0
   

Pork ridden Dems can't help themselves.

 
 
Reply Tue 20 Mar, 2007 08:26 am
Funding more than war

Nearly half of the $21 billion that House Democrats added to President Bush's request for emergency war funding would go to nonmilitary spending and to pork projects.
The supplemental spending bill includes more than $3.7 billion in farm subsidies, $2.9 billion in additional Gulf Coast hurricane relief and $2.4 billion for social programs such as money for rural Northwest school districts, health insurance for poor children, energy assistance for poor families and others.
Mr. Bush yesterday called on Congress to pass legislation that funds the troops without extraneous spending provisions or requirements for an early withdrawal from Iraq.
"They have a responsibility to pass a clean bill that does not use funding for our troops as leverage to get special-interest spending for their districts," said Mr. Bush, whose initial request funded the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as about $3.4 billion in hurricane relief.
"They have a responsibility to get this bill to my desk without strings and without delay."
House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer, Maryland Democrat, said nonmilitary items in the emergency spending bill address vital needs that the previous Republican-led Congress neglected and that can't go unfunded until the next fiscal year begins Oct. 1.
"We are responding to needs that last Republican majority ignored, such as funding for children's health care that was requested by Republican and Democratic governors," Hoyer spokeswoman Stacey Bernards said.
Emergency spending bills historically are a magnet for pork projects, but critics of the war supplemental say the new Democratic majority has broken their vow to restore fiscal restraint to Washington.
Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas, chairman of the Republican Study Committee, said Democratic leaders were trying to "wrap pork in Old Glory."
"To call some of the stuff in this bill an emergency must have Webster spinning in his grave," Mr. Hensarling said. "The real emergency Democrats must have is the emergency of selling votes to get this thing passed."
Debate is set to begin this week on the $124 billion emergency spending bill, which also would require all U.S. troops to pull out of Iraq by fall 2008 or sooner if benchmarks for progress are not met. A vote on the bill is scheduled for Thursday.
The more than $9.9 billion of nonmilitary spending in the House bill includes $1 billion to buy vaccines against a major bird-flu epidemic, $750 million for State Children's Health Insurance Program, $500 million for wildfire suppression, $400 million for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, and $100 million in food aid to Africa.

Tom Schatz, president of Citizens Against Government Waste, said the bill is "a blatant betrayal of the Democrats' campaign promise to restore fiscal accountability to Congress."
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi questioned the validity of the criticism.
"Are they talking about the money that we have in the bill for health care for the poorest children in America -- legislation that has been asked for by both Democratic and Republican governors?" Mrs. Pelosi said to reporters last week.
"Are they talking about disaster assistance, which they have refused to give to America's farmers, which is long overdue?" she said. "I don't know, but I am very proud of the product that we are putting forth. It makes our country stronger by improving our military readiness. It holds the Iraqi government accountable by putting forth the president's own benchmarks."
The bill's $3.7 billion in agriculture assistance to U.S. farmers includes $1.4 billion to compensate ranchers who lost livestock in disasters, $283 million in milk subsidies, $74 million in peanut subsidies and $25 million in spinach subsidies. The legislation also adds $400 million to continue funding for rural Northwest school districts facing cuts in federal compensation because of declines in timber and salmon harvests.
It boosts the president's request for Gulf Coast hurricane relief by about $2.9 billion, adding $1.3 billion for Army Corps of Engineers' flood control projects, $30 million for colleges, $30 million for schools and $25.1 million for the Small Business Administration's disaster loan program.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, has not indicated whether he will take up the House bill or introduce his own emergency spending legislation. Senate Republicans are expected to fight any funding that goes beyond the war effort or any measure to require a troop withdrawal.
Last week, the Senate in a near party-line vote rejected a Democratic plan to force all U.S. troops to pull out from Iraq by March 2008.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 555 • Replies: 15
No top replies

 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Mar, 2007 09:20 am
That's a shame. Unfortunately, pork is not something that either party has the market cornered on. I am certainly disappointed that the Dems didn't keep their promise to control spending. But I would also like to see a comparison between this bill and say the last 5 years or so of emergency spending bills. Like what kinds of things were financed.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Mar, 2007 10:53 am
Why is there even an emergency funding bill in the first place? It's not like we didn't know the war was going on. It just hit its 5 year anniversery.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Mar, 2007 11:06 am
parados wrote:
Why is there even an emergency funding bill in the first place? It's not like we didn't know the war was going on. It just hit its 5 year anniversery.


Don't you mean 4 year? We have only been there since 2003.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Mar, 2007 11:14 am
You see, McG, this is how you separate liberals and those who are merely against the administration.

I personally don't see anything wrong with taking money from Iraq to spend on poor children's health care or to put aside for events like hurricane Katrina. I wonder if a majority of the public will. I am kinda thinking they are tired of seeing so much go to Iraq and would like to see some money being spent here for a change. But I could be wrong.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Mar, 2007 11:15 am
Baldimo wrote:
parados wrote:
Why is there even an emergency funding bill in the first place? It's not like we didn't know the war was going on. It just hit its 5 year anniversery.


