Timing is everything in politics.
An issue can be ignored until it’s time to be used to make political hay.
Some would say that the Republican current fixation with deficit spending is an issue whose “timing” will help this November.
So it is that when John Kline posted on his website : Congressman John Kline is inviting Minnesotans to help Washington end its addiction to wasteful spending, that I was not surprised. I expected to see the typical stuff that he likes to talk about … like an earmark added to the 2006 Appropriations Bill (HR 3058) for the Sparta Teapot Museum in North Carolina. But NO, Mr. Kline actually asked about ending a program that is more Corporate Welfare than a Congressman bringing “home the bacon.”
Of the four choices, the biggest dollar program with a projected savings of $2 Billion is : “Eliminate funding for a green government project that the private sector is already leading: The “FreedomCAR” and fuel partnership program is a duplicative program already being implemented by the private sector.”
FreedomCAR ? Hmmmm… I will bet that you never heard of the FreedomCAR, but since Freedom is in the name, somehow you are probably thinking that this is a Republican-themed program. The C-A-R in FreedomCAR is an acronym for Cooperative Automotive Research, but what’s the Freedom … simple … to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and the foreign dictators that reap monies off our dependence. A goal that every American can agree with … and also agree that we have a long way to go to get there.
The program was created during John Kline’s first term in Congress … that’s when the Republicans controlled the House and George Bush announced the program in his 2003 State of the Union address. Funny, how we forgot about that … but now, the “timing” has a Democrat in the White House and Democrats controlling the House.
Yes, “timing” is everything … especially since President Obama just drove Chevrolet Volt during his tour of the Detroit-Hamtramck assembly plant last week.
This program subsidizes research by major automakers for developing their own versions of hybrid, plug-in hybrid (PHEV), and fuel cell vehicles. The subsidies also fund private R&D of light- weight materials, electronic power control, and electric drive motors.
One of the main components in these plug-in hybrid vehicles is the battery … since PHEVs have the potential to displace a large amount of gasoline by delivering up to 40 miles of electric range without recharging— new batteries would have to be developed. The Department of Energy awarded 3M in Saint Paul up to $1.14 million (total DOE/industry cost share: $ 2.28 million) over two years to screen nickel/manganese/cobalt (NMC) cathode materials through building and testing of small-sized cells.
I do not know the status of 3M’s project, nor how many jobs were created or retained, but the objective sure sounds reasonable.
Working with corporate interests is not new … when President Bush gave monies to the auto industry, he said : “In the midst of a financial crisis and a recession, allowing the U.S. auto industry to collapse is not a responsible course of action." The monies for this came from the TARP legislation that John Kline voted for. Ah, “timing” is everything … while President Obama’s so-called bailout of the GM and Chrysler is now getting repaid, the Bush monies will never be returned.
What seems odd though is the “timing” and what project Mr. Kline included in his choices.
Ending Corporate Welfare is fiscally responsible. Yet, this project is one that may take government incentives from our goal of being energy independent.
The question is why did Mr. Kline and the Republicans pick the FreedomCAR project and not some other Corporate Welfare programs.
The term “Corporate Welfare” actually has many components.
How about ethanol subsidies which cost the US Treasury $6 billion in 2009 ?
Ethanol subsidies are just the tip of the money tree. "Farm subsidies are America's largest corporate welfare program," said Brian Riedl, an analyst at the Heritage Foundation. The question is why federal money flows primarily to growers of five crops—corn, soybeans, wheat, cotton and rice—while livestock, poultry and produce farmers get by without subsidy checks? After the media reported that at least 2,702 millionaires received farm payments from 2003 to 2006 (including such hobby-farmers as Scottie Pippin of the NBA fame and a number of family members of Congress including Minnesota’s Michele Bachmann (R-MN-06), the 2008 Farm bill prohibited all subsidies to anyone whose non-farm adjusted gross income exceeds $500,000. The Obama administration said its proposed farm subsidy cuts would save $2.3 billion over 10 years. Its new budget proposal would lower the cap on direct payments from $40,000 per person per year to $30,000. It would also reduce income eligibility limits over three years to $250,000 for non-farm adjusted gross income.
As easy to see Corporate Welfare in the Ag sector, there is a larger sector that is prone to largesse … and that’s is processed by a House Committee that Mr. Kline sits … The House Armed Forces Committee. Interestingly, Mr. Kline makes the argument the FreedomCAR program is a “duplicative program.” Hmmm. Why is Mr. Kline supportive of General Electric’s request for $1.8 - $2.9 billion required for an alternative engine for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter ? In essence, a “duplicative program.”
GE claims that its alternate engine will enable the government to have cost-saving competitions across the lifetime of the F-35 program, saving taxpayers billions of dollars. What it leaves out of its talking points is that the government would first have to pay for two production lines, two supply chains and two workforces to build the competing engines, and then split the annual buys between two teams in a way that would eliminate any economies of scale. Once fielded, the two engines would require separate sets of spare parts, separate maintenance procedures, and other redundant items that would increase rather than decrease the cost of operating the plane. Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) during debate about whether to fund the alternate engine expressed concerns about having two redundant engines would increase the complexity of the program, potentially undercutting both affordability and readiness.
Lockheed chairman Robert Stevens has stated that the company expects the actual purchase price of each Air Force F-35 variant will be roughly the same as a current Lockheed F-16 or Boeing F/A-18. That would be about $60 million in today's dollars -- less than half the price of an F-22 Raptor -- and it includes all the necessary mission equipment. Remember that Mr. Kline supported an “earmark” to procure additional F-22 that the Pentagon does not want …. Oh, and the alternate engine was not requested by President Bush or President Obama or the DOD … it’s just Corporate Welfare being funded by Mr. Kline and his friends in Congress.
“Timing” is everything in politics … and this “Timing” reeks of a political stunt.
Cutting Corporate Welfare for the FreedomCAR maybe short-sighted. Developing the technology required to ween ourselves from foreign produced oil, will require decades of trial and error in which a variety of bridge technologies are phased in over time.
Cutting FreedomCAR funding may sound good for political purposes but not be a good strategic decision.
Showing posts with label Earmarks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Earmarks. Show all posts
Monday, August 02, 2010
Sunday, June 06, 2010
MN-02 : Does Harvard Study Prove Kline Right About Earmarks ?
A case study in logic, goes something like this :
John Kline is a human being.
Women are human beings.
Therefore, John Kline is a woman.
If you accept that logic, then consider this ...
John Kline opposes earmarks since they “are based on a member's seniority, committee assignment or party affiliation.”
A Harvard study states that obtaining a chairmanship on a “powerful congressional committee” actually damages corporations within the states that receive these federal dollars.
Therefore, John Kline’s opposition to earmarks benefits Minnesota.
In both examples, the logic is faulty.
Yet, that is the assessment suggested in a recent Letter to the Editor proclaiming that “A new Harvard Business School study shows how John Kline’s “no earmark” policy benefits Minnesota.”
I am not sure if the writer read the Do Powerful Politicians Cause Corporate Downsizing?
report, but its basic question was “Does public sector spending complement or crowd out private sector economic activity?”
John Kline is not mentioned ... nor is his "no earmark" policy ... in fact Minnesota is barely a sidenote.
The report analyzed over 42 years of earmarks and various changes of committee chairman and determined that corporations in those states invested less in their business than they may have otherwise.
But what does that mean ?
Well, the report states … “a key feature of our data is that firm-level figures reflect capex, R&D, payout, employment, and sales growth aggregated across all operations of the firm, including divisions located in other states. … To the extent that portfolio capital has greater mobility across states than across countries, the impact of fiscal stimulus may be weaker at the state level than the national level.”
Further, the report states : “This suggests the crowding out of private investment is particularly pronounced in industries operating at a high level of capacity where competition for additional factors of production including facilities and specialized capital is expected to be strong.”
My interpretation : if labor and resources are constrained in one state, a company may increase in another state … thus the corporation may grow in total, but not necessarily in the state that received federal funds. Hence one of the reasons why the military industrial complex has operations in virtually every state … when “labor gets tight”, they can re-align.
The report concludes : “Our results demonstrate that the average firm retrenches in the face of government spending shocks, but it is certainly possible (and perhaps likely) that some individual firms do in fact benefit from these spending shocks.”
The report uses as an example that Alabama had not had a chairman of a powerful committee until Senator Richard Shelby (R-AL) came into power. For example, Shelby’s $15 million earmarks went specifically to the construction of housing and facilities for lower income families … the result was that another Alabama company that produced prefabricated homes saw a decline in activity.
Now, is that bad ?
Do you want mobile homes in your community or brick and mortar homes … plus the mobile home business has had significant changes in profitability and demand caused by a number of other factors (most notably interest rates), so it is difficult to know what the demand in Alabama would have been without Shelby’s earmark.
What the report really confirmed is something that has been widely reported – the largest of recipients of earmarks are Hawaii, Alaska, Mississippi, West Virginia, and Alabama: All states which had powerful congressional chairmen over the sample period.
Thus the problem is not earmarks, but that certain individuals look first and foremost to their state and not to the overall country.
It’s the people that are the problem … not necessarily the earmark process. Yes, so Richard Shelby (R-AL) is a problem … there are many examples that taxpayers should be concerned. Senate appropriator Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii). then-Senate Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), Senate Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee Ranking Member Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), and Robert Byrd (D-WV) have created imbalances.
But if I think of long-serving Senators that could impact this situation, I think of Ted Kennedy and John Kerry, Democrats representing Massachusetts and John McCain and John Kyl, Republicans representing Arizona. In terms of earmark dollars, Massachusetts comes in at 27 yet based on population it should be 13 ( in effect a negative 14) while Arizona is #25 in terms of earmark dollars and #21 in population (a negative 4) … so there are examples of Senators that are not abusing the system. FYI : Minnesota is #37 in earmark dollars while #20 in terms of population ( and coming in second to Indiana as having the worst relationship.)
Returning back to the LTE writer’s assessment, NO, Mr. Kline’s “no earmark” policy DOES NOT benefit Minnesota … if Alabama is not building mobile homes, that does not mean that Minnesota is.
What it does mean is that certain states are getting more federal investment than we are.
The real question is : Is there a better way to ensure that the dollars are invested for the greatest need and purpose ?
John Kline’s “no earmark” policy does not address that … in some ways, the analogy would be that Honor Students are punished when other students abuse the system … the report clearly shows that Minnesota is not abusing the system, yet our dollars are helping other states.
There are some better approaches.
When will the Republicans put some serious fiscal conservatives like Jeff Flake (R-AZ) on the Appropriations Committee ? He has been repeatedly rejected by GOP leadership yet that would be the first step in stopping wasteful government spending.
How about rotating committee assignments, so that no one holds a committee chairmanship for longer than two years ?
How about a maximum amount that any Senator or Representative can request ?
How about getting Senate Republicans to reach agreement with House Republicans on what their earmark policy will be ? Who will control Senators Shelby, Cochran, et al ?
How about Enhanced Rescission Authority legislation ?
Or, something that Mr. Kline could do without the Republican Party approval … following the Tim Walz Transparency process … request input from constituents … give a hard review … and then report back what you will recommend.
But doing nothing, is just that … Mr. Kline your “no earmark” policy does nothing.
All that said, Mr. Kline has opposed earmarks that benefit Minnesota, yet he has been a strong supporter of earmarks that the Pentagon does not want … C-17 cargo plane, F-22 fighter, F-18 fighter, or even alternate engine for the Joint Strike Fighter.
