Confession is good for the soul...
...Pity that you had to farm it out, Senator Stevens.
By Moe Lane Posted in Breaking News — Comments (7) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
(Ach, my manners: H/T Glenn)
Oh, I know, it's traditional to offer up a staffer for these embarrassing little revelations:
After much speculation, a staffer to Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, admitted to Cox Newspapers today that the senator is the lawmaker who placed a “secret hold” on legislation that would open up the obscure world of government contracting to public scrutiny.
Until now, it was a political whodunnit as to who quietly blocked legislation introduced by Sens. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and Barack Obama, D-Ill., that would create a searchable database of government contracts, grants, insurance, loans and financial assistance, worth $2.5 trillion last year.
While speculation centered on Stevens, there was no confirmation. Under Senate rules, the hold remains cloaked in secrecy unless the senator who places it lifts it.
Aaron Saunders, spokesperson for Stevens, said Coburn was informed two weeks ago that his boss had concerns about the bill. Namely, Stevens is concerned that the bill would create more bureaucracy. He wants to see a cost-benefit analysis.
There aren't very many times where somebody should be allowed to use 'droll' in public, but this is one of them. 'Cost-benefit analysis', Senator Stevens? How droll, how very, very droll... not to mention shameless. Then again, so is sending out a spokesman to face the lions - particularly when he's got nothing but a 'cost-benefit analysis' to protect himself with.
Hey, just because it's traditional, it doesn't make it right.
« Toward an Understanding of the Obamian Language — Comments (4) | The Nightmare at 20,000 Feet — Comments (2) »
Confession is good for the soul... 7 Comments (0 topical, 7 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
If only the leadership had some guts they'd call this for what it is - a sham to kill the bill. I hope Sen. Coburn and other sponsors will blast Sen. Stevens from the floor for this hypocrisy.
Sen. Stevens has wasted more money on useless pet projects than anybody save Robert Byrd (is there anything in WV that isn't named after him?). And now he's suddenly worried about bureacracy and what kind of waste it might create?
If it wasn't so sad it would be laughable.
The man who was going to build a bridge from noplace to nowhere on land owned by his family tried to stop a bill that would make malfeasance more difficult.
Well I am shocked.
to the party and to Alaska, HEY you extreme north republicans, get rid of this pork peddler!
"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle
and when he does, Alaskans will try to reprise "Weekend at Bernies'." Get used to the idea.
Now I'm not going to re-fight the battles we've had here before, but whenever all ya'll are ready to start paying for your federal highways and bridges, airports, dams, water systems, and on, and on; we have something to talk about.
The Ketchikan Airport bridge is no "porkier" than any other bridge or overpass to an airport. Help repeal the Davis-Bacon Act and the cost goes down by a third to a half. The Knik Arm bridge/causeway is a vital transportation link that allows both container cargo and air freight cargo to transfer to trucks, bypass downtown Anchorage and connect to the continental highway system via the Alaska Highway. There is a reason that Anchorage International is the largest air cargo port in the world, and that same reason holds true for fast container cargo. Not that any of you are much interested in an explanation because it feels so good to scream about pork. But take comfort in the fact that your objections will have about the same effect in Alaska as wetting your pants in a dark suit: it will give you a warm feeling and nobody will notice.
In Vino Veritas
Hey there was a whole thread about how PORK was the tool that helped Republicans the most, and pointed out that Republican PORK was good for America because it went to better causes than those wascally Democrats like.
So why are some of the PORK defenders so upset about Stephens keeping the American people in the dark about who gets PORK by putting this bill on a "Double Secret" hold?
Repeat through the Election of '08.
As an issue, a return to Republican values of fiscal conservatism is a winner.
As an issue, a line item veto that passes Constitutional muster is a winner.
PORK and Spending like a drunken sailor are not Republican values, no matter what the greater good is.
Social Conservatism is an important plank in the Republican Party platform for sure, but it's not the only one.
As far as I'm concerned, the only line item veto that's Constitutional is a Constitutional Amendment. And if the legislature is so childish as to demand that the President fix their problems, instead of fixing their own budgetary procedures, then you're never going to get the supermajorities to pass it.
But anyway, I still see no evidence that "fiscal conservatism" in terms of budget hawkery has been an undisputed Republican value since 1980. GHW Bush wasn't accusing Ronald Reagan of "voodoo economics" for no reason.
--
If you're seeing shades of gray, it's because you're not looking close enough to see the black and white dots.
Yes, Democrats: Please, please PLEASE try to impeach the president during wartime.