Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Unwanted $336,000 appropriated by Congress
Outsports Discussion Board > Outsports > Politics & Religion
maxallen
A Republican Congressman from Tulsa recently took credit for securing $336,000 in a massive year-end spending bill, to study the water storage systems at two Northeast Oklahoma lakes. But it seems that funding for this project was secured, and the study begun, in 2003.

It would be funny if it weren't so sad and true.

Most disturbing is the quote at the very end of the article: "It happens quite often."

[ December 07, 2004, 07:04 AM: Message edited by: maxallen ]
RazorbackTX
Dear GOP,

Thank you for runaway spending, the biggest government ever and the largest deficits on record.

Love,
Red States
bobby78751
These people call themselves conservatives? Bring on a national bankruptcy!!!!
aquaman
QUOTE
bobby78751:
These people call themselves conservatives? Bring on a national bankruptcy!!!!
Not till we borrow a trillion or more so we can fund private SS accounts. Nothing like digging deeper and deeper.
William1865
While it's wonderful to see Democrats so outraged over unrestrained federal spending (and we all know, of course, that ALL of this spending is by Republicans, and that Democrats would never, ever, not in a billion years, waste a penny of taxpayer funds on a frivolous or undeserving project), this isn't really a matter of conservative vs. liberal. It's a matter of people in power abusing it. This is a general reason why government should be kept as small as possible - the people in power, be it Democrat or Republican, are going to screw over taxpayers no matter what, so the goal should be to give them as few chances as possible to do so.


Here is analysis from Heritage, which I'm sure will be criticized as unreliable because it's a conservative group, and this criticism will come from the very people who claim "conservatives" in Congress aren't REALLY conservative because they're spending so much money. But whatever...
Heritage Foundation on spending

And some actual projects...

Pork Spending
RazorbackTX
QUOTE
William1865:
... This is a general reason why government should be kept as small as possible - ....
Dear GOP,

You still control the White House, the House and the Senate. You are the party of small government, right? Thanks for the biggest government ever.

Love,
Red ink red states
maxallen
I didn't mean the original post to be an attack on Republican spending, but rather the unchecked nature of the money that Congress is doling out. I absolutely agree with William's comments; it's a problem on both sides.

The towns that rely on these lakes for their water supply nearly had a disaster a few summers ago when one of the lakes virtually dried up. So I don't think the study mentioned in the article is frivolous or undeserving, but it was already funded and already underway, and Congress -- this Congressman in particular -- doesn't care enought about a mere $336,000 to check into the actual need for it.

It's all about getting re-elected. Keep your constituents happy by spending in your own backyard, whatever it takes. But in this case, his flagrant free-spending of $336,000 could work against him (and rightfully so).
hockeyTom
They don't care Raze. Isn't it about time for yet another multi- hundred billion dollar tax cut for the wealthy again? I mean Christmas is approaching and all. wink
PhillyFan
Dear US Gov't,

Please send Pork project money to:

PF
One Eagle way
Phx, AZ

Bankruptcy approaches...

Love,

True american patriot
RazorbackTX
Dear PF,

Your pork project money is being held in an escrow account at Halliburton. Please contact them, Im sure they would be happy to get it to you right away.

Hugs,
Razorbacktx
PhillyFan
Dear Haliburton,

Could you please release the first round of funds from the pork barrel escrow account? Recently, I put in a billing for the first portion at 225.95 per hour. Accumulated totals of this billing plus fees come to 347,982.75.

Thanks for your understanding.

Love,

PF
William1865
QUOTE
RazorbackTX:
QUOTE
William1865:
... This is a general reason why government should be kept as small as possible - ....
Dear GOP,

You still control the White House, the House and the Senate. You are the party of small government, right? Thanks for the biggest government ever.

Love,
Red ink red states
For those not familiar with all this, Raze takes a very narrow-minded approach to things - i.e. because I'm a Republican I, in Raze's mind, fully and automatically support anything and everything any and all Republicans ever do. This philosophy is much simpler, and thus presumably more to Raze's liking, than considering the fact that some, if not most, members of any given political party are likely to disagree with one or even several of a party's stands on issues, but still feel that in the broad scope of things their chosen party is the best choice out of all available options.

As a Republican, I am tremendously disappointed in people from my party who do in fact claim to support "smaller government" and yet do little to stop and even aid/abet the worrisome growth of federal spending. I support organizations like Cato Institute and ATR that are trying to counter this impulse. I suppose we all do what we can. To a great extent this is somewhat out of my hands. And besides, if Republicans weren't spending money like a bunch of drunken sailors, what would my fellow Republicans and I have to bitch about? (Yes, I know, I could bitch about the whole gay marriage thing, and most if not all of my Republican friends would agree with me, but that's just not as much fun to bitch about.)
PhillyFan
With Raze coming from Ark/TX.. we'd not expect a big thinker.. unless it was huntin for squirrels, possum.. or coons... no GJ.. not those coons
gmginsfo
Good posts, William, and thanks for the informative links. Review of what some call pork reveals it isn't pork at all, but valid spending for projects simply incapable of being funded by less-wealthy localities. E.g., swimming pools in towns too poor to afford them. That doesn't sound like pork to me, but something that serves the whole community in a positive way. Conversely, too many of the so-called "studies" funded reek, splatter and burn of pork. BOTH parties are guilty of funding these and BOTH need to eliminate them.