In the end, let’s ask Mr. Kline : How will your crusade change the process ?
John Kline is a human being.
Women are human beings.
Therefore, John Kline is a woman.
If you accept that logic, then consider this ...
John Kline opposes earmarks since they “are based on a member's seniority, committee assignment or party affiliation.”
A Harvard study states that obtaining a chairmanship on a “powerful congressional committee” actually damages corporations within the states that receive these federal dollars.
Therefore, John Kline’s opposition to earmarks benefits Minnesota.
In both examples, the logic is faulty.
Yet, that is the assessment suggested in a recent Letter to the Editor proclaiming that “A new Harvard Business School study shows how John Kline’s “no earmark” policy benefits Minnesota.”
I am not sure if the writer read the Do Powerful Politicians Cause Corporate Downsizing?
report, but its basic question was “Does public sector spending complement or crowd out private sector economic activity?”
John Kline is not mentioned ... nor is his "no earmark" policy ... in fact Minnesota is barely a sidenote.
The report analyzed over 42 years of earmarks and various changes of committee chairman and determined that corporations in those states invested less in their business than they may have otherwise.
But what does that mean ?
Well, the report states … “a key feature of our data is that firm-level figures reflect capex, R&D, payout, employment, and sales growth aggregated across all operations of the firm, including divisions located in other states. … To the extent that portfolio capital has greater mobility across states than across countries, the impact of fiscal stimulus may be weaker at the state level than the national level.”
Further, the report states : “This suggests the crowding out of private investment is particularly pronounced in industries operating at a high level of capacity where competition for additional factors of production including facilities and specialized capital is expected to be strong.”
My interpretation : if labor and resources are constrained in one state, a company may increase in another state … thus the corporation may grow in total, but not necessarily in the state that received federal funds. Hence one of the reasons why the military industrial complex has operations in virtually every state … when “labor gets tight”, they can re-align.
The report concludes : “Our results demonstrate that the average firm retrenches in the face of government spending shocks, but it is certainly possible (and perhaps likely) that some individual firms do in fact benefit from these spending shocks.”
The report uses as an example that Alabama had not had a chairman of a powerful committee until Senator Richard Shelby (R-AL) came into power. For example, Shelby’s $15 million earmarks went specifically to the construction of housing and facilities for lower income families … the result was that another Alabama company that produced prefabricated homes saw a decline in activity.
Now, is that bad ?
Do you want mobile homes in your community or brick and mortar homes … plus the mobile home business has had significant changes in profitability and demand caused by a number of other factors (most notably interest rates), so it is difficult to know what the demand in Alabama would have been without Shelby’s earmark.
What the report really confirmed is something that has been widely reported – the largest of recipients of earmarks are Hawaii, Alaska, Mississippi, West Virginia, and Alabama: All states which had powerful congressional chairmen over the sample period.
Thus the problem is not earmarks, but that certain individuals look first and foremost to their state and not to the overall country.
It’s the people that are the problem … not necessarily the earmark process. Yes, so Richard Shelby (R-AL) is a problem … there are many examples that taxpayers should be concerned. Senate appropriator Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii). then-Senate Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), Senate Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee Ranking Member Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), and Robert Byrd (D-WV) have created imbalances.
But if I think of long-serving Senators that could impact this situation, I think of Ted Kennedy and John Kerry, Democrats representing Massachusetts and John McCain and John Kyl, Republicans representing Arizona. In terms of earmark dollars, Massachusetts comes in at 27 yet based on population it should be 13 ( in effect a negative 14) while Arizona is #25 in terms of earmark dollars and #21 in population (a negative 4) … so there are examples of Senators that are not abusing the system. FYI : Minnesota is #37 in earmark dollars while #20 in terms of population ( and coming in second to Indiana as having the worst relationship.)
Returning back to the LTE writer’s assessment, NO, Mr. Kline’s “no earmark” policy DOES NOT benefit Minnesota … if Alabama is not building mobile homes, that does not mean that Minnesota is.
What it does mean is that certain states are getting more federal investment than we are.
The real question is : Is there a better way to ensure that the dollars are invested for the greatest need and purpose ?
John Kline’s “no earmark” policy does not address that … in some ways, the analogy would be that Honor Students are punished when other students abuse the system … the report clearly shows that Minnesota is not abusing the system, yet our dollars are helping other states.
There are some better approaches.
When will the Republicans put some serious fiscal conservatives like Jeff Flake (R-AZ) on the Appropriations Committee ? He has been repeatedly rejected by GOP leadership yet that would be the first step in stopping wasteful government spending.
How about rotating committee assignments, so that no one holds a committee chairmanship for longer than two years ?
How about a maximum amount that any Senator or Representative can request ?
How about getting Senate Republicans to reach agreement with House Republicans on what their earmark policy will be ? Who will control Senators Shelby, Cochran, et al ?
How about Enhanced Rescission Authority legislation ?
Or, something that Mr. Kline could do without the Republican Party approval … following the Tim Walz Transparency process … request input from constituents … give a hard review … and then report back what you will recommend.
But doing nothing, is just that … Mr. Kline your “no earmark” policy does nothing.
All that said, Mr. Kline has opposed earmarks that benefit Minnesota, yet he has been a strong supporter of earmarks that the Pentagon does not want … C-17 cargo plane, F-22 fighter, F-18 fighter, or even alternate engine for the Joint Strike Fighter.
In the end, let’s ask Mr. Kline : How will your crusade change the process ?
Monday, May 24, 2010
MN-02 : Kline Opposes Earmarks But What About Programmatic Requests ?
Today’s Fuzzy Math Problem :
How does President Obama’s $548.9 billion Department of Defense FY2011 Budget become approved as a marked-up budget of $726 billion without “Earmarks” ?
Answer : “Programmatic Requests”
John Kline (R-MN-02) of the House Armed Services Committee HASC proudly issued a press release announcing “ the committee’s unanimous approval of H.R. 5136, the National Defense Authorization Act for FY-2011”. The word “earmark was never mentioned … although Mr. Kline did congratulate himself for changes in the “the Yellow Ribbon reintegration law I championed three years ago” … a program that was funded via an “earmark”.
Ignoring “earmarks” is easy … even during a moratorium … just follow the instructions in this GOP memo that redefines what used to be called “earmarks” as Programmatic Requests : “For HASC GOP Member purposes the term “programmatic requests” has no current definition.”
The memo goes on to give a specific example : "the second engine for the Joint Strike Fighter, which the committee believes is a national security imperative to reduce the risk inherent in requiring the Air Force, Navy and Marines to fly a common aircraft. This broadly supported action has been included as a matter of policy, and not at the request of a single Member."
Are you familiar with the Joint Strike Fighter second engine ?
It was highlighted on ABC News last week as a $3 Billion Boondoggle and one that was mentioned in the Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) Pork Book earning it last year’s The Little Engine That Couldn’t Award.
CAGW writes about the alternate engine for the Joint Strike Fighter as having “received $1.2 billion in pork since 2004. The Senate did not include any funds for the alternate engine in its version of the appropriations bill, but the House version prevailed in conference.
On February 1, 2010 at his briefing on the fiscal year 2011 DOD budget, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said, “I’m fully aware of the political pressure to continue building the C-17 and to proceed with an alternate engine for the F-35, so let me be clear. I will strongly recommend that the president veto any legislation that sustains the unnecessary continuation of these two programs.”
On February 25, 2010, Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell reiterated DOD’s position on the alternate engine, stating, “this money can clearly be better spent buying capabilities that our warfighters do need. This is a luxury we cannot afford.”
For someone that promotes himself as having the goal of “reducing wasteful pork-barrel spending and restoring order to America’s fractured fiscal house.”, why does Mr. Kline continue to fund a program that even President Bush gave up on ?
If only, the alternate engine was the single “Programmatic Requests” but it’s not.
As CAGW reports for last year’s DOD budget, there were “$6,056,565,000 for 35 anonymous projects. This accounted for only 2 percent of the 1,752 earmarks, but 59 percent of the $10.3 billion cost of the bill, which is more than last year’s 57 percent.”
And the C-17 that Secretary Gates referred to was also reviewed by CAWG to the tune of $2.5 Billion for the procurement of ten C–17 aircraft. “In a floor statement on September 30, 2009, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) voiced his opposition to the C-17 funding: “That’s why the Administration ‘strongly objects’ to the addition of $2.5 billion in funding for these ten unrequested C-17 aircraft. The Department of Defense’s (DoD) own analyses shows that the 205 C-17s that the Air Force has or which are on order, together with the existing fleet of C-5 aircraft, are sufficient to meet the Department’s future airlift needs – even under the most stressing situations. So, I am absolutely convinced that we should not be having taxpayers put up $2.5 billion for these aircraft. Doing so not only misallocates procurement funds this year to buy expensive airplanes that are not needed, but it also imposes a continuing sustainment cost of $100 million dollars per year for every year thereafter for their operation.”
Mr. Kline is quite vocal about his opposition to “earmarks but he commonly refers to small-dollar domestic programs … and although we can all agree that “wasteful” spending must be eliminated, yet Mr. Kline fails to highlight the area that he has direct input … Congress’ appetite for military spending … just ask about the $69,880,000 for 22 projects “earmarked”by Rep. Rob Bishop (R-UT) … and when Mr. Kline was asked about his support for Mr. Bishop’s F-22 “earmark”, Mr. Kline said it was good for jobs.
I hope that Dan Powers, the DFL endorsed candidate, takes a hard look at Defense spending. Mr. Kline will no doubt claim his military experience provides him with greater insight, yet Mr. Kline is addicted to military spending … while America is fighting ground wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Kline’s HASC wants to raise the 286-ship fleet to 313 ships including funding for two SSN 774 Virginia-class submarines — the first time the committee has authorized two ships in one year – and $3 billion to fully fund two DDG 51 Arleigh Burke-class destroyers and support the restart of construction of the class.
With al Qaeda and the Taliban seeming to be headquartered in caves, why does Mr. Kline want to spend so much on ships ?
How does President Obama’s $548.9 billion Department of Defense FY2011 Budget become approved as a marked-up budget of $726 billion without “Earmarks” ?
Answer : “Programmatic Requests”
John Kline (R-MN-02) of the House Armed Services Committee HASC proudly issued a press release announcing “ the committee’s unanimous approval of H.R. 5136, the National Defense Authorization Act for FY-2011”. The word “earmark was never mentioned … although Mr. Kline did congratulate himself for changes in the “the Yellow Ribbon reintegration law I championed three years ago” … a program that was funded via an “earmark”.
Ignoring “earmarks” is easy … even during a moratorium … just follow the instructions in this GOP memo that redefines what used to be called “earmarks” as Programmatic Requests : “For HASC GOP Member purposes the term “programmatic requests” has no current definition.”
The memo goes on to give a specific example : "the second engine for the Joint Strike Fighter, which the committee believes is a national security imperative to reduce the risk inherent in requiring the Air Force, Navy and Marines to fly a common aircraft. This broadly supported action has been included as a matter of policy, and not at the request of a single Member."
Are you familiar with the Joint Strike Fighter second engine ?
It was highlighted on ABC News last week as a $3 Billion Boondoggle and one that was mentioned in the Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) Pork Book earning it last year’s The Little Engine That Couldn’t Award.
CAGW writes about the alternate engine for the Joint Strike Fighter as having “received $1.2 billion in pork since 2004. The Senate did not include any funds for the alternate engine in its version of the appropriations bill, but the House version prevailed in conference.
