimited funding through 527's.
This whole lobby scandal is because the Republicans have been too effective in directing pork to their interests.
Pork does go right back into the economy. Even money the bureaucracy skims gets spent somewhere. It is not like it evaporates.
Bush is doing exactly what should be done...cut taxes and force the Congress to deal with a deficit. It is all he can do. They spend the money. Personally, I do my best to vote the big spenders in the Republican party out in the primaries.
That's the businessman's problem, not mine. And in any case, pork isn't about businessmen bribing (or "influencing") politicians; it's about politicians bribing voters. That's the real crime that's going on here.
But it gets them re-elected...if you are for democracy, you have to put up with the damn politics.
Thanks for the interesting debate..
Later
When people's votes are being sold to the highest bidder, "democracy" becomes a meaningless term.
Ok...it's getting a little late, but I will bite.
Yes, we live in a Republic...based on democracy. I agree that pure democracy is not sustainable. However, to ensure responsive government, you have to have some way to approach "leaders" beyond the ballot box.
The cure is a purely libertarian federal government that does nothing more than collect tariffs, provide for the defense of the nation, and regulate interstate commerce (very conservatively defined.)
That will not happen in my lifetime IMHO, but it might one day. The direction at this point in our history is to apply steady downward pressure on revenue while the SC realigns to a more basic view of the Constitution, therefore allowing a "reigning in" of federal power abuses and therefore expenditures.
Overspending ultimately is self limiting...even for the US. Sooner or later the money runs out and people suffer terribly. Our spending and size of government is now within acceptable limits, the trick is to maintain and shrink the overall reach of government.
I don't think that beating up Republicans over pork helps towards the ultimate goal of throttling big government. The K Street project was to wean lobbying firms away from the Dems...that is not something to be ashamed of.
Republicans have been winning the lobbying battle, and Abramhoff is just an excuse to change the rules. I don't like it. It took DeLay a long time to get republicans to this point.
Money=politics=freespeech
Don't forget the christians are evil branch.
Yeah, I remember when the veto was outlawed.
GWB gave Congress the green light to spend as much money as they wanted with his "new tone in Washington" philosophy.
Send all your money to me. It will get back into the economy one way or another, and I 'll spend it more wisely than Congress. I promise.
Of course, but we're faced with a bit of a chicken/egg problem. As long as pork is allowed to fester, Congressmen will mostly not be responsive to pressure to reduce the size of government, or take any other meaningful steps that will get things back on the right track. They know that as long as they keep the gravy train running, they don't have to care what anyone else has to say concerning these subjects, because they know they have enough voters bought and paid for, to keep themselves in power.
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.