John Fund has an excellent piece asking why the Administration and Congress aren’t cutting non-defense discretionary spending. We’re in a war and dealing with the aftermath of a major national disaster that effects millions. And what has Congress done in recent months?
Neither the White House nor Congress appears to be in any mood, for example, to revisit the highway bill’s 6,373 “earmarks,” or individual projects for members, worth $24.2 billion. Alaska’s Rep. Don Young, chairman of the House Transportation Committee, has bragged that the bill is “stuffed like a turkey” with goodies for his state. It includes $721 million for Alaska, including a $2.2 million “bridge to nowhere” connecting the town of Ketchikan (population 8,900) to an airport on Gravina Island (population 50). Another bridge, in Anchorage, has a $200 million price tag and is considered such a marginal project that even the Anchorage Chamber of Commerce opposes it.
Non-defense spending has skyrocketed in recent years, growing by leaps and bounds during a time of war. The appitite for pork in Congress continues unabated, with such wasteful programs as the Medicare bill, the farm bill, and the transportation bill costing this nation billions in wasteful pork-barrel projects. These projects would be a waste in peacetime – but in a time of war they’re absolutely unconscionable. Fund notes that FDR was perfectly willing to slash spending during the Second World War – and while we’re not engaged in a conflict of that order, there’s no reason why someone in Washington can’t start demanding fiscal discipline.
It’s a sad reality of American politics that there isn’t a single party willing to hold the line on spending. The Democrats would tax and spend, which would harm the economy while expanding the deficit, and while the Republicans have the right idea on taxes, they still don’t have a clue about holding down the continual expansion of government. If anything, political power has weakened the GOP’s resolve in controlling the size and scope of government. The Medicare bill was nothing more than a massive handout – and did it make the AARP any more likely to accept the critical efforts at reforming Social Security? Certainly not.
The Bush Administration has been excellent on terror, good on taxes, but pitiful when it comes to limiting government. In a time of war, spending $2.2 million to build a bridge to nowhere is absolutely unacceptable. Dumping billions into subsidies is unacceptable. Inflating the size of government at a record pace is unacceptable.
With the effects of Hurricane Katrina requiring a massive rebuilding effort, it’s time for Bush to draw a line in the sand. No more pork. No more subsidies. No more handouts to industry. Sadly, while Bush’s determination in the war on terror is resolute, his determination to stem the tide of government encroachment is as lily-livered as they come. The American people are perfectly willing to sacrifice their time and their money to help those in need along the Gulf Coast. Why can’t government be willing to sacrifice its addiction to pork barrel spending?
Just curious, but were there any earmarks in the transportation bill from Louisiana’s congressional delegation for, say, levee improvement?
If not, what were their earmarks for? Where do we find a list?
Any realistic call for public sacrifice begins with a rollback of needless tax cuts enacted multiple times since 2001. All the disproven supply-side claptrap in the world can’t justify peacetime tax cuts fueled by deficits let alone wartime tax cuts fueled by tax cuts. There is zero evidence that has even remotely indicated that Bush-era tax cuts have done anything for economic growth, and they certainly have not “trickled down” in the post-globalization era where wealth “trickles out” to the lowest bidder on the globe.
Ironically, much of the GDP growth we’ve seen in the past three years is the direct result of the very pork-barrel spending programs you suggest be on the chopping block. Don’t get me wrong…I’m no fan of the farm bill, the transportation bill, or the feckless half-hearted Medicare drug bill. But the employment and public investment that has transpired, at least as a result of the first two items, has contributed far more to economic growth in this country (however artificial that debt-fueled growth may be) than any Bush tax cut has. Similarly, the rebuilding of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast should produce a positive trendline in economic growth numbers, at least a couple quarters from now….even though most of the rebuilding will be financed by the national credit card. Any economic growth financed by deficits is a mirage.