On February 1, 2010 at his briefing on the fiscal year 2011 DOD budget, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said, “I’m fully aware of the political pressure to continue building the C-17 and to proceed with an alternate engine for the F-35, so let me be clear. I will strongly recommend that the president veto any legislation that sustains the unnecessary continuation of these two programs.”
On February 25, 2010, Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell reiterated DOD’s position on the alternate engine, stating, “this money can clearly be better spent buying capabilities that our warfighters do need. This is a luxury we cannot afford.”
For someone that promotes himself as having the goal of “reducing wasteful pork-barrel spending and restoring order to America’s fractured fiscal house.”, why does Mr. Kline continue to fund a program that even President Bush gave up on ?
If only, the alternate engine was the single “Programmatic Requests” but it’s not.
As CAGW reports for last year’s DOD budget, there were “$6,056,565,000 for 35 anonymous projects. This accounted for only 2 percent of the 1,752 earmarks, but 59 percent of the $10.3 billion cost of the bill, which is more than last year’s 57 percent.”
And the C-17 that Secretary Gates referred to was also reviewed by CAWG to the tune of $2.5 Billion for the procurement of ten C–17 aircraft. “In a floor statement on September 30, 2009, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) voiced his opposition to the C-17 funding: “That’s why the Administration ‘strongly objects’ to the addition of $2.5 billion in funding for these ten unrequested C-17 aircraft. The Department of Defense’s (DoD) own analyses shows that the 205 C-17s that the Air Force has or which are on order, together with the existing fleet of C-5 aircraft, are sufficient to meet the Department’s future airlift needs – even under the most stressing situations. So, I am absolutely convinced that we should not be having taxpayers put up $2.5 billion for these aircraft. Doing so not only misallocates procurement funds this year to buy expensive airplanes that are not needed, but it also imposes a continuing sustainment cost of $100 million dollars per year for every year thereafter for their operation.”
Mr. Kline is quite vocal about his opposition to “earmarks but he commonly refers to small-dollar domestic programs … and although we can all agree that “wasteful” spending must be eliminated, yet Mr. Kline fails to highlight the area that he has direct input … Congress’ appetite for military spending … just ask about the $69,880,000 for 22 projects “earmarked”by Rep. Rob Bishop (R-UT) … and when Mr. Kline was asked about his support for Mr. Bishop’s F-22 “earmark”, Mr. Kline said it was good for jobs.
I hope that Dan Powers, the DFL endorsed candidate, takes a hard look at Defense spending. Mr. Kline will no doubt claim his military experience provides him with greater insight, yet Mr. Kline is addicted to military spending … while America is fighting ground wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Kline’s HASC wants to raise the 286-ship fleet to 313 ships including funding for two SSN 774 Virginia-class submarines — the first time the committee has authorized two ships in one year – and $3 billion to fully fund two DDG 51 Arleigh Burke-class destroyers and support the restart of construction of the class.
With al Qaeda and the Taliban seeming to be headquartered in caves, why does Mr. Kline want to spend so much on ships ?
Monday, April 26, 2010
MN-02 : Kline Supports $4M Earmark for Local School Funding
This week, John Kline (R-MN) issued a press release concerning the Republican Party imposing a conference-wide, one-year ban on earmarks. Mr. Kline said ““Washington needs to earn back the trust of the American people, and a bipartisan ban on earmarks is a step in the right direction. I encourage my colleagues in the majority party to join House Republicans in showing our constituents we are serious about reducing wasteful pork-barrel spending and restoring order to America’s fractured fiscal house.”
House Resolution 1289 is notably because of the absence Ron Paul (R-TX), Don Young (R-AL) and Joseph Cao (R-LA).
Press releases are worth what there printed on … scrap paper. This PR is eerily similar to the one issued prior to the 2008 elections :
“The American people are tired of out-of-control government spending, taxing, and borrowing. To earn back their trust, we need to immediately cut off the earmarks that have given Washington a bad name. Partial solutions are not enough. An immediate earmark moratorium is the only way to wipe the slate clean and allow us to start getting spending under control.”
If the 2008 Press Release meant anything, then Mr. Kline’s Labor and Education Committee would not have had a lot of “requests” to consider. But alas, that’s not true … worse yet, these are for next year when this year’s appropriations have not yet been completed.
Most interesting was the reaction from Ken Calvert (R-CA), "I'm going to enthusiastically support it. The process needs to be reformed, and we're going to come back as a majority and reform the system."
Interesting, because Mr. Calvert has been recognized as a Most Corrupt Nominee for some of his use of earmarks. But this moratorium is for FY 2011 … so the $325,000 that Mr. Calvert requested for Riverside Unified School District, Riverside, CA for a science, technology, engineering and mathematics initiative, including curriculum development and purchase of equipment still stands.
Mr. Calvert is not the only one.
There’s the $150,000 by Roy Blount (R-MO) Missouri State University, Springfield, MO for the Missouri Innovation Academy.
It should be mentioned that Mr. Blount is a candidate for the US Senate … so “pork” could result in some votes …. And Mr. Blount is so important that Mr. Kline’s Freedom and Security PAC gave $5,000 to his campaign.
And by the way, Mr. Kline's PAC also made a contribution to Mr. Calvert.
There are many other “requests” that involved Mr. Kline’s Education Committee; such as, $1 million to be split evenly between four school districts "requested" by Todd Tiahrt (R-KS) USD 402, Augusta, KS Public Schools for technology upgrades, USD 446, Independence, KS Public Schools for technology upgrades and teacher training, USD 373, Newton, Kansas Public Schools for technology upgrades, and USD 353, Wellington, KS, Public Schools for technology upgrades and teacher training
Oh, and by the way, Mr. Tiahrt is a candidate for US Senate this November. I guess that is why Mr. Kline is concerned that “spending priorities [be] based on a project’s merit rather than a Member’s seniority, party affiliation …”
Considering that Mr. Kline is “serious about reducing wasteful pork-barrel spending and restoring order to America’s fractured fiscal house”, Second District voters may be interested in the project merits for the $255,000 “request” from John Carter (R-TX) for Peaceable Kingdom Retreat for Children, Inc., Killeen, TX for educational programming . The program originated as a Baptist Church program that is designed for children with chronic/terminal illnesses and special needs to discover their natural abilities and interests and obtain the critical life and coping skills needed to reach their full potential. Sounds worthwhile … but is Killeen that much different than Minnesota … after all, the Children’s Hospitals and Clinics of Minnesota serves many needy children. Maybe, Mr. Kline is hoping that the Peaceable Kingdom Retreat will open a branch in Minnesota.
Yes, “earmarks” should be a concern … but what really is an“earmarks” ?
“Earmarks” are funds provided by the Congress for projects, programs, or grants where the purported congressional direction (whether in statutory text, report language, or other communication) specifies the location or recipient, or otherwise curtails the ability of the executive branch to manage its statutory and constitutional responsibilities pertaining to the funds allocation process.
Well, obviously, Mr. Kline being opposed to “earmarks” he would never advocate for one … would he ? After all, Mr. Kline wants funding “ based on a project’s merit” and shouldn’t the primary focus be on the accountability of taxpayer dollars.
If after review in several Department of Education reports, which cite lackluster progress and unresolved issues about the effectiveness of a program, shouldn’t future funding be re-evaluated ?
That’s what President Obama has done in his Budget
proposal : “$9 million for the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program, a private school voucher program begun in 2004. The Budget proposes to continue to provide private school vouchers for only those students currently enrolled in the program. Based on current program participation rates and the amount of available program funding carried forward from prior fiscal years, it is expected that this will be the final request for Federal funding to support the Opportunity Scholarship program.”
That $9 million has been reduced from the $13 million that was previously budgeted … which would seem to be the smart thing to do if it is not working. The not-for-profit Washington Scholarship Fund has announced it will no longer administer the program that serves an estimated 1,300 children already enrolled in the 55 private or parochial schools in the District.
Don’t know about “ Opportunity Scholarship Program” … it’s classic Frank Luntz codespeak for government money to private schools. And who goes to those private schools … well, a Heritage Foundation study found that in 2007 more than 37 percent of Representatives and 45 percent of Senators sent their own children to private school, more than double the national average of 11.5 percent.
Well, if a program is being cut by the Administration, what should Congress do … accept it or author legislation to change it.
Yes, Mr. Kline is a co-sponsor of H.R. 4312 School Choice Incentive Act.
Great, while Minnesota schools suffer and Mr. Kline opposed the stimulus that brought dollars to School Districts in the Second District, Mr. Kline approves funding for Washington DC schools … Yes, Mr. Kline truly serves Washington and his Party’s interests ahead of Minnesota.
NOTE : A Tip of the Hat to MNPact for first discussing Kline’s press release.
House Resolution 1289 is notably because of the absence Ron Paul (R-TX), Don Young (R-AL) and Joseph Cao (R-LA).
Press releases are worth what there printed on … scrap paper. This PR is eerily similar to the one issued prior to the 2008 elections :
“The American people are tired of out-of-control government spending, taxing, and borrowing. To earn back their trust, we need to immediately cut off the earmarks that have given Washington a bad name. Partial solutions are not enough. An immediate earmark moratorium is the only way to wipe the slate clean and allow us to start getting spending under control.”
If the 2008 Press Release meant anything, then Mr. Kline’s Labor and Education Committee would not have had a lot of “requests” to consider. But alas, that’s not true … worse yet, these are for next year when this year’s appropriations have not yet been completed.
Most interesting was the reaction from Ken Calvert (R-CA), "I'm going to enthusiastically support it. The process needs to be reformed, and we're going to come back as a majority and reform the system."
Interesting, because Mr. Calvert has been recognized as a Most Corrupt Nominee for some of his use of earmarks. But this moratorium is for FY 2011 … so the $325,000 that Mr. Calvert requested for Riverside Unified School District, Riverside, CA for a science, technology, engineering and mathematics initiative, including curriculum development and purchase of equipment still stands.
Mr. Calvert is not the only one.
There’s the $150,000 by Roy Blount (R-MO) Missouri State University, Springfield, MO for the Missouri Innovation Academy.
It should be mentioned that Mr. Blount is a candidate for the US Senate … so “pork” could result in some votes …. And Mr. Blount is so important that Mr. Kline’s Freedom and Security PAC gave $5,000 to his campaign.
And by the way, Mr. Kline's PAC also made a contribution to Mr. Calvert.
There are many other “requests” that involved Mr. Kline’s Education Committee; such as, $1 million to be split evenly between four school districts "requested" by Todd Tiahrt (R-KS) USD 402, Augusta, KS Public Schools for technology upgrades, USD 446, Independence, KS Public Schools for technology upgrades and teacher training, USD 373, Newton, Kansas Public Schools for technology upgrades, and USD 353, Wellington, KS, Public Schools for technology upgrades and teacher training
Oh, and by the way, Mr. Tiahrt is a candidate for US Senate this November. I guess that is why Mr. Kline is concerned that “spending priorities [be] based on a project’s merit rather than a Member’s seniority, party affiliation …”
Considering that Mr. Kline is “serious about reducing wasteful pork-barrel spending and restoring order to America’s fractured fiscal house”, Second District voters may be interested in the project merits for the $255,000 “request” from John Carter (R-TX) for Peaceable Kingdom Retreat for Children, Inc., Killeen, TX for educational programming . The program originated as a Baptist Church program that is designed for children with chronic/terminal illnesses and special needs to discover their natural abilities and interests and obtain the critical life and coping skills needed to reach their full potential. Sounds worthwhile … but is Killeen that much different than Minnesota … after all, the Children’s Hospitals and Clinics of Minnesota serves many needy children. Maybe, Mr. Kline is hoping that the Peaceable Kingdom Retreat will open a branch in Minnesota.
