The Senate Defense Supplemental Bill
war... war... hmmm... did someone said something about a war?
By streiff Posted in Democrats — Comments (20) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
From The Victory Caucus
$24 million for funding for sugar beets; $3 million for funding for sugar cane (goes to one Hawaiian co-op); $20 million for insect infestation damage reimbursements in Nevada, Idaho, and Utah; $2.1 billion for crop production losses; $1.5 billion for livestock production losses; $100 million for Dairy Production Losses; $13 million for Ewe Lamb Replacement and Retention Program; $32 million for Livestock Indemnity Program; $40 million for the Tree Assistance Program; $100 million for Small Agricultural Dependent Businesses; $6 million for North Dakota flooded crop land; $35 million for emergency conservation program; $50 million for the emergency watershed program; $115 million for the conservation security program; $18 million for drought assistance in upper Great Plains/South West; Provision that extends the availability by a year $3.5 million in funding for guided tours of the Capitol. Also a provision allows transfer of funds from holiday ornament sales in the Senate gift shop; $165.9 million for fisheries disaster relief, funded through NOAA (including $60.4 million for salmon fisheries in the Klamath Basin region); $12 million for forest service money (requested by the president in the non-emergency FY2008 budget); $425 million for education grants for rural areas – (Secure Rural Schools program); $640 million for LIHEAP; $25 million for asbestos abatement at the Capitol Power Plant; $388.9 million for funding for backlog of old Department of Transportation projects; $22.8 million for geothermal research and development; $500 million for wildland fire management; $13 million for mine safety technology research; $31 million for one month extension of Milk Income Loss Contract program (MILC); $50 million for fisheries disaster mitigation fund; $100 million for security at the Presidential Candidate Nominating Conventions; and $2 million for the University of Vermont.
Oh, yeah, we almost forgot, end the war by March 2008.
« Corrupt Democrat Watch, July 10 Edition, Part One — Comments (20) | In case you were wondering what, if anything, Pelosi's plan actually *meant*... — Comments (8) »
The Senate Defense Supplemental Bill 20 Comments (0 topical, 20 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
I'd like to see someone take each of these things and put a congressman's name by it who voted for this bill and whose district/state is getting our hard-earned money (i.e. who was bribed to vote for this bill).
"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." -- Rudyard Kipling
Here is the Republican pork. This is just the highway bill in 2005. (24 billion in pork) Lets face it we have no room to complain.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/08...
Dragon
The sole purpose of the highway bill is pork distribution. The bill at issue here, today, is a supplemental military spending bill to support operations in Iraq. The sole reason for the pork here is to buy off Democrats so Miss Nancy can win a Pyhrric Victory before finally passing legislation POTUS will sign.
____
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.
It looks like from reading the soup in there that the DOT cash is being appropriated from the Highway Trust Fund.
Folks may complain about pork, but its pork that's paid for dedicated user fees.
Now you can quibble about some of the specific expenditures, but given the expected growth in traffic and especially in freight, the overall federal highway program is a vital economic engine.
Folks who worry about job exportation and outsourcing ought to be beating the drums for a fuel tax hike in 2009 (one is likely anyway), we've already paid a premium on gas since the last bill without crashing the economy, so adding 20, 25 cents to the gallon will pay for billions of new lanes, new roads and the like - all of which generates construction jobs and manufacturing jobs in the U.S. due to the "buy America" provisions in the bill.
"...so adding 20, 25 cents to the gallon will pay for billions of new lanes, new roads and the like - all of which generates construction jobs and manufacturing jobs..."
Sounds very "New Deal" to me. Big FDR fan are we?
Well, as much as I like the idea of the New Deal, this is much more about taking care of what we have and preparing for increases in population and freight movements in the coming years.
You have freight industries like trucking and rail screaming for capacity increases - the railroads looking for capital tax credits, and trucks looking for more lanes and less congested highways - the DOT has already made congestion relief a priority.
Heck, in 2002/03, the DOT did a needs assessment that called for a $375 billion bill - but we ended up at a $286.5 billion or so.
While the interstate system is built, its capacity is being stressed, and in some areas, now it needs to be rebuilt or overhauled. The roads paid for by fuel taxes aren't built in China then shipped over, and the users of those roads are American motorists and American trucking companies, so why not make an investment here?