If you really want to shave off some pork barrel spending, I’ll give you the most deserving victim of them all…..vaporize the Department of Homeland Security…..and give the thousands of Republican Party campaign contributors, er DHS employees, 30 minutes to clean out their desks. As I predicted following its politically-motivated inception, DHS has become the most worthless bureaucratic boondoggle that taxpayers have ever been forced to fund. Its only reason for existing is that the GOP’s 2002 midterm election strategy was to bait Democrats into opposing DHS a couple months before the election by loading it with union-busting provisions. Democrats took the bait, and so did American voters….to the peril of everybody’s pocketbook and the very existence of the New Orleans residents that DHS killed.
Rove and the gang compared Max Cleland to Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden because Cleland wouldn’t rubber stamp Bush’s Homeland Security boondoggle. Ironically, such comparisons now better apply to DHS supporters since the Department is likely responsible for the death of more Americans than Hussein and bin Laden combined. The time for DHS”s decapitation should have been August 26…but since we can’t build a time machine and undo its destruction, we should at least drive a stake through the heart of the beast on September 12. As for DHS employees, they can always go back to putting saddles on the backs of Arabian horses.
Except for 4.9 unemployment, steady GDP growth, and an increase in tax revenues to the federal government…
Gee, and all this time I thought it was a hurricane and a flood that did it. I guess it must have been Karl Rove’s secret weather control device
The City Of New Orleans had an evacuation plan – it was not followed. How that is somehow the fault of the DHS requires a leap of logic achievable only by the battiest of moonbats.
Except they didn’t do any such thing – as any thinking person who has seen that particular commercial can see.
The Department of Homeland Security as a concept isn’t a bad one – the Hart-Rudman Commission recommended it as part of a bipartisan report before 9/11. However, like all government programs, it always has to grow like kudzu. Given that the federal bureaucracy is hardly a bastion of Republicanism, abolishing the DHS would put quite a few card-carrying Democrats into the delicate position of having to do real work for a change – which is a tempting proposition.
Which, of course, also teaches a valuable lesson: expansive government programs don’t work – which is why supporting a party that sees government as the solution to every problem is so patently foolish.
“Except for 4.9 unemployment, steady GDP growth, and an increase in tax revenues to the federal government…”
I could point to the same statistics from this time in 1997 and suggest it was evidence of the success of Clinton’s tax increase….except that would be just as assinine as what you’re saying. Tax policy has a very limited effect on economic growth rates, save for radical tax increases or over-the-top 1981-style tax cuts that rob that alter the entire foundation of the economic structure. You convinced yourself in 2001 that the next time we saw any positive economic trendlines, no matter how far into the future, would be the direct result of Bush’s tax cuts. The only problem is you have no evidence to affirm that Bush’s tax cuts have anything to do with present economic figures.
The current economic numbers are the combined result of sound monetary policy by the Fed and the natural cycle of a market economy on the upswing. Had Clinton-era tax rates been maintained, I submit we’d still have a 4.9% unemployment rate, we’d still have steady GDP growth, and we’d be seeing MUCH HIGHER revenue collection since those enjoying all the dividends from the recent economic upswing would be paying a top tax rate of 39.5% rather than 33%.
“How that is somehow the fault of the DHS requires a leap of logic achievable only by the battiest of moonbats.”
Have you been held up in Tora Bora for the past 10 days? Those of us with access to modern technology have been told time and time again that FEMA’s unimaginable incompetence in responding to the Gulf Coast disaster was the direct result of the added layers of red tape created when DHS took FEMA under its wings. Instead of following long-standing procedures, Brown was standing by to wait for directions from pointy-headed DHS bureaucrats hired for their political connectedness to the White House, despite having no background in emergency relief.
While New Orleans’ evacuation plan wasn’t followed prior to the hurricane, that doesn’t excuse FEMA’s third-rate response, which was very directly impacted by DHS red tape….exactly what the “small government” conservatives promised us DHS would cut through more quickly.
“Except they didn’t do any such thing – as any thinking person who has seen that particular commercial can see.”
Cleland’s photo was sandwiched in between photos of bin Laden and Hussein. A visual like that is an unequivocal comparison. If I produced a commercial putting a photo of your mother in between the photos of two crack whores, you know exactly what message was trying to be conveyed….the exact message Turdblossom conveyed with the imagery of the Cleland ad.