Yes, “earmarks” should be a concern … but what really is an“earmarks” ?
“Earmarks” are funds provided by the Congress for projects, programs, or grants where the purported congressional direction (whether in statutory text, report language, or other communication) specifies the location or recipient, or otherwise curtails the ability of the executive branch to manage its statutory and constitutional responsibilities pertaining to the funds allocation process.
Well, obviously, Mr. Kline being opposed to “earmarks” he would never advocate for one … would he ? After all, Mr. Kline wants funding “ based on a project’s merit” and shouldn’t the primary focus be on the accountability of taxpayer dollars.
If after review in several Department of Education reports, which cite lackluster progress and unresolved issues about the effectiveness of a program, shouldn’t future funding be re-evaluated ?
That’s what President Obama has done in his Budget
proposal : “$9 million for the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program, a private school voucher program begun in 2004. The Budget proposes to continue to provide private school vouchers for only those students currently enrolled in the program. Based on current program participation rates and the amount of available program funding carried forward from prior fiscal years, it is expected that this will be the final request for Federal funding to support the Opportunity Scholarship program.”
That $9 million has been reduced from the $13 million that was previously budgeted … which would seem to be the smart thing to do if it is not working. The not-for-profit Washington Scholarship Fund has announced it will no longer administer the program that serves an estimated 1,300 children already enrolled in the 55 private or parochial schools in the District.
Don’t know about “ Opportunity Scholarship Program” … it’s classic Frank Luntz codespeak for government money to private schools. And who goes to those private schools … well, a Heritage Foundation study found that in 2007 more than 37 percent of Representatives and 45 percent of Senators sent their own children to private school, more than double the national average of 11.5 percent.
Well, if a program is being cut by the Administration, what should Congress do … accept it or author legislation to change it.
Yes, Mr. Kline is a co-sponsor of H.R. 4312 School Choice Incentive Act.
Great, while Minnesota schools suffer and Mr. Kline opposed the stimulus that brought dollars to School Districts in the Second District, Mr. Kline approves funding for Washington DC schools … Yes, Mr. Kline truly serves Washington and his Party’s interests ahead of Minnesota.
NOTE : A Tip of the Hat to MNPact for first discussing Kline’s press release.
Friday, March 19, 2010
Earmarks cause rift in Republican family
Having current working relationships with officials at all levels of government is useful in applying for and allocating possible State and Fed grant money as well as accomplishing initiatives that require multiple government levels.
A great campaign theme … yet it is the quandary for Republican candidates this year … promoting access while prominent Republicans, like John Kline (MN-02), are denouncing “earmarks”.
Kline’s press release states his position clearly : “For four years, Congressman Kline has refused to participate in the earmarking process, instead advocating that federal funding decisions should be based on merit, rather than a Member’s seniority, party affiliation, or the committees on which they serve.”
One has to wonder if Mr. Kline would have a problem with someone whose campaign emphasizes "working relationship" ?
Yet, it's that "working relationship" that "sets Kathy apart" ... or so says, Kathy Danner's website .
Her bio is : "Kathy is the wife of a Nissan man (meaning that he is employed at Nissan North American Headquarters), mother of two elementary schoolers, caregiver to one tick attracting dog and two over-fed gold fish. : ) She is also the daughter of US Congressman John Kline. Kathy and Ted gave up 2/3 of their combined income to stay home with their first child. They lived on $34,000 a year. Kathy grew up a Marine Corps kid. She is now a thriving WAHM (work at home mom) , an avid gardener, was a discussion Leader and now a member for Bible Study Fellowship International.
Mrs. Danner is a candidate for Williamson TN County Commissioner in the 4th District.
Voters will have to judge for themselves if Mrs. Danner will have any sway with her Father, but the point of this commentary is that earmarks are a source of controversy within the Republican Party.
While Mr. Kline press releases indicate that Republicans are all signing up for his “Pork-free Diet”, that just ain’t happening.
The Senate just voted on banning “earmarks” … and … well, let’s just say that a number of Republicans said NO -- Alexander (R-TN), Bond (R-MO), Bunning (R-KY), Cochran (R-MS), Collins (R-ME), Gregg (R-NH), Hutchison (R-TX), Inhofe (R-OK), Lugar (R-IN), Murkowski (R-AK), Roberts (R-KS), Shelby (R-AL), Snowe (R-ME), Voinovich (R-OH) and Wicker (R-MS). Most interesting is that a number of these Senators will be retiring this year, so if they brought home the “pork” or not, would not affect them at the ballot box.
Lamar Alexander expressed it correctly “I’m not ready to give away the Congress’ right to appropriate money… Under the Constitution, that’s my job.”
Senator Alexander knows that “earmarks” only account for roughly two-percent of federal spending. (Note : Last year, Tennessee received more than half a billion dollars in earmarks for 130 projects. Yep, that Tennessee where Mrs. Danner is a candidate for elective office.)
Senator Alexander goes on to say, “But I don’t want that to be the whole discussion about debt reduction, because we could eliminate all the earmarks and we could still be on our way to Armageddon in terms of our national debt.”
Mr. Kline thinks that not participating in “earmarks” is the solution.
NO !
In fact, as Senator Jim Inhofe said prohibiting lawmakers from directing money to their states would give more power to President Barack Obama and the executive agency heads he appoints.
A better solution would be follow Tim Walz (D-MN-01) example getting citizen input in an open, accountable, and transparent appropriations process.
The Walz approach appears to be similar to the one that Marsha Blackburn (R-TN-07) used. She describes it as “The intent of the solicitation was for Members to identify those transportation projects in their districts that should receive funding from the Highway Trust Fund. The potential funding for these projects does not come from the Federal Treasury. Instead, the funds are collected from gas tax proceeds paid by Tennessee consumers dedicated only for the purpose of infrastructure development. As such, High Priority Projects do not increase the federal debt, nor do they create a future obligation for Tennessee Taxpayers. Failure to identify worthy projects in the 7th District would abdicate infrastructure development decisions to bureaucrats who may well spend the funds in ways that don’t meet our district’s needs. Congressman Blackburn, after consulting extensively with local officials and the Tennessee Department of Transportation, believes that her request list better meets 7th District needs than any bureaucratic effort could.”
Mr. Kline and House Republicans, who calling for a moratorium on “earmarks”, are pushing a campaign issue … but history tells us that once the new session starts, the moratorium will be over … and for the Republicans, they hope to be in charge, and once again being able to re-establish those "working relationship" with newly empowered County Commissioners.
A great campaign theme … yet it is the quandary for Republican candidates this year … promoting access while prominent Republicans, like John Kline (MN-02), are denouncing “earmarks”.
Kline’s press release states his position clearly : “For four years, Congressman Kline has refused to participate in the earmarking process, instead advocating that federal funding decisions should be based on merit, rather than a Member’s seniority, party affiliation, or the committees on which they serve.”
One has to wonder if Mr. Kline would have a problem with someone whose campaign emphasizes "working relationship" ?
Yet, it's that "working relationship" that "sets Kathy apart" ... or so says, Kathy Danner's website .
Her bio is : "Kathy is the wife of a Nissan man (meaning that he is employed at Nissan North American Headquarters), mother of two elementary schoolers, caregiver to one tick attracting dog and two over-fed gold fish. : ) She is also the daughter of US Congressman John Kline. Kathy and Ted gave up 2/3 of their combined income to stay home with their first child. They lived on $34,000 a year. Kathy grew up a Marine Corps kid. She is now a thriving WAHM (work at home mom) , an avid gardener, was a discussion Leader and now a member for Bible Study Fellowship International.
Mrs. Danner is a candidate for Williamson TN County Commissioner in the 4th District.
Voters will have to judge for themselves if Mrs. Danner will have any sway with her Father, but the point of this commentary is that earmarks are a source of controversy within the Republican Party.
While Mr. Kline press releases indicate that Republicans are all signing up for his “Pork-free Diet”, that just ain’t happening.
The Senate just voted on banning “earmarks” … and … well, let’s just say that a number of Republicans said NO -- Alexander (R-TN), Bond (R-MO), Bunning (R-KY), Cochran (R-MS), Collins (R-ME), Gregg (R-NH), Hutchison (R-TX), Inhofe (R-OK), Lugar (R-IN), Murkowski (R-AK), Roberts (R-KS), Shelby (R-AL), Snowe (R-ME), Voinovich (R-OH) and Wicker (R-MS). Most interesting is that a number of these Senators will be retiring this year, so if they brought home the “pork” or not, would not affect them at the ballot box.
Lamar Alexander expressed it correctly “I’m not ready to give away the Congress’ right to appropriate money… Under the Constitution, that’s my job.”
Senator Alexander knows that “earmarks” only account for roughly two-percent of federal spending. (Note : Last year, Tennessee received more than half a billion dollars in earmarks for 130 projects. Yep, that Tennessee where Mrs. Danner is a candidate for elective office.)
Senator Alexander goes on to say, “But I don’t want that to be the whole discussion about debt reduction, because we could eliminate all the earmarks and we could still be on our way to Armageddon in terms of our national debt.”
Mr. Kline thinks that not participating in “earmarks” is the solution.
NO !
In fact, as Senator Jim Inhofe said prohibiting lawmakers from directing money to their states would give more power to President Barack Obama and the executive agency heads he appoints.
A better solution would be follow Tim Walz (D-MN-01) example getting citizen input in an open, accountable, and transparent appropriations process.
The Walz approach appears to be similar to the one that Marsha Blackburn (R-TN-07) used. She describes it as “The intent of the solicitation was for Members to identify those transportation projects in their districts that should receive funding from the Highway Trust Fund. The potential funding for these projects does not come from the Federal Treasury. Instead, the funds are collected from gas tax proceeds paid by Tennessee consumers dedicated only for the purpose of infrastructure development. As such, High Priority Projects do not increase the federal debt, nor do they create a future obligation for Tennessee Taxpayers. Failure to identify worthy projects in the 7th District would abdicate infrastructure development decisions to bureaucrats who may well spend the funds in ways that don’t meet our district’s needs. Congressman Blackburn, after consulting extensively with local officials and the Tennessee Department of Transportation, believes that her request list better meets 7th District needs than any bureaucratic effort could.”
Mr. Kline and House Republicans, who calling for a moratorium on “earmarks”, are pushing a campaign issue … but history tells us that once the new session starts, the moratorium will be over … and for the Republicans, they hope to be in charge, and once again being able to re-establish those "working relationship" with newly empowered County Commissioners.
Saturday, March 06, 2010
Walz Wants Input on Earmarks, Kline Lets Others Decide
Representative Tim Walz (MN-01) is requesting input on how our tax dollars should be spent.
Walz writes : “Each year, the appropriations process allows Members of Congress to solicit input and ideas from their constituents as to which local projects need federal funds. I intend to request funding this year for projects that will create jobs through investments in southern Minnesota and/or will have a transformative impact on the region.
While I continue to work with my colleagues to rein in the deficit and bring the budget into balance in Washington, it is important to note that Congressional earmarks do not add to the federal deficit. Any funds not reserved for specific projects through the Congressional earmark process would instead be left for federal bureaucrats in Washington to distribute, in accordance with federal law, as they see fit. I support an open, accountable, and transparent appropriations process because I think it is critically important that the people of southern Minnesota have a say in how their taxpayer dollars are spent in our community.