Don't you mean 4 year? We have only been there since 2003.


Yeah, but why is it an EMERGENCY?

So we can keep it off of the budget, and keep Bush's budget looking more balanced.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Mar, 2007 11:16 am
revel wrote:
You see, McG, this is how you separate liberals and those who are merely against the administration.

I personally don't see anything wrong with taking money from Iraq to spend on poor children's health care or to put aside for events like hurricane Katrina. I wonder if a majority of the public will. I am kinda thinking they are tired of seeing so much go to Iraq and would like to see some money being spent here for a change. But I could be wrong.


You don't seem to grasp the idea. If they want to spend money on those things, create separate spending bills that can be voted on instead of trying to add pork to something else.

The Dems ran on the promise they wouldn't do these things, remember? It was less then a year ago and here they are, mouths at the trough.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Mar, 2007 11:24 am
McGentrix wrote:
revel wrote:
You see, McG, this is how you separate liberals and those who are merely against the administration.

I personally don't see anything wrong with taking money from Iraq to spend on poor children's health care or to put aside for events like hurricane Katrina. I wonder if a majority of the public will. I am kinda thinking they are tired of seeing so much go to Iraq and would like to see some money being spent here for a change. But I could be wrong.


You don't seem to grasp the idea. If they want to spend money on those things, create separate spending bills that can be voted on instead of trying to add pork to something else.

The Dems ran on the promise they wouldn't do these things, remember? It was less then a year ago and here they are, mouths at the trough.


Your right, I didn't graps the main point.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Mar, 2007 02:26 pm
McGentrix wrote:
revel wrote:
You see, McG, this is how you separate liberals and those who are merely against the administration.

I personally don't see anything wrong with taking money from Iraq to spend on poor children's health care or to put aside for events like hurricane Katrina. I wonder if a majority of the public will. I am kinda thinking they are tired of seeing so much go to Iraq and would like to see some money being spent here for a change. But I could be wrong.


You don't seem to grasp the idea. If they want to spend money on those things, create separate spending bills that can be voted on instead of trying to add pork to something else.

The Dems ran on the promise they wouldn't do these things, remember? It was less then a year ago and here they are, mouths at the trough.


Their explanation, whether you want to buy it or not, is that they can't do that at this time because the budget for this year was already passed and these things supposedly cannot wait until the next fiscal year. I don't know if that's true, but that is the explanation.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Mar, 2007 02:27 pm
revel wrote:
You see, McG, this is how you separate liberals and those who are merely against the administration.

I personally don't see anything wrong with taking money from Iraq to spend on poor children's health care or to put aside for events like hurricane Katrina. I wonder if a majority of the public will. I am kinda thinking they are tired of seeing so much go to Iraq and would like to see some money being spent here for a change. But I could be wrong.


hear hear
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Mar, 2007 03:21 pm
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
revel wrote:
You see, McG, this is how you separate liberals and those who are merely against the administration.

I personally don't see anything wrong with taking money from Iraq to spend on poor children's health care or to put aside for events like hurricane Katrina. I wonder if a majority of the public will. I am kinda thinking they are tired of seeing so much go to Iraq and would like to see some money being spent here for a change. But I could be wrong.


hear hear


You mean looter guy still doesn't have enough Heinken to go around? Most of those that left after Katrina will never return - why would they? They had nothing before, have nothing now, and are unwilling to work for anything. A welfare check is the same no matter where you are. The bus ride to Houston was like going to a carnival for these folks. What low lifes - I was unfortunate to spend a good portion of 2006 in Houston - those people destroyed the hotels and motels that were offering them temporary, emergency housing. They busted up the places, pissed in the radiators, crapped on the floors, broke all the elevators (trust me, it would only take two of them do to it).
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Mar, 2007 03:26 pm
aren't there some kittens to drown or flies somewhere that need their wings pulled off cj? Surely all your work can't be done.... it's only 4:26 Central time.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Mar, 2007 03:34 pm
You think I'm kidding about that???? Christ man wake up and smell the urine in the A/C....
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Mar, 2007 03:35 pm
cjhsa wrote:
You think I'm kidding about that???? Christ man wake up and smell the urine in the A/C....


Surely you have some links for us.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Mar, 2007 03:37 pm
cjhsa wrote:
You think I'm kidding about that???? Christ man wake up and smell the urine in the A/C....


I'll leave that sort of investigative procedure to you good buddy.... Laughing
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 20 Mar, 2007 06:22 pm
Been there, done that....

Need references?

Call the Holiday Inn or Country Inn & Suites in Sugarland, TX.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Pork ridden Dems can't help themselves.
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 09/28/2024 at 10:22:11