creators.com opinion web
Conservative Opinion General Opinion
Roger Simon
Roger Simon
25 May 2012
Businessmen Make Lousy Presidents

My experience with vulture capitalism is limited. A vulture could not make even a snack out of my capital. I don'… Read More.

23 May 2012
Is Mitt Romney Count Dracula?

In the end, it won't be about who raises the most money. It won't be about who ate a dog or kept one on the … Read More.

18 May 2012
Poll Results Are “Massaged” Before They Are Released

I promise you this is not another one of my columns about how polls suck. Point One: You already know polls suck.… Read More.

More Pork, Anybody?

Share Comment

President Barack Obama sounded so mournful Wednesday about having to sign a $410 billion bill to fund the federal government that, for a second, I thought he'd refuse.

He was not sad about the amount of money involved. These days, $410 billion is small potatoes. Obama's stimulus package was $787 billion. His budget for next year projects a $1.75 trillion deficit.

So $410 billion is probably in the range of what Bernie Madoff still has hidden away in his mattress.

No, it was not the amount that made the president so gloomy. It was the $7.7 billion for 8,570 pet projects that are contained in the bill and known as earmarks.

During his campaign, Obama had promised to end most earmarks, and now he is spending billions on them. This has ticked him off. Sort of.

"Done right, earmarks have given legislators the opportunity to direct federal money to worthy projects that benefit people in their districts, and that's why I've opposed their outright elimination," Obama said Wednesday.

So, good earmarks: Yay!

"But the fact is that, on occasion, earmarks have been used as a vehicle for waste and fraud and abuse," Obama also said.

So, bad earmarks: Boo!

How do we tell the difference? The Internet. In the future, earmarks will have to be posted on the Internet.

"Earmarks that members do seek must be aired on those members' Websites in advance, so the public and the press can examine them and judge their merits for themselves," Obama said.

Earmarks could be Twittered, but I doubt that members of Congress could keep their tweets to 140 characters.

There is no exact definition of what an earmark is.

Or even what pork is.

Obama has no objection to pork. Just as long as it serves the public good.

Which is why in Obama's $787 billion stimulus bill there was plenty of money for a magnetic levitation train between Disneyland and Las Vegas. This would do a lot of people who like to gamble while wearing mouse ears a lot of good.

Which is the trouble with pork and even earmarks. Everybody who wants the dough claims it does somebody some good.

Sparta, N.C., got $500,000 in federal tax dollars for a teapot museum a couple of years ago. Some thought that was an evil earmark, but North Carolina politicians said it was "local revitalization."

Boston's infamous Big Dig, the costliest highway project in American history, was supposed to cost a mere $2.8 billion but, according to The Boston Globe, will end up costing $22 billion and won't be paid off until 2038. It was designed to replace an elevated highway so the area would be less ugly. In other words, it was not really pork but "local revitalization." (As Barney Frank once asked, "Rather than lower the expressway, wouldn't it be cheaper to raise the city?")

But don't worry. Things are changing.

"The future demands that we operate in a different way than we have in the past," Obama said Wednesday. "This piece of legislation must mark an end to the old way of doing business and the beginning of a new era of responsibility and accountability that the American people have every right to expect and demand."

In the old days, people learned about ridiculous and wasteful pork barrel spending by reading about it in the newspapers. In the future, people will learn about ridiculous and wasteful pork barrel spending by reading about it on the Internet. Ain't progress grand?

To find out more about Roger Simon, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2009, CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.


Comments

4 Comments | Post Comment
Roger, why don't you & your fellow liberals hold President Obama to his promises? Neither the federal nor the state governments can continue to spend beyond their means, nor can you or I in our personal lives. Increasing taxes only on those making more than $250k will never come close to raising enough to pay off the national debt which now exceeds $10 trillion. Interest expense on this debt, even at all time low rates, consumes in excess of 20% of total federal receipts. With the national debt increasing to $14 trillion, maybe more, the % of total receipts required for interest only payments will soon approach 1/3 of total federal receipts, maybe more given that income taxes will surely raise less money in each of the next few years due the amount of losses sustained by everyone in our economy. The grand plan that one's total debt payments cannot exceed 31% of ones income only applies to us, I guess? We are headed toward national bankruptcy & our President & the elected idiots on Capitol Hill haven't got a clue.
Comment: #1
Posted by:
Fri Mar 13, 2009 8:22 AM
Re: Forrest
Like you, I don't like debt. However, you fail to mention that nearly all our national debt was done under the administrations of Reagan and the two Bushes and that our present preicament is due to the free market, deregulated policies of the GOP and the DLC, who are Republicans passing themselves off as Democrats. Class warfare has been going on for 30 years now with the intended goal the dumbing down and eventual elimination of the middle class. We have a government of, by and for the corporations whose iunterests in no way coincide with the vast majority of Americans.
Comment: #2
Posted by: michael nola
Fri Mar 13, 2009 8:57 AM
Re: michael nola
Michael, I agree about the accumulation of the debt being greatest during the time you mentioned. Present Obama & the liberals are in control at this time & they are the ones that must try to come to grips with these basic facts of our situation. If we are to be forever looking back & blaming the past policies & politicians we will never solve the problem. Look back a little farther & you will find Carter's CRA. Couple that piece of idealistic legislation with capitalistic greed & we got ourselves a deadly result. Hopefully, it wont tank us.
Comment: #3
Posted by:
Fri Mar 13, 2009 4:06 PM

I'm bothered that even someone supposedly "liberal," or at least sensible in most of his columns, is keeping alive the right-wing taunt about the "high-speed train to Disneyland." According to FactCheck.org at Newsweek:

"A widely repeated claim that $8 billion is set aside for a "levitating train" to Disneyland is untrue. That total is for unspecified high-speed rail projects, and some of it may or may not end up going to a proposed 300-mph "maglev" train connecting Anaheim, Calif., with Las Vegas." This country is grievously behind much of the civilized world in the development and deployment of high-speed, efficient rail systems. We've spent half a century and untold trillions of tax dollare supporting air and auto transporation, while corporate interests have tried to destroy railways altogether.

While there is indeed $8 billion dollars in the bill that will be spent on developing high speed rail, it certainly won't all be going to a train that drops you can ride from an enchanting playground for children to a boozy one for adults. It will go to redress the balance between efficient rail, on the one hand, and on the other, both gas-guzzling automobiles and the heavily subsidized trucking industry and Interstate transportation system and inconvenient, overcrowded, expensive air transporation.

And don't forget: both Anaheim and Las Vegas are important American cities; both have more to offer their residents and businessowners than cartoon characters and poker chips.

Your comment was a cheap shot, Roger, and totally unworthy of someone of integrity.
Comment: #4
Posted by: A. D. Reed
Fri Mar 20, 2009 6:04 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Roger Simon
May. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31 1 2
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Marc Dion
Marc DionUpdated 28 May 2012
Tom Rosshirt
Tom RosshirtUpdated 26 May 2012
David Sirota
David SirotaUpdated 25 May 2012

14 Nov 2011 Bad News -- Nobody Terrible at Debate

20 Feb 2008 Clinton Targets Pledged Delegates

6 Mar 2009 Why Steele Just Doesn't Get It