Below, you will see links to all of the qualified applications for federal funding I've received this year. I must make a decision on whether to request funding for each individual application very soon. Before I make my decision, I want to hear from you. ”
Tim Walz is a true Representative. He is not advocating shadowy spending where special interests get special attention. He wants to hear from all citizens. In fact, Walz goes on to encourage projects that will create jobs and have strong public support. Walz writes : “The more public support from local elected leaders, community officials, and from citizens in southern Minnesota project requestors can demonstrate for a project, the better the chance that I will submit it to the House Appropriations Committee for consideration.”
Further, he writes “I am also interested in projects that are eligible for federal funds through the appropriations process but will not require annual federal financial support to be successful.”
Lastly, he is not guaranteeing approval.
That’s a true Representative - open, responsive and concerned with how to best invest in the communities of southern Minnesota.
Contrast Representative Tim Walz, with John Kline in Minnesota’s Second District.
Mr. Kline, the “No” man who seems to be very comfortable in Washington Republican leadership has denounced Earmarks as a waste of tax dollars.
Kline wrote in 2008 “There is no accountability. Members of Congress are not even required to disclose to taxpayers what projects they have requested funding for.”
Although Representative Walz is not required, his website and press reporting lists all projects for voters to review the process. Walz writes : “To the best of my knowledge, I am the only Member of Congress who seeks public input on earmark applications before finalizing my request to the House Appropriations Committee. I am committed to this unprecedented transparency because I believe the best decisions are well-informed decisions.”
Why doesn’t Mr. Kline do that ?
After all, as Representative Walz stated “Any funds not reserved for specific projects through the Congressional earmark process would instead be left for federal bureaucrats in Washington to distribute, in accordance with federal law, as they see fit.”
It’s Mr. Kline’s failure to be involved in the appropriations process that has contributed to Minnesota being a donor state. The Tax Foundation rates Minnesota at the bottom - #46 writing : “Minnesota taxpayers receive less federal funding per dollar of federal taxes paid compared to the average state. Per dollar of Federal tax collected in 2005, Minnesota citizens received approximately $0.72 in the way of federal spending. This ranks the state 46th highest nationally and represents a decrease from 1995 when Minnesota received $0.78 per dollar of taxes in federal spending (44th highest nationally). Neighboring states and the amount of federal money they received per dollar of federal taxes collected were: North Dakota ($1.68), South Dakota ($1.53), Iowa ($1.10) and Wisconsin ($0.86).
Mr. Kline has taken a self-promoting political slant that he belongs to an elite group of 22 members of Congress that are opposing “earmarks”.
That type of elitism is bad for Minnesota. Mr. Kline could be as open, transparent and responsive as Representative Walz and investigate and promote projects that will grow jobs and improve Minnesota. Not all "earmarks" are wasteful government spending ... an effective Representative will make good decisions and spend our money wisely.
So, if you think that Highway 14 (Minnesota’s most deadliest highway) should be included in a federal appropriation, click here and tell Representative Walz (or any other project that might involve infrastructure investment such as water, sewer, road, etc.) … likewise, if you don’t think that a project should be included, I am sure that Representative Walz would want that input.
Walz writes : “Each year, the appropriations process allows Members of Congress to solicit input and ideas from their constituents as to which local projects need federal funds. I intend to request funding this year for projects that will create jobs through investments in southern Minnesota and/or will have a transformative impact on the region.
While I continue to work with my colleagues to rein in the deficit and bring the budget into balance in Washington, it is important to note that Congressional earmarks do not add to the federal deficit. Any funds not reserved for specific projects through the Congressional earmark process would instead be left for federal bureaucrats in Washington to distribute, in accordance with federal law, as they see fit. I support an open, accountable, and transparent appropriations process because I think it is critically important that the people of southern Minnesota have a say in how their taxpayer dollars are spent in our community.
Below, you will see links to all of the qualified applications for federal funding I've received this year. I must make a decision on whether to request funding for each individual application very soon. Before I make my decision, I want to hear from you. ”
Tim Walz is a true Representative. He is not advocating shadowy spending where special interests get special attention. He wants to hear from all citizens. In fact, Walz goes on to encourage projects that will create jobs and have strong public support. Walz writes : “The more public support from local elected leaders, community officials, and from citizens in southern Minnesota project requestors can demonstrate for a project, the better the chance that I will submit it to the House Appropriations Committee for consideration.”
Further, he writes “I am also interested in projects that are eligible for federal funds through the appropriations process but will not require annual federal financial support to be successful.”
Lastly, he is not guaranteeing approval.
That’s a true Representative - open, responsive and concerned with how to best invest in the communities of southern Minnesota.
Contrast Representative Tim Walz, with John Kline in Minnesota’s Second District.
Mr. Kline, the “No” man who seems to be very comfortable in Washington Republican leadership has denounced Earmarks as a waste of tax dollars.
Kline wrote in 2008 “There is no accountability. Members of Congress are not even required to disclose to taxpayers what projects they have requested funding for.”
Although Representative Walz is not required, his website and press reporting lists all projects for voters to review the process. Walz writes : “To the best of my knowledge, I am the only Member of Congress who seeks public input on earmark applications before finalizing my request to the House Appropriations Committee. I am committed to this unprecedented transparency because I believe the best decisions are well-informed decisions.”
Why doesn’t Mr. Kline do that ?
After all, as Representative Walz stated “Any funds not reserved for specific projects through the Congressional earmark process would instead be left for federal bureaucrats in Washington to distribute, in accordance with federal law, as they see fit.”
It’s Mr. Kline’s failure to be involved in the appropriations process that has contributed to Minnesota being a donor state. The Tax Foundation rates Minnesota at the bottom - #46 writing : “Minnesota taxpayers receive less federal funding per dollar of federal taxes paid compared to the average state. Per dollar of Federal tax collected in 2005, Minnesota citizens received approximately $0.72 in the way of federal spending. This ranks the state 46th highest nationally and represents a decrease from 1995 when Minnesota received $0.78 per dollar of taxes in federal spending (44th highest nationally). Neighboring states and the amount of federal money they received per dollar of federal taxes collected were: North Dakota ($1.68), South Dakota ($1.53), Iowa ($1.10) and Wisconsin ($0.86).
Mr. Kline has taken a self-promoting political slant that he belongs to an elite group of 22 members of Congress that are opposing “earmarks”.
That type of elitism is bad for Minnesota. Mr. Kline could be as open, transparent and responsive as Representative Walz and investigate and promote projects that will grow jobs and improve Minnesota. Not all "earmarks" are wasteful government spending ... an effective Representative will make good decisions and spend our money wisely.
So, if you think that Highway 14 (Minnesota’s most deadliest highway) should be included in a federal appropriation, click here and tell Representative Walz (or any other project that might involve infrastructure investment such as water, sewer, road, etc.) … likewise, if you don’t think that a project should be included, I am sure that Representative Walz would want that input.
Sunday, February 14, 2010
MN-02 : Kline Needs to Listen To The Neighbors
We hear it all the time, Minnesota is not competitive … our neighbors have it better.
Maybe because they have elected officials that represent their constituents.
Case in point, the so called “stimulus” … it had a number of aspects. Some we feel directly … some indirectly … and some maybe not at all.
As President Obama stated in the State of the Union address, his administration’s economic recovery plan includes 25 different tax cuts. "Now, let me repeat: We cut taxes," he said. "We cut taxes for 95 percent of working families. We cut taxes for small businesses. We cut taxes for first-time homebuyers. We cut taxes for parents trying to care for their children. We cut taxes for 8 million Americans paying for college."
The “stimulus” also included monies for the states … which helped Minnesota’s budget signficantly. Beyond the immediate action, there are other programs that require application, evaluation and approval.
So the question is how is this being handled by Minnesota’s competitors?
"If the funds are there, Senator Grassley’s going to help Iowa, rather than some other state, get its share" was the comment as the Iowa Republican Senator submitted his “requests”.
"I strongly opposed the stimulus, but the only thing that could make it worse would be if none of it returned to the taxpayers of Missouri," said Kit Bond (R-MO).
"The proposed project would create 38 new jobs and bring broadband to eight hospitals, five colleges, 16 libraries and 161 K-12 schools," wrote Sen. Mike Johanns (R-NE) in his request.
These are not unique, as the Washington Times reported of a number of Republicans who voted against the legislation, but then recognized that they need to represent their constituents. "We know their endeavor will provide jobs and investment in one of the poorer sections of the Congressional District," Representative Joe Wilson (R-SC) wrote Agriculuture Secretary Vilsack in a Aug. 26, 2009, letter in support of a funding request. "I believe the addition of federal funds to these projects would maximize the stimulative effect of these projects on the local economy," Sen. Robert F. Bennett (R-UT) wrote on Feb. 11, 2009 in his justification for funding.
So where is John Kline’s requests … or does he believe that his constituents need to be represented only during votes and not in services ?
Heck, he doesn’t even have to look outside the Minnesota delegation to see how it’s done.
Erik Paulsen (R-MN-03) wrote concerning transportation projects “I worked hard to secure this funding in order to reduce congestion, improve economic opportunities and increase safety. I’m pleased these critical projects were passed by the House”
The projects :
- Interstate 94/Brockton Lane Interchange : $700,000 for the Brockton Interchange project includes preliminary design, environmental reviews, right-of-way acquisition and final design to construct an interchange at the location of Interstate 94 and Brockton Lane
- Highway 169/Interstate 494 Interchange : $400,000 for the project involves a segment of US Hwy 169 from 4,600 feet south and 13,600 feet north of the 169/494 interchange; and a segment of I-494 from 7,300 feet west and 3,400 feet east of the 169/494 interchange. The project provides all of the US Hwy 169 to I-494 (system-to-system) moves, as well as providing local access to the principal arterials of US Hwy 169 and I-494.
- Highway 610 Construction : $ 400,000 - Design and construction of Trunk Highway 610 in Maple Grove from County State Aid Highway 81 to the final terminus of Interstate 94, thus completing the corridor from I-35W to I-94. The project would include planning, design, update of environmental review, right-of-way acquisition, construction and the realignment of several local roadways and utilities.
Oh, and for the record, just like those Republicans that voted against the stimulus, Andrew Foxwell, spokesperson for the Representative explained his vote : "While Congressman Paulsen has worked for months to get these projects approved, he voted no on the overall bill due to many problems with this massive and expensive piece of legislation."
That’s right Mr. Kline (cannot call you Representative until you tell us who you represent), you can actually oppose legislation and still work to make sure that Minnesota gets a fair return on its money. This is not a new concept … since it was addressed previously noting that Bob Hofstad of MnDOT said that the state receives about 92 cents for every dollar that its residents send to Washington.
The stimulus is a great opportunity to address Minnesota’s lagging broadband capacity ... just as Representatives are requesting for their states. Governor Pawlenty is opposing bonding for higher education facilities as he believes that in the future, class will be taught over the Internet. Sadly, Minnesota is not equipped for the Internet speeds required. The Ultra-High Speed Task Force released its report in November on Minnesota’s broadband needs. Currently only one county meets the currently accepted standards while some are extremely behind (Cook at 37%) … Minnesota's broadband adoption in the metro area is 57% while rural broadband is at 39.4% according to a Pew Internet project. This is a great opportunity for jobs in a public-private partnership especially since the federal Recovery Act Broadband Program is now starting to approve projects … South Dakota just got $20.6 million to add 140 miles of middle mile spurs… thus South Dakota will not only have a tax advantage over Minnesota but also a broadband advantage to attract new business. For example, state economic development officials were helping a company look for up to 500 acres of land within 30 minutes of a major airport and close to a railroad. Lake County could provide both but it lost out because it did not have one other requirement: A high-speed Internet fiber connection. The lost opportunity meant 150 jobs were lost.