Transportation is a place where voters don't mind spending money, as evidenced by 70% or so of local and state fee/tax hikes and bonding passing in the last three election cycles.
International container freight is expected to double in the next 25-30 years or so, and it has to move from the West Coast to consumers east of California.
Politically, I do tend to lean left, but as many transportation officials will say: there are no Republican roads nor Democratic bridges.
Since when does a honest Republican consider a highway bill pork distribution. Only a Democrat would even suggest such a thing.
Dragon
We have no room to complain? I suppose if you consider yourself a republican first and a conservative second, then that might be true. But for those of us who adhere to Mike Pence's stance (a.k.a. "I'm a Christian, a Conservative, and a Republican... in that order"), we were complaining about the highway bill before it was even signed in 2005. It was the RSC that came out bashing the bill and informed the press of all of the pork (i.e. the "Bridge to Nowhere"). So do we have a right to complain? I'd say we not only have a right, we have a responsibility to complain whether it is a democrat or a republican congress that is recklessly spending out tax money. I can honestly say that if the republican-led congress had been more fiscally responsible, I would have actually voted in 2006. Instead, I sat out my first election since I became eligible to vote. Just because both democrats and republicans do it doesn't make it right and doesn't mean we have no right to complain about it.
Well said. Your right, we do have the right and the responsibility to complain. I posted those facts to show that we have to clean up our own act before we can take the moral high ground.
It is hard for me to believe that we have sunk to such levels that the highway bill is now a pork distribution system. Ronald Wilson Reagan is rolling over in his grave.
I too felt the Republican Party was drifting away from the Republican ideals. Finally, I woke up and realized, it was not me who left the party but the elected Republicans who deserted the party.
I had posts over a year ago complaining about the massive deficits and the increase from 4000 to 16000 lobbyists.
I will not blindly vote for someone who calls himself a Republican. I will vote for the person who is best for this country. It’s time to start voting to protect American interests.
Dragon
My industry sure is suffering. How can we get some of that pork?
For the ad campaign? I know the MSM isn't going to scroll these numbers across the screen for swing voters. The current Republican beltway leadership doesn't have the skills, unless we're going to depend on Lott, McConnel and a few others to do all the heavy lifting. We'll have to pay for our own air time to reach the independents in mass. Club for Growth?
The Dems started early on framing the debate, based unfortunately on the amo (facts) we fed them, and it worked. We need to start early too with the mantra of what the Democrat Congress is, "tax and spend". Let the information campaign begin.
“They chose dishonor. They will have war.” - Winston Churchill
Lott and McConnell in rejecting the Coburn amendment. My 2 Indiana Senators voted for the amendment.
You’re a persistent cuss, pilgrim.
John Wayne to Jimmy Stewart in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance
Not Voting - 4
Enzi (R-WY)
Johnson (D-SD)
McCain (R-McCain)
Nelson (D-NE)
I confess. I kinda modified party affiliation from what Roll Call recorded for McCain. I just wanta be accurate. :)
You’re a persistent cuss, pilgrim.
John Wayne to Jimmy Stewart in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance
Sen. Coburn had an amendment to strip the 100 million dollars out of the war supplemental to pay expenses for the party conventions in 2008. I do not yet have the names of the 52 Senators who voted for keeping this pile of pork in the bill.
You’re a persistent cuss, pilgrim.
John Wayne to Jimmy Stewart in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance
the roll call vote is up at Thomas
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm...
You’re a persistent cuss, pilgrim.
John Wayne to Jimmy Stewart in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance
It is even worse than it looks. If all Republicans had voted together for this it would have passed with flying colors. It is not even the usual Republican suspects that sunk this:
Allard (R-CO)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Cochran (R-MS)
Coleman (R-MN)
Domenici (R-NM)
Lott (R-MS)
McConnell (R-KY)
Specter (R-PA)
Stevens (R-AK)
Are these guys really this politically stupid? This bill is headed for a Bush veto anyway. The Democrats are giving a campaign issue two-fer: anti-war and pro-pork. At least vote against the pork. Didn't you learn anything from the last election?

Kyoto Now! (Because only pollution from the US hurts the planet)