[ December 07, 2004, 11:45 AM: Message edited by: gmginsfo ]
hockeyTom
On that we can agree.
RazorbackTX
QUOTE
PhillyFan:
With Raze coming from Ark/TX.. we'd not expect a big thinker.. unless it was huntin for squirrels, possum.. or coons... no GJ.. not those coons
Not into hunting, Elly May didnt like me going after her critters.
PhillyFan
hmmm...

Now we know the following things about Raze,

1. Hick (school)
2. Overalls (weekends)
3. Trailers (home)
4. Queen (huntin)
5. Non-US Citizen (poke fan)

How many teeth do you have left?

Tally-burton-ho ho ho
William1865
QUOTE
RazorbackTX:
QUOTE
PhillyFan:
With Raze coming from Ark/TX.. we'd not expect a big thinker.. unless it was huntin for squirrels, possum.. or coons... no GJ.. not those coons
Not into hunting, Elly May didnt like me going after her critters.
Wow, that's actually pretty funny.
fantomas
QUOTE
Originally quoth \"gmginsfo:
BOTH parties are guilty....
But only one bills itself as the party of "fiscal responsibility" and "small government," and only one has its acolytes and adherents repeating this mantra despite all evidence to the contrary....

"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time."--Abraham Lincoln, 16th President of the United States of America
CPT_Doom
QUOTE
This philosophy is much simpler, and thus presumably more to Raze's liking, than considering the fact that some, if not most, members of any given political party are likely to disagree with one or even several of a party's stands on issues, but still feel that in the broad scope of things their chosen party is the best choice out of all available options.
Which is why none of the resident "conservatives" on this board talk about "all lefties" or otherwise describe those who are (figuratively at least) across the aisle in monolithic terms.

More importantly, let us remember it was a Democratic administration, and a Democratic Congress, that got us the last fiscally responsible tax and spending system on the Hill. As Sen. Kerry himself pointed out, the key phrase during the 90s was "pay as you go" - no new or revised spending unless and until there was a means to pay for it.

Unfortunately, the reckless behavior of this administration, and the Congress that is supposed to keep it in check (and that Congress has both parties in it, don't get me wrong), all the good work done during the Clinton years is being slowly decimated. The tax code is being riddled with more loopholes to allow the rich to avoid paying taxes, along with irresponsible tax cuts and credits, which will all severely limit the government's ability to maintain its promises and its regulation of key sectors of our society.

I mean, do we really want a country without OSHA? Do we really want no enforcement of environmental laws? What about the FDA - should it be just a rubber stamp for the pharma industry?

In the 1980s, when we last faced a huge deficit crisis, one of the news magazines (I think it was Dateline, but I could be wrong) covered/sponsored an event where common people tried to balance the budget. It was amazing how quickly "pork" went away when these people really looked at discretionary spending and the government - almost none of them could come up with a viable way to get the budget balanced.

So, all of you under 40 should be planning now to have 0 Social Security benefits when you retire, and Medicare may also not be an option by then either - then we will really be in a world of sh*t.
dfwAggie99
QUOTE
fantomas:
\"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.\"--Abraham Lincoln, 16th President of the United States of America
Abe obviously didn't have religious, Bush supporters in mind...
MIB
QUOTE
William1865:
QUOTE
RazorbackTX:
QUOTE
PhillyFan:
With Raze coming from Ark/TX.. we'd not expect a big thinker.. unless it was huntin for squirrels, possum.. or coons... no GJ.. not those coons
Not into hunting, Elly May didnt like me going after her critters.
Wow, that's actually pretty funny.
Once in a while he does say something remotely humorous. I think it's between his pumpkin seed spitting contests.

[ December 07, 2004, 02:24 PM: Message edited by: MIB ]
PhillyFan
Dear MIB,

It is too hilly up in dem dar woods to grow pumkin... we make us some of dat der moonshine... just like grandma ...

Love,

Raze
William1865
I'll have to go back and check my sources here, but I believe that at some point in the 90s, during the Clinton Administration, there were Republican majorities in Congress. Again, I'll have to check and see.
CPT_Doom
QUOTE
I'll have to go back and check my sources here, but I believe that at some point in the 90s, during the Clinton Administration, there were Republican majorities in Congress. Again, I'll have to check and see.
Only after the Democatic-led House and Senate voted in the 1994 Clinton economic program, which included some tax increases and closed a lot of loopholes. I believe, in fact, that in the House not a single GOP member voted in favor of this fiscally-responsible course. The Gingrich-led GOP then used those votes against various members of Congress in the "Contract on America" elections to win their majorities.

Good ole GOP - always willing to screw over those who do the right thing.
fantomas
Hell, even old dead Raygun raised taxes to get the country's fiscal situation in order. Drunken sailors hardly approximates the recklessness of the crew in power now.

From the 1994 GOP Contract on America (aka The Contract with America)

QUOTE
Thereafter, within the first 100 days of the 104th Congress, we shall bring to the House Floor the following bills, each to be given full and open debate, each to be given a clear and fair vote and each to be immediately available this day for public inspection and scrutiny.

1. THE FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT

A balanced budget/tax limitation amendment and a legislative line-item veto to restore fiscal responsibility to an out-of-control Congress, requiring them to live under the same budget constraints as families and businesses.

Now that's funny!
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2010 Invision Power Services, Inc.