Today, Minnesota may be competing with neighboring states for business, but tomorrow, the competition will be world-wide … and Minnesota (and the United States) are already behind.
The question for Mr. Kline is : Will you listen ? Minnesota is hurting and you're not helping.
Maybe because they have elected officials that represent their constituents.
Case in point, the so called “stimulus” … it had a number of aspects. Some we feel directly … some indirectly … and some maybe not at all.
As President Obama stated in the State of the Union address, his administration’s economic recovery plan includes 25 different tax cuts. "Now, let me repeat: We cut taxes," he said. "We cut taxes for 95 percent of working families. We cut taxes for small businesses. We cut taxes for first-time homebuyers. We cut taxes for parents trying to care for their children. We cut taxes for 8 million Americans paying for college."
The “stimulus” also included monies for the states … which helped Minnesota’s budget signficantly. Beyond the immediate action, there are other programs that require application, evaluation and approval.
So the question is how is this being handled by Minnesota’s competitors?
"If the funds are there, Senator Grassley’s going to help Iowa, rather than some other state, get its share" was the comment as the Iowa Republican Senator submitted his “requests”.
"I strongly opposed the stimulus, but the only thing that could make it worse would be if none of it returned to the taxpayers of Missouri," said Kit Bond (R-MO).
"The proposed project would create 38 new jobs and bring broadband to eight hospitals, five colleges, 16 libraries and 161 K-12 schools," wrote Sen. Mike Johanns (R-NE) in his request.
These are not unique, as the Washington Times reported of a number of Republicans who voted against the legislation, but then recognized that they need to represent their constituents. "We know their endeavor will provide jobs and investment in one of the poorer sections of the Congressional District," Representative Joe Wilson (R-SC) wrote Agriculuture Secretary Vilsack in a Aug. 26, 2009, letter in support of a funding request. "I believe the addition of federal funds to these projects would maximize the stimulative effect of these projects on the local economy," Sen. Robert F. Bennett (R-UT) wrote on Feb. 11, 2009 in his justification for funding.
So where is John Kline’s requests … or does he believe that his constituents need to be represented only during votes and not in services ?
Heck, he doesn’t even have to look outside the Minnesota delegation to see how it’s done.
Erik Paulsen (R-MN-03) wrote concerning transportation projects “I worked hard to secure this funding in order to reduce congestion, improve economic opportunities and increase safety. I’m pleased these critical projects were passed by the House”
The projects :
- Interstate 94/Brockton Lane Interchange : $700,000 for the Brockton Interchange project includes preliminary design, environmental reviews, right-of-way acquisition and final design to construct an interchange at the location of Interstate 94 and Brockton Lane
- Highway 169/Interstate 494 Interchange : $400,000 for the project involves a segment of US Hwy 169 from 4,600 feet south and 13,600 feet north of the 169/494 interchange; and a segment of I-494 from 7,300 feet west and 3,400 feet east of the 169/494 interchange. The project provides all of the US Hwy 169 to I-494 (system-to-system) moves, as well as providing local access to the principal arterials of US Hwy 169 and I-494.
- Highway 610 Construction : $ 400,000 - Design and construction of Trunk Highway 610 in Maple Grove from County State Aid Highway 81 to the final terminus of Interstate 94, thus completing the corridor from I-35W to I-94. The project would include planning, design, update of environmental review, right-of-way acquisition, construction and the realignment of several local roadways and utilities.
Oh, and for the record, just like those Republicans that voted against the stimulus, Andrew Foxwell, spokesperson for the Representative explained his vote : "While Congressman Paulsen has worked for months to get these projects approved, he voted no on the overall bill due to many problems with this massive and expensive piece of legislation."
That’s right Mr. Kline (cannot call you Representative until you tell us who you represent), you can actually oppose legislation and still work to make sure that Minnesota gets a fair return on its money. This is not a new concept … since it was addressed previously noting that Bob Hofstad of MnDOT said that the state receives about 92 cents for every dollar that its residents send to Washington.
The stimulus is a great opportunity to address Minnesota’s lagging broadband capacity ... just as Representatives are requesting for their states. Governor Pawlenty is opposing bonding for higher education facilities as he believes that in the future, class will be taught over the Internet. Sadly, Minnesota is not equipped for the Internet speeds required. The Ultra-High Speed Task Force released its report in November on Minnesota’s broadband needs. Currently only one county meets the currently accepted standards while some are extremely behind (Cook at 37%) … Minnesota's broadband adoption in the metro area is 57% while rural broadband is at 39.4% according to a Pew Internet project. This is a great opportunity for jobs in a public-private partnership especially since the federal Recovery Act Broadband Program is now starting to approve projects … South Dakota just got $20.6 million to add 140 miles of middle mile spurs… thus South Dakota will not only have a tax advantage over Minnesota but also a broadband advantage to attract new business. For example, state economic development officials were helping a company look for up to 500 acres of land within 30 minutes of a major airport and close to a railroad. Lake County could provide both but it lost out because it did not have one other requirement: A high-speed Internet fiber connection. The lost opportunity meant 150 jobs were lost.
Today, Minnesota may be competing with neighboring states for business, but tomorrow, the competition will be world-wide … and Minnesota (and the United States) are already behind.
The question for Mr. Kline is : Will you listen ? Minnesota is hurting and you're not helping.
Saturday, January 10, 2009
GOP Not Serious About Earmarks; Dems Not Serious About Reform
Congress is back !
While some things stay the same, other things change … and not for the better.
Oh, sure there are plenty of new faces --- each with unbridled optimism and good intentions. Alas, their first reaction must be … did you guys run last November ?
For those voters that thought that change would be in order, must now be seriously disappointed. In Minnesota, all the House incumbents were re-elected … but what changes will really happen ?
In the House on Republican side, Minnesota has returned John Kline and Michele Bachmann.
Kline’s major theme of his re-election was Stop the Pork while Bachmann is also on a pork-free diet. So, did the Republicans heed their campaign motto ? NO.
Pork can be best controlled through the Appropriations Committee which directs all federal discretionary spending. I have never heard Kline or Bachmann openly campaign for assignment to this committee. With Democrats increasing their overall numbers in the House, the Appropriations Committee ratio changed from 37-29 in the 110th Congress to 37-23 in the 111th, leaving Republicans with only two seats to fill after accounting for retirements and election losses. Of course, they could have re-assigned existing members including dishonored Jerry Lewis (R-CA) but that change is rarely made. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) who is an outspoken critic of wasteful government spending openly campaigned for a seat last session and for this new session. IF the Republicans wanted to stop the pork, they would have made sure that Flake got that assignment. Alas, the new members will be Tom Cole (R-OK) and Steven LaTourette (R-OH). Word is that Cole was promised the assignment in exchange for stepping down as chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee (no Blagojevich buy-out here).
Minnesota’s newly elected Erik Paulsen (MN-06) has been assigned to the House Financial Services Committee where Bachmann has served.
So, on the Republican side, Minnesota has lost its voice in the powerful Ways and Means Committee with the retirement of Jim Ramstad. Republicans filled six slots - Charles Boustany Jr. (LA); Ginny Brown-Waite (FL); Geoff Davis (KY); Dean Heller (NV); Dave Reichert (WA); and Peter Roskam (IL).
Voters were sold a “pig in the poke” with Kline and Bachmann’s ranting … they have started off this session exhibiting their failures to motivate their colleagues … all the while the grandstanding continues for voter’s obfuscation. Kline issues press releases while Bachmann editorializes about limestone sidewalks, skateboard parks and bike lanes. No doubt we will hear about these “earmarks” thoughout the session, yet they have failed to take the necessary action by making real change in committee assignments.
The GOP is playing us for suckers again.
And the Democrats are not starting out well either.
In the House, the Rules have been changed. Term limits on committee chairs have been changed while the “Pay-go” rules which required spending proposals to be balanced with revenue or cuts, have been gutted.
While Kline and Bachmann are pseudo-deficit spending and "anti-pork-barrel" politicians, Minnesotans in the First District remember a true fiscal conservative – Tim Penny. When Penny was in the House, he formed the Democratic Budget Group and when his party failed to reduce the federal deficit, he did not seek re-election. Penny saw the hypocrisy and excessive partisanship first hand. He wrote a book entitled Common Cents: A Retiring Six-Term Congressman Reveals How Congress Really Works--And What We Must Do to Fix it which he denounces the rules that make chairmen too powerful. Penny was right then and the Republicans changed those rules under the guise of the "Contract With America”. After the lessons of Tom Delay, Duke Cunnningham, John Doolittle, Jerry Lewis, and Rick Renzi just to name a few dishonored Republicans, the Democrats are reverting to the old rules just when Charlie Rangel (D-NY) ethics problems are being investigated. Rangel chairs the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee. It was a good move when Henry Waxman (D-CA) took over for John Dingell (D-MI) as chairman of the influential Committee on Energy and Commerce. Failure to allow younger members like Tim Walz (D-MN-01) and Keith Ellison (D-MN-05) to assume responsibilities opposes the opportunities for change.
Walz should be angered by the relaxing of Pay-go rules as his votes last session clearly embraced that philosophy, and was a major theme in his election campaigns.
Somehow, I suspect that Penny, who must still be smarting over the over half a million in federal funds that was slipped into the 1991 budget at the last moment to preserve and enshrine Lawrence Welk's boyhood home in Strasburg, N D (pop. 623), must see that nothing has changed has changed in over a decade since he left Congress.
{NOTE : on the Senate side, the major committees that will impact spending include : Appropriations Committee - Minnesota does not currently have a member and the Democrats have a four seat advantage. On the Senate Budge Committee, Minnesota does not currently have a member and the Democrats have a three seat advantage. Franken may be in-line for a seat on the Senate Health Education Labor and Pensions Committee where the Democrats have a one seat advantage. The Coleman legal challenge is impacting Minnesotans from having input on shaping our fiscal future.}
While some things stay the same, other things change … and not for the better.
Oh, sure there are plenty of new faces --- each with unbridled optimism and good intentions. Alas, their first reaction must be … did you guys run last November ?
For those voters that thought that change would be in order, must now be seriously disappointed. In Minnesota, all the House incumbents were re-elected … but what changes will really happen ?
In the House on Republican side, Minnesota has returned John Kline and Michele Bachmann.
Kline’s major theme of his re-election was Stop the Pork while Bachmann is also on a pork-free diet. So, did the Republicans heed their campaign motto ? NO.
Pork can be best controlled through the Appropriations Committee which directs all federal discretionary spending. I have never heard Kline or Bachmann openly campaign for assignment to this committee. With Democrats increasing their overall numbers in the House, the Appropriations Committee ratio changed from 37-29 in the 110th Congress to 37-23 in the 111th, leaving Republicans with only two seats to fill after accounting for retirements and election losses. Of course, they could have re-assigned existing members including dishonored Jerry Lewis (R-CA) but that change is rarely made. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) who is an outspoken critic of wasteful government spending openly campaigned for a seat last session and for this new session. IF the Republicans wanted to stop the pork, they would have made sure that Flake got that assignment. Alas, the new members will be Tom Cole (R-OK) and Steven LaTourette (R-OH). Word is that Cole was promised the assignment in exchange for stepping down as chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee (no Blagojevich buy-out here).
