This may look like a long Blog Posting but it is really not that
long, unless you read...
Ø Fella’s
Re-Posted Blog Posting of February 5, 2012 entitled “Earmarks ... Pork by Any Other Name Still Stinks”. (Which I
recommend you read.)
Ø And
you read Fella’s New Blog Posting entitled, “Congress Gave Pork A New Name But It Stinks Even More Than It Used To
Stink When Congress Was Calling It By Its Two Prior Names”. (Which I
recommend you read.)
Ø And
then you read the link to the Internet Article from February 28, 2021.
(Which I recommend you read if you want to get really confused.)
Actually, if I were you, I would not read the Internet Article Link but I’m not you. You may be a seeker of more confusion than I am.
Earmarks ... Pork by Any Other Name Still Stinks
If I were running for President of the United States, I would be bringing up for discussion Earmarks (a.k.a. Pork Barrel Spending) a heck of a lot more often than they are being talked about during this current campaign.
One of the smokescreens put up by the Porkers is that this may be a lot of money but it may not be a lot of money because it is only a small part of the Overall Total Budget.
Don’t blame me if you can’t understand the prior sentence. You have to be a member of Congress for 6 to 8 years before you can understand such “logic”.
I am going to address the issue of Pork Barrel Spending from two related points of view.
The First Point of
View...
It seems to me that those who say the amount of money spent, while big is small, are missing a major point. The real damage of Pork is the fact that Pork allows bad legislation to become law.
If a congressman Dudley Do-Right
sees that a particular piece of legislation sponsored by a congressman Snidely Whiplash
will do great damage to our country but is persuaded to vote for Snidely’s Pork Barrel Project because Dudley is given his own Pork Barrel Project, the end result is Snidely’s bad legislation has been passed.
It is not a fair trade off that Dudley’s Pork is deserving of becoming the law of the land because Snidely’s is not deserving of becoming the law of the land.
Why can’t our Congress pass individual laws based strictly on the merits of each individual law? Instead of a Merit Based Legislation Process we have an entrenched system of Trade-Offs of Bad and Good...
I will give you yours (no matter how good or bad it is) if you give me mine (no matter how good or bad it is).
The Second Point of
View...
The Trade-Off of Bad and Good System has been established so long that even the Dudley’s up in congress are defending it as necessary.
I recently heard a member of congress (whom I admire) vehemently defend the Earmark System. To do this he recited a long list of what were to him (and to me) very worthwhile projects. These wonderful laws were undeniably beneficial to our Country. His point was all Pork Does Not Stink As Much As Other Pork Stinks.
Here is what goes through Congressman Snidely’s small mind all the time...
Ø Wow! Congressman Dudley’s legislation is a great piece of legislation!
Ø Dudley will be dying to get his great piece of legislation enacted into law.
Ø My Pork Legislation will never be able to stand on its own merits because it is bad legislation.
Ø I’ll tell Dudley that he can’t have his good legislation unless I get my, bad for the country but good for my re-election, bad legislation.
Ø This is a Win Win for us but not for the Good Ole USofA.
Ø I get re-elected and Dudley gets re-elected.
Ø I don’t want to lose Dudley because it took a long time to train (corrupt) him to think that this Trade-Off of Bad and Good System is the way it has to be.
Ø After all, making laws is like making sausage and everyone knows that the main ingredient in Congressional Sausage is Pork.
It is not uncommon to hear Congressmen Dudley and Snidely make speeches about the need to get rid of Pork. Usually they say that reductions have already taken place but more reductions are necessary. This gives us hope. We take comfort in hope because we have small minds also.
I did some research on my own to find out about recent Total Pork Barrel Spending. It was not easy to find this information but here is what I came up with...
Ø $15,600,000,000 in 2009.
Ø $15,600,000,000 in 2010.
Only a Highly Trained (corrupt) Congressional Thinking Mind would look at the two bullets above and call that a “reduction”. Here’s how they do that....
They look at the 2010 number and say, it could have been more, and therefore, it must be less because it is not more and it would have been more if it had been more.
Would I kid u?
Smartfella
This is the New Blog Posting promised above...
Congress Gave Pork a New Name but It Stinks Even More Than It Used To Stink When Congress Was Calling It by Its Two Prior Names
Back in the Bubba Clinton and the Dubya Bush years Congress made a big stink about their Stinking Earmark Program. Somewhere along the way Congress “fixed” it. Attaboy 9% Approval Rated Congress because They Eliminated Earmarks Completely!...Or did they?
Now our highly overrated 9% Approval Rated Congress is flat-dab-out-in-the-open
bringing back Pork Barrel Spending f.k.a. Earmarks but they have
given it an even Newer New Name! It
is now called Community Funding Projects! (If that name was not enough to make you feel the urge to throw up, they
also call them Member-Directed Spending.)
It took us years to figure
out what Earmarks were. Who among us
can be against Communities? Heck Communities R Us! We will never
figure this one out.
I hereby declare our 9% Approval Rated Congress the Winner!
I give you one guess who the Losers are.
************
Are you thinking, How Bad Can It Be? Fella is now going to tell you How Bad It Will Be.
Under this new iteration of Pork/Earmarks/Community Funding Projects each member of Congress officially gets the Opportunity to Propose 10 Community Funding Projects!
That’s 10 Official Opportunities to Officially Waste Taxpayer Money!
Do you know how many Representative
and Senators we have in our 9% Approval Rated Congress? We have 535 of these
Public Servants Serving us.
10 times 535 is...
5,350 Officially Sanctioned Opportunities to Officially Waste Taxpayer Money!
Would I kid u?
Smartfella
Lagniappe: I tried but could not find out if they get 10 per year or 10 every Congress (2 years). Either way it is A Lot! If it is every year, it is A Lot times 2.
I’m done with this Blog Posting but, if you are glutton for confusion, click below and you can read on and on and on...
THE SWAMP, RELOADED: HOUSE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE CHIEF MAKES RETURN OF EARMARKS OFFICIAL; EVERY CONGRESSMAN GETS 10
Posted by J.D.
Rucker | Feb 27, 2021 | The Liberty Daily