“Given that the federal bureaucracy is hardly a bastion of Republicanism, abolishing the DHS would put quite a few card-carrying Democrats into the delicate position of having to do real work for a change – which is a tempting proposition”
Again, do you have any slides you could share from your Tora Bora vacation last week? Those of us who took in any news at all last week were treated to a smorgasboard of details about DHS, including the fact that its employees all seem to have their jobs due as a quid pro quo with the Bush administration. Senior FEMA officials were replaced with Bush hacks whose background is in everything except dealing with terrorism and emergency management. Or do you really believe that the Bush administration elected a DHS staff filled with John Kerry supporters? Sometimes you write things so ignorant that it completely negates any intelligent comments you occasionally make.
“Which, of course, also teaches a valuable lesson: expansive government programs don’t work – which is why supporting a party that sees government as the solution to every problem is so patently foolish.”
Two or three Senate Democrats voted for the DHS. Every Senate Republican did. Who’s the party that sees government as the solution to every problem again?
Clinton slashed capital gains taxes from 28% to 20% in 1997, which helped spur much of the growth in the late 1990s. Coincidentally, revenue from capital gains doubled over the next four years.
Well, then don’t take my word for it. How about a Nobel-prize winning economist (who criticized the Bush tax plan as being too small!).
I’m not necessarily opposed to taking FEMA out of the DHS, but FEMA’s response wasn’t all that slow given the circumstances, and that still doesn’t excuse the criminal negligence of the local authorities who didn’t even follow their own evacuation plan.
No, it wasn’t. Here’s the ad. Cleland’s photo was not “sandwiched” with bin Laden and Hussein – and a fourth grader could see that there’s no such comparison being made.
Then again, most fourth graders have more comprehension skills than the typical Democrat partisan these days it would seem…
1 – The federal bureaucracy is overwhelmingly Democrat.
2 – Most positios in the DHS aren’t appointed one.
3 – The Bush Administration has almost no control over the bureaucracy, which is why elements of State, the CIA, and other departments have tried to thwart Bush policy over the years.
The idea of a Department of Homeland Security is a good one that was first recommended by a bipartisan commission.
Two or three? Try all but 9.
The problems with FEMA need to be addressed, and Brown’s departure is a good thing. However, that doesn’t excuse the incompetence of Nagin and Blanco, which ensured that New Orleans was screwed long before it would be humanly possible for FEMA to have done anything – not to mention the endemic corruption that ensured that money for levees went into the hands of the local Democratic machine.
“Clinton slashed capital gains taxes from 28% to 20% in 1997, which helped spur much of the growth in the late 1990s. Coincidentally, revenue from capital gains doubled over the next four years.”
You’re comparing apples to oranges. The potential for revenue growth and economic expansion is far more realistic in the wake of capital gains tax cuts than income tax cuts. I can live with declining capital gains tax rates if they’re accompanied with rising personal income tax rates. Those who suggest we can and should lower both are Grover Norquist-esque ideologues who want to defund government, because that’s the inevitable result.
“Well, then don’t take my word for it. How about a Nobel-prize winning economist (who criticized the Bush tax plan as being too small!).”
One economist? Well, I can come up with ONE economist who says just the opposite about the effects of the Bush tax cut….Paul Krugman. It’s your economist’s word against mine. Hell, I can give you a second economist opposed to the Bush tax plan…Alan Greenspan. Two against one…you lose.
“that still doesn’t excuse the criminal negligence of the local authorities who didn’t even follow their own evacuation plan.”
Republicans are taking one of two different approaches post-Katrina. There are those who realize the overwhelming evidence of Federal mismanagement is more than Karl Rove and Fox News can overcome….and are trying to buy time by calling on us all to “stop the blame game.” And there are those like yourself, trying to deflect all criticism to local and state officials whose pre-Katrina planning was admittedly inadequate. Is it possible to have two thoughts in our collective heads at the same time? That Nagin and Blanco made their share of mistakes….and that the Federal government also royally fucked up?