Minnesota’s newly elected Erik Paulsen (MN-06) has been assigned to the House Financial Services Committee where Bachmann has served.
So, on the Republican side, Minnesota has lost its voice in the powerful Ways and Means Committee with the retirement of Jim Ramstad. Republicans filled six slots - Charles Boustany Jr. (LA); Ginny Brown-Waite (FL); Geoff Davis (KY); Dean Heller (NV); Dave Reichert (WA); and Peter Roskam (IL).
Voters were sold a “pig in the poke” with Kline and Bachmann’s ranting … they have started off this session exhibiting their failures to motivate their colleagues … all the while the grandstanding continues for voter’s obfuscation. Kline issues press releases while Bachmann editorializes about limestone sidewalks, skateboard parks and bike lanes. No doubt we will hear about these “earmarks” thoughout the session, yet they have failed to take the necessary action by making real change in committee assignments.
The GOP is playing us for suckers again.
And the Democrats are not starting out well either.
In the House, the Rules have been changed. Term limits on committee chairs have been changed while the “Pay-go” rules which required spending proposals to be balanced with revenue or cuts, have been gutted.
While Kline and Bachmann are pseudo-deficit spending and "anti-pork-barrel" politicians, Minnesotans in the First District remember a true fiscal conservative – Tim Penny. When Penny was in the House, he formed the Democratic Budget Group and when his party failed to reduce the federal deficit, he did not seek re-election. Penny saw the hypocrisy and excessive partisanship first hand. He wrote a book entitled Common Cents: A Retiring Six-Term Congressman Reveals How Congress Really Works--And What We Must Do to Fix it which he denounces the rules that make chairmen too powerful. Penny was right then and the Republicans changed those rules under the guise of the "Contract With America”. After the lessons of Tom Delay, Duke Cunnningham, John Doolittle, Jerry Lewis, and Rick Renzi just to name a few dishonored Republicans, the Democrats are reverting to the old rules just when Charlie Rangel (D-NY) ethics problems are being investigated. Rangel chairs the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee. It was a good move when Henry Waxman (D-CA) took over for John Dingell (D-MI) as chairman of the influential Committee on Energy and Commerce. Failure to allow younger members like Tim Walz (D-MN-01) and Keith Ellison (D-MN-05) to assume responsibilities opposes the opportunities for change.
Walz should be angered by the relaxing of Pay-go rules as his votes last session clearly embraced that philosophy, and was a major theme in his election campaigns.
Somehow, I suspect that Penny, who must still be smarting over the over half a million in federal funds that was slipped into the 1991 budget at the last moment to preserve and enshrine Lawrence Welk's boyhood home in Strasburg, N D (pop. 623), must see that nothing has changed has changed in over a decade since he left Congress.
{NOTE : on the Senate side, the major committees that will impact spending include : Appropriations Committee - Minnesota does not currently have a member and the Democrats have a four seat advantage. On the Senate Budge Committee, Minnesota does not currently have a member and the Democrats have a three seat advantage. Franken may be in-line for a seat on the Senate Health Education Labor and Pensions Committee where the Democrats have a one seat advantage. The Coleman legal challenge is impacting Minnesotans from having input on shaping our fiscal future.}
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Politics aside, Politicians Praise MN Largest Earmark
It certainly wasn’t a Mark Antony moment ( you know, ”I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him), yet for less than an hour on Monday, September 15th, the poisonous pox of “earmarks” was not acknowledged … no they came to praise the largest “earmark” project to built in Minnesota in a very long time.
It was a good day … no sneering of the evils of “earmarks” … just a spirit of accomplishment … as it should be. In alternating speeches, Republicans and Democrats gushed in a esprit de corps. Yet there were some differences in the scope of how they approached their few moments of allocated time to address the audience. Congresswoman Michele Bachman (R-06) spoke of in her “Minnesota Nice” manner assuring the crowd that private donations will quickly be funding the 35W Remembrance Garden while Congressman Keith Ellison (D-05) saw this as only a minor start on the need to address the nation’s infrastructure needs. There was much praise for the workers who built this project… Congressman Tim Walz (D-01) thanked the rescue workers … and the children who were on the bus as the bridge was collapsing thanked the volunteers with the Salvation Army and Red Cross for all their assistance since the tragedy occurred.
And throughout it all there was no mention that the only members of the Minnesota delegation voting against a funding bill that included $195 million for funding the reconstruction of the I-35W bridge in Minneapolis were Representatives John Kline (MN-02) and Michele Bachmann, both Republicans … as that could have been embarrassing since they were both on the podium giving speeches.
My question is : Isn’t this proof that all “earmarks” are not wasteful government spending ?
While Bachmann and Kline are on a “pork-free” diet, they are not recognizing that the “earmark” process actually dispenses monies for needed projects.
Joe Bodell asked the right question … is this a principled stand against pork, or is Kline cutting off his nose to spite his face ? Bodell’s column is dated, but the intent is valid and he reviews the “earmarks” requested by Congressmen Oberstar, Ellison, Kline and Walz. Bodell finds minor problems with the “earmarks” in the Transpiration bill. My conclusion based on reviewing the Defense and HHS funding bills is that Minnesota’s members of Congress are not abusing the system but that Bachmann and Kline are short-changing their Districts and the State. In Bachman and Kline's world, others get a larger share of the pie ... as the pie does not get smaller ... our needs are not served ... but our monies go elsewhere.
In the First District, Congressman Walz is being challenged by Dr. Brian Davis who has campaigned on “earmark” reform.
Walz has been transparent on his funding requests publishing his 47 "earmark" requests for 2009 appropriations.
From Walz’s press release : “While it is likely that only a few of these meritorious projects will ultimately receive funding, I believe it is important for residents of southern Minnesota to be able to see the list of projects I am supporting and I am proud to release this list of local priorities.”
In this way, voters know Walz’s vision for the District’s needs … Dr. Davis needs to tell voters which projects he does not believe should be funded and any that he would add to the list. If it’s “wasteful government spending”, then tell us and if you plan to adhere to a “pork-free diet” tell us that.
For one hour on Monday, “earmarks” were not evil … they were a bridge to improving our infrastructure ... and there are a lot of bridges that need improving.
It was a good day … no sneering of the evils of “earmarks” … just a spirit of accomplishment … as it should be. In alternating speeches, Republicans and Democrats gushed in a esprit de corps. Yet there were some differences in the scope of how they approached their few moments of allocated time to address the audience. Congresswoman Michele Bachman (R-06) spoke of in her “Minnesota Nice” manner assuring the crowd that private donations will quickly be funding the 35W Remembrance Garden while Congressman Keith Ellison (D-05) saw this as only a minor start on the need to address the nation’s infrastructure needs. There was much praise for the workers who built this project… Congressman Tim Walz (D-01) thanked the rescue workers … and the children who were on the bus as the bridge was collapsing thanked the volunteers with the Salvation Army and Red Cross for all their assistance since the tragedy occurred.
And throughout it all there was no mention that the only members of the Minnesota delegation voting against a funding bill that included $195 million for funding the reconstruction of the I-35W bridge in Minneapolis were Representatives John Kline (MN-02) and Michele Bachmann, both Republicans … as that could have been embarrassing since they were both on the podium giving speeches.
My question is : Isn’t this proof that all “earmarks” are not wasteful government spending ?
While Bachmann and Kline are on a “pork-free” diet, they are not recognizing that the “earmark” process actually dispenses monies for needed projects.
Joe Bodell asked the right question … is this a principled stand against pork, or is Kline cutting off his nose to spite his face ? Bodell’s column is dated, but the intent is valid and he reviews the “earmarks” requested by Congressmen Oberstar, Ellison, Kline and Walz. Bodell finds minor problems with the “earmarks” in the Transpiration bill. My conclusion based on reviewing the Defense and HHS funding bills is that Minnesota’s members of Congress are not abusing the system but that Bachmann and Kline are short-changing their Districts and the State. In Bachman and Kline's world, others get a larger share of the pie ... as the pie does not get smaller ... our needs are not served ... but our monies go elsewhere.
In the First District, Congressman Walz is being challenged by Dr. Brian Davis who has campaigned on “earmark” reform.
Walz has been transparent on his funding requests publishing his 47 "earmark" requests for 2009 appropriations.
From Walz’s press release : “While it is likely that only a few of these meritorious projects will ultimately receive funding, I believe it is important for residents of southern Minnesota to be able to see the list of projects I am supporting and I am proud to release this list of local priorities.”
In this way, voters know Walz’s vision for the District’s needs … Dr. Davis needs to tell voters which projects he does not believe should be funded and any that he would add to the list. If it’s “wasteful government spending”, then tell us and if you plan to adhere to a “pork-free diet” tell us that.
For one hour on Monday, “earmarks” were not evil … they were a bridge to improving our infrastructure ... and there are a lot of bridges that need improving.
Thursday, July 24, 2008
MN-02 : Did Reagan feel the Planet Shaking when Kline earmark funding was approved ?
''You could feel the planet shaking,'' President Ronald Reagan said when he vetoed legislation that contained 121 "demonstration projects".
Today, we would call those "demonstration projects" earmarks, but Reagan was quick with a quip to describe pork barrel projects, stating “I haven't seen so much lard since I handed out blue ribbons at the Iowa State Fair.''
Well, I have a hunch that the shockwave that Simi Valley California felt about 5:50 PM on Tuesday night was President Reagan rolling over in his grave from what the House was funding.
At that time, John Kline’s legislation was approved.
That’s right Congressman John “Pork-Free” Kline sponsorsed the legislation that authorized $1 million dollars for a project that clearly fits the definition of pork – namely, congressional spending that applies to a very limited number of individuals or entities that don’t benefit the nation as a whole, or enhance the defense of the country.
H.R. 5235 establishes, and funds, the Ronald Reagan Centennial Commission.
That’s right, our tax dollars will be used to celebrate the anniversary of someone’s birth and lifetime accomplishments … George Washington didn’t get this observation.
Now, I have nothing against remembering Reagan, but with a national debt of over $9 trillion dollars and unfunded liabilities that make fiscal conservatives shudder, is this appropriate for the use of public money … i.e. your tax dollars?
NO.
This should be funded by private dollars. The Reagan Presidential Library gets over 300,000 visitors …. either increase the admission price or put out a collection plate.
Some may say, it’s only a Million Dollars, well, consider that on John Kline’s campaign website, he has a feature Stop The Pork in which he requests contributions and your approval on petition.
Kline cites the following projects :
-- $211,509 for olive fruit fly research in Paris (The Olive Fruit Fly is the world’s most disastrous olive pest and has infested thousands of acres of California’s olive groves.)
-- $591,000 for the Montana Sheep Institute (former Republican Senator Conrad Burns pet project)
-- $200,000 for a Lobster Institute in Maine (where both Senators are Republicans)
-- $100,000 to Develop a Walking Tour of Boydton, Virginia (requested by Republican Congressman Virgil Goode.)
Interestingly, though Congressman Kline does not mention the $500,000 requested for the Ronald Reagan Parkway in Indiana by Republican Congressman Steve Buyer that is considered an earmark in the same category as those listed above.
If Kline considered those projects as examples of Washington wasteful pork-barrel spending, then why not a Million Dollars for a Taxpayer-funded celebration ?
