Posted on 03/15/2022 7:50:52 AM PDT by Red Badger
Basically nobody would support funding these things if they were put to a vote on their own.
In a sad commentary on the state of America’s priorities, the $1.5+ trillion spending legislation passed by Congress last week barely made headlines. Little attention was paid to the 2,700-page spending bill or the fact that it was released at 2:30 a.m. on the day of the vote, meaning most members of Congress voted on it blindly without even having skimmed the legislation.
In a less dysfunctional country, this would be an outrage. Yet there’s even more scandal lurking beneath the surface-level incompetence of our elected officials.
The latest budget bill features an astounding 4,000 “earmarks,” pet spending items slipped into the fine print that fund projects and handouts to special interests in members’ home districts. The money funneled to earmarks totals a whopping $10 billion. (To put that number in context, it’s roughly one-fifth what the federal government spent on COVID-19 vaccine and treatment development.)
The full list of earmarks is 367 pages long. It’s far too long for most journalists—let alone an average American who doesn’t follow these things for a living—to actually go through in detail. However, a look at a few highlights gives you an idea about the kinds of things our money is spent on through this corrupt process.
Here are 10 of the most absurd earmarks in the latest spending legislation.
*****************************************************************************
$995,000 for a project on “soil health” at New Mexico State University, requested by Senators Martin Heinrich and Ben Ray Luján of New Mexico.
$1.5 million for “tree restoration” in Ohio, requested by Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio.
$1 million for the “Multicultural Innovation Center” at the Rhode Island Black Business Association, requested by Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island.
$60 million to “renovate” the research facilities at the University of South Alabama College of Medicine, requested by Senator Richard Shelby of Alabama.
$160,000 to study the “sustainability” of astronaut food at Lincoln University in Pennsylvania, requested by Senator Bob Casey of Pennsylvania.
$109,000 for facility improvements to a local arts center, requested by Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont.
$200,000 to provide tech support for women and minority-owned businesses via the Vermont Center for Women & Enterprise, requested by Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont.
$2 million for a pilot program to try an electric-vehicle-based ferry system in Alaska, requested by Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska.
$600,000 for the YMCA of Southern Arizona, requested by Congresswoman Ann Kirkpatrick of Arizona.
$110,000 for a food truck and refrigerated van for the Spanish American Center in Massachusetts, requested by Congressman Jim McGovern of Massachusetts.
*****************************************************************************
As you can see, these are pet projects and crony handouts for special interests, not essential items that require federal funding. Out of all 4,000+ earmarks, few seem like things that need to be funded by taxpayers at all—let alone at the federal level.
Can anyone explain why a Virginia taxpayer like me should have to pay for Alaska’s electric ferry experiment? Or why a Californian should have to pay for Spanish food in Massachusetts or tree restoration in Ohio?
I’d hold my breath waiting for a good answer, but then I’d probably pass out. Basically nobody would support funding these things if they were put to a vote on their own, or even as a part of smaller legislation that could be properly scrutinized. That’s why they aren’t, and why earmarks are so inherently corrupt.
The famed economist Frédéric Bastiat once deemed the government “the great fictitious entity by which everyone seeks to live at the expense of everyone else.” And though you couldn’t tell from the way Congress behaves, there is no blank check from which the federal government can draw.
When our elected officials funnel billions of taxpayer dollars to their corrupt handouts, that money must, directly or indirectly, come out of our pockets. Americans shouldn’t stand for a political class that wants to live at our expense—or more precisely, since the federal government is more than $30 trillion in debt, living at the expense of future generations.
We need an earmark to develop a surgical procedure to connect the rectums of members of Congress to their mouths so literal s_ _ _t can come out of their mouths. Allott $10 million for that.
A couple of the projects seem reasonable. However, virtually all of them should be funded out of state/local tax revenues. Why the rest of US taxpayers should foot the bill makes little sense to me.
We need to take back control of the US Government from the DC UniParty, the Deep State and the Communist/Socialist straphangers.
I’m surprised this one made the list: “$60 million to “renovate” the research facilities at the University of South Alabama College of Medicine”
The others are ridiculous pork make-work stupid projects. While I agree it should not be in the purview of the federal government, at least this one at least will do something useful.
None of that should be the recipient of Federal tax dollars. None of that is the intended purview of the Federal government.
(With the possible exception of the astronaut food)
Put a locomotive on a barge and go for it. Electric propeller.
“$1.5 million for “tree restoration” in Ohio, requested by Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio.”
None of that, of course, will EVER reach ‘tree restortion” (whatever that is) ...it WILL reach his pocket, one way or another
St. Patrick drove the snakes out of Ireland.
Apparently, they moved to Washington DC.
Maxine’s 2022 Desk Calendar, 14 March 2022
All of the earmarks woven into the different bills so as to hide them from the average person looking at the overall bill
Interesting that the author didn’t list the political party of each requester. Here ya go:
1. $995,000, Martin Heinrich, RAT and Ben Ray Luján, RAT.
2. $1.5 million, Sherrod Brown, RAT.
3. $1 million, Jack Reed, RAT.
4. $60 million, Richard Shelby, Repub.
5. $160,000, Bob Casey, RAT.
6. $109,000, Patrick Leahy, RAT.
7. $200,000, Bernie Sanders, RAT.
8. $2 million, Lisa Murkowski, Repub.
9. $600,000, Ann Kirkpatrick, RAT.
10. $110,000, Jim McGovern, RAT.
Hmmm... 2 Repubs and 8 RATS. Says a lot, especially considering these are mostly state oriented spending and the Congress should have nothing to do with it.
Why are we focused on $10B and not on the 149 times larger amount $1.49T in the rest of that bill?
8 demonKKKrats and 2 assistant demonKKKrats.
Pitiful.
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.