And as for the silver bullet “evacuation plan”, did it discuss where these busloads of people were going to be sent after they left New Orleans? Or how the local officials would be able to avoid mass violence when attempting to force people out of their homes without National Guard presence? The conservative argument that we’d have had a fairy tale ending to this nightmare if only the evacuation plan had been followed to the letter by local leaders doesn’t seem to realize that the Feds still would have needed to play a huge role here, but were unprepared to deal with ANYTHING.
“No, it wasn’t. Here’s the ad. Cleland’s photo was not “sandwiched†with bin Laden and Hussein ”
That’s not the same ad. An anti-Cleland ad was featured on all the major news networks in the months before the elections, showing Cleland’s photo sandwiched between bin Laden and Hussein. I should e-mail the Georgia Democratic Party and see if they still have a copy of the real ad which GOP ideologues now appear to want to retroactively cover-up.
“Two or three? Try all but 9.”
I distinctly remember the DHS vote. All the Republicans supported it, along with Mary Landrieu (who still had to get past the December runoff), Ben Nelson, Zell Miller and Independent Dean Barkley who was appointed by Gov. Ventura to replace Wellstone. Their must be some red-tape issue here somewhere where multiple votes were taken over DHS.
“the endemic corruption that ensured that money for levees went into the hands of the local Democratic machine.”
Can this be proven? If so, the local thieves should have been prosecuted. The premise that the Feds were repeatedly giving money to officials who they knew were stealing it still puts the Feds at fault. Your not helping your cause much here.
Which would ironically shift the tax burden dramatically in favor of the rich. It’s far easier to avoid paying income taxes than it is to avoid paying capital gains taxes.
Paul Krugman is a partisan hack, and his record shows it. Alan Greenspan supported Bush’s tax plan, and still does today.
The ad is hosted by Joshua Micah Marshall – the liberal writer. That is the ad. You’re wrong.
Follow the link. All but 9 Democrats voted for the final passage of the bill. Kerry voted for it. Daschle voted for it. Only 9 Democrats voted against final passage. More may have voted against an earlier version of the bill, but the final legislation was approved by a vote of 90-9 with Sen. Murkowski not present.
Guess what, that’s what happens with most federal programs, and how it works for years.
Although ironically most of the corruption seems to be in heavily Democratic cities…
“Which would ironically shift the tax burden dramatically in favor of the rich. It’s far easier to avoid paying income taxes than it is to avoid paying capital gains taxes.”
Capital gains tax cuts are the only tax cut favoring the wealthy that could logically lead to economic stimulus. I don’t support their continuous decline, but are the lesser of two evils in comparison to income tax cuts. The only economic stimulus that can come from an income tax cut is if it is disproportionately targeted to the lower classes who would be more likely to recycle it into the economy through increased consumption….which they almost never are. The Bush income tax cuts rank as the single biggest economic policy disaster since, well, since Reagan’s over-the-top 1981 income taxes, which required three tax increases in the following five years to bandage the revenue wounds.
“Paul Krugman is a partisan hack”
So is your economist. It’s the word of one “partisan hack” versus another’s.
“That is the ad. You’re wrong.”
I know what I saw. Either there was a different ad or the advertisement previewed on CBS News and the McLaughlin Group that DID feature Cleland’s photo between those of bin Laden and Hussein was scrapped before hitting Georgia airwaves. When they showed the ad in those venues, it was mentioned that it was “about to air.” Perhaps Rove decided to tone it down before it hit TV screens.
“All but 9 Democrats voted for the final passage of the bill.”
I stand corrected. Upon further review, the bill that was defeated 52-47 was the Democratic alternative DHS bill, which was supported by Landrieu, Ben Nelson, Miller and Barkley.
“Guess what, that’s what happens with most federal programs, and how it works for years.
Although ironically most of the corruption seems to be in heavily Democratic cities…”
No, my friend, most of the corruption occurs with the corporate world feeding out of the Federal subsidy trough…..And ironically, most of the corruption seems to come from energy barons joined at the hip with REPUBLICAN lawmakers, particularly the Republican lawmakers currently living in the White House. 😉