All I can say is mark February 6, 2011 on your calendar now for a Big Party at John Kline’s house. In the meantime, I can agree with Congressman Kline, that we must stop Congress from ”spending tax dollars on frivolous projects” and that should have started with Kline’s support of HR 5235.
Today, we would call those "demonstration projects" earmarks, but Reagan was quick with a quip to describe pork barrel projects, stating “I haven't seen so much lard since I handed out blue ribbons at the Iowa State Fair.''
Well, I have a hunch that the shockwave that Simi Valley California felt about 5:50 PM on Tuesday night was President Reagan rolling over in his grave from what the House was funding.
At that time, John Kline’s legislation was approved.
That’s right Congressman John “Pork-Free” Kline sponsorsed the legislation that authorized $1 million dollars for a project that clearly fits the definition of pork – namely, congressional spending that applies to a very limited number of individuals or entities that don’t benefit the nation as a whole, or enhance the defense of the country.
H.R. 5235 establishes, and funds, the Ronald Reagan Centennial Commission.
That’s right, our tax dollars will be used to celebrate the anniversary of someone’s birth and lifetime accomplishments … George Washington didn’t get this observation.
Now, I have nothing against remembering Reagan, but with a national debt of over $9 trillion dollars and unfunded liabilities that make fiscal conservatives shudder, is this appropriate for the use of public money … i.e. your tax dollars?
NO.
This should be funded by private dollars. The Reagan Presidential Library gets over 300,000 visitors …. either increase the admission price or put out a collection plate.
Some may say, it’s only a Million Dollars, well, consider that on John Kline’s campaign website, he has a feature Stop The Pork in which he requests contributions and your approval on petition.
Kline cites the following projects :
-- $211,509 for olive fruit fly research in Paris (The Olive Fruit Fly is the world’s most disastrous olive pest and has infested thousands of acres of California’s olive groves.)
-- $591,000 for the Montana Sheep Institute (former Republican Senator Conrad Burns pet project)
-- $200,000 for a Lobster Institute in Maine (where both Senators are Republicans)
-- $100,000 to Develop a Walking Tour of Boydton, Virginia (requested by Republican Congressman Virgil Goode.)
Interestingly, though Congressman Kline does not mention the $500,000 requested for the Ronald Reagan Parkway in Indiana by Republican Congressman Steve Buyer that is considered an earmark in the same category as those listed above.
If Kline considered those projects as examples of Washington wasteful pork-barrel spending, then why not a Million Dollars for a Taxpayer-funded celebration ?
All I can say is mark February 6, 2011 on your calendar now for a Big Party at John Kline’s house. In the meantime, I can agree with Congressman Kline, that we must stop Congress from ”spending tax dollars on frivolous projects” and that should have started with Kline’s support of HR 5235.
Friday, June 27, 2008
Politics Trumps Governance UPDATE : Republicans Delay (?) Earmark Proposal
I know I should lose some weight, exercise more and eat healthier, but why start now ?
I thought about maybe a New Year’s resolution, but why commit to that now ?
Following up on earlier commentary, The Hill reports “The Senate Republican Conference will wait until at least July to consider long-awaited reforms to the earmarking process.”
From January to April to June and now til July – more proof that the GOP realizes that there are problems with “pork-barrel projects” but that “pork-barrel projects” may be beneficial for re-election purposes. They can blame it on “the heavy business awaiting Senate action before the Fourth of July” (funny, but Bush warned us about the dangers without his FISA bill, but that vote won’t be until July 8 even though the Senate voted overwhelming to move to final vote … what is the Senate working on?), but since the “earmark” proposal has been pending for so long, they just don’t want to address it before November's election. The fact is that the Senate is in the middle of the Appropriations review process (the HHS-Labor-Education, Commerce-Justice-Science, and Homeland Security budgets are done but the DOD mega-budget and others are in review).
Why don't they admit it, they don’t want to operate under any scrutiny now.
Under existing procedures, things can be done. For example, remember the Farm bill and how Republican Minority Leader Mitch McConnell included $60 to $70 million in tax breaks for the horse racing industry. His authorization would be deemed by most as “pork-barrel” spending.
Minnesotans can tell the difference between “pork-barrel projects” and a justified “earmark” … just ask any of the Minnesota county engineers who say that 70% of the Minnesota’s roads and bridges are worse off than they were ten years ago.
Let me be clear, earmarks are not implicitly bad.
We need transparency and agreement between state and federal governments on which projects are best needed.
That takes leadership.
Good leadership is exemplified by First District Representative Tim Walz (D-MN) and 45 other Representatives who have embraced transparency.
But the “political” fears of acknowledging “earmarks” is impacting good governance.
Poor leadership (is that an oxymoron?) is exemplified by Governor Tim Pawlenty (R-MN).
Read the letters between Fourth District Congresswoman Betty McCollum (D-MN) and the Governor over “acknowledging” $165,000,000 worth of earmarks that the Pawlenty administration requested from her office for FY2009 authorizations. The projects being discussed include transportation projects and federal funding for the Minnesota National Guard.
Transparency and common sense spending is at stake … not political points to be used in election year campaign speeches.
I thought about maybe a New Year’s resolution, but why commit to that now ?
Following up on earlier commentary, The Hill reports “The Senate Republican Conference will wait until at least July to consider long-awaited reforms to the earmarking process.”
From January to April to June and now til July – more proof that the GOP realizes that there are problems with “pork-barrel projects” but that “pork-barrel projects” may be beneficial for re-election purposes. They can blame it on “the heavy business awaiting Senate action before the Fourth of July” (funny, but Bush warned us about the dangers without his FISA bill, but that vote won’t be until July 8 even though the Senate voted overwhelming to move to final vote … what is the Senate working on?), but since the “earmark” proposal has been pending for so long, they just don’t want to address it before November's election. The fact is that the Senate is in the middle of the Appropriations review process (the HHS-Labor-Education, Commerce-Justice-Science, and Homeland Security budgets are done but the DOD mega-budget and others are in review).
Why don't they admit it, they don’t want to operate under any scrutiny now.
Under existing procedures, things can be done. For example, remember the Farm bill and how Republican Minority Leader Mitch McConnell included $60 to $70 million in tax breaks for the horse racing industry. His authorization would be deemed by most as “pork-barrel” spending.
Minnesotans can tell the difference between “pork-barrel projects” and a justified “earmark” … just ask any of the Minnesota county engineers who say that 70% of the Minnesota’s roads and bridges are worse off than they were ten years ago.
Let me be clear, earmarks are not implicitly bad.
We need transparency and agreement between state and federal governments on which projects are best needed.
That takes leadership.
Good leadership is exemplified by First District Representative Tim Walz (D-MN) and 45 other Representatives who have embraced transparency.
But the “political” fears of acknowledging “earmarks” is impacting good governance.
Poor leadership (is that an oxymoron?) is exemplified by Governor Tim Pawlenty (R-MN).
Read the letters between Fourth District Congresswoman Betty McCollum (D-MN) and the Governor over “acknowledging” $165,000,000 worth of earmarks that the Pawlenty administration requested from her office for FY2009 authorizations. The projects being discussed include transportation projects and federal funding for the Minnesota National Guard.
Transparency and common sense spending is at stake … not political points to be used in election year campaign speeches.
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
In an Obama Administration Will Republicans Defend Article 1 ?
This election season has brought attention to what is being worn – or not worn – on a candidate’s lapel.
Have you noticed if your Congressman(woman) is wearing an “Article 1” button ?
There has been a movement for members of Congress to take a pledge to be “pork-free” and in Minnesota there are currently two of the 46 who have sworn off earmarks – that would be Congressman John Kline (MN-02) and Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (MN-06).
As a fiscal conservative, I applaud the effort to eliminate “pork-barrel” projects, but there is a vast difference between “pork-barrel” spending and “earmarks”.
What Kline and Bachmann are doing is shirking their Article 1 responsibilities and allowing the Executive Branch the power to spend funds as they deem appropriate.
Congressman John Yarmuth (KY-03) is reminding his colleagues of their Article 1 duties by offering lapel buttons. It may seem to be purely for show, yet the message is clear … Congress authorizes the monies. Note specifically Section 8 and a couple of the important passages “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, …” [snip] “To establish Post Offices and Post Roads …” [snip] and Section 9 “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law;” [snip]
Minnesotans know all to well of the conditions of our roads and bridges … ( I-35 Bridge is not the only problem … Kline’s district has the Hasting bridge and Bachmann’s district has the DeSoto Bridge). Without someone advocating earmarks for those repairs, other Congressman’s projects will be funded first.
First District Congressman Tim Walz has the right approach “Minnesota sends more money to Washington that it gets back, and it’s appropriate for us to advocate for the good use of tax dollars (in the district.)”
All Minnesotans need to be concerned about this as the State’s ability to attract and maintain businesses is predicated on its physical infrastructure.
And in 2009, when the next Congress convenes, there is a bigger problem. The Highway Trust Fund (HTF) is projected to have a deficit of as much as $5 billion. As a result of how highway projects are funded, this could mean a one-third reduction of highway and transit spending. That deficit will be compounded even more as the cost of gasoline has resulted in a drop in miles traveled … the driving milage drop has only exacerbated a problem, not created it. The HTF is funded almost exclusively by the 18.3 cents per gallon taxes paid on gasoline and 24.8 cents per gallon tax on diesel by the nation’s drivers and truckers. So will Congress use it’s Section 8 responsiblities and increase taxes to fund these need investments … and will the Minnesota delegation have members that make sure we get our monies returned back to the State?
Earmarks are not the problem … “pork-barrel” projects are.
With the projected shortfall and the increased needs, do you want the next President to decide how monies should be spent ? Those members of Congress that sign the “earmarks” pledge are not being responsible or responsive.
As voters evalute incumbents, they should look for the “Article 1” button and ask them if they are willing to embrace transparency in earmark funding. If so, they should get your vote.
Have you noticed if your Congressman(woman) is wearing an “Article 1” button ?
There has been a movement for members of Congress to take a pledge to be “pork-free” and in Minnesota there are currently two of the 46 who have sworn off earmarks – that would be Congressman John Kline (MN-02) and Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (MN-06).
As a fiscal conservative, I applaud the effort to eliminate “pork-barrel” projects, but there is a vast difference between “pork-barrel” spending and “earmarks”.
What Kline and Bachmann are doing is shirking their Article 1 responsibilities and allowing the Executive Branch the power to spend funds as they deem appropriate.
Congressman John Yarmuth (KY-03) is reminding his colleagues of their Article 1 duties by offering lapel buttons. It may seem to be purely for show, yet the message is clear … Congress authorizes the monies. Note specifically Section 8 and a couple of the important passages “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, …” [snip] “To establish Post Offices and Post Roads …” [snip] and Section 9 “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law;” [snip]
Minnesotans know all to well of the conditions of our roads and bridges … ( I-35 Bridge is not the only problem … Kline’s district has the Hasting bridge and Bachmann’s district has the DeSoto Bridge). Without someone advocating earmarks for those repairs, other Congressman’s projects will be funded first.
First District Congressman Tim Walz has the right approach “Minnesota sends more money to Washington that it gets back, and it’s appropriate for us to advocate for the good use of tax dollars (in the district.)”
All Minnesotans need to be concerned about this as the State’s ability to attract and maintain businesses is predicated on its physical infrastructure.
And in 2009, when the next Congress convenes, there is a bigger problem. The Highway Trust Fund (HTF) is projected to have a deficit of as much as $5 billion. As a result of how highway projects are funded, this could mean a one-third reduction of highway and transit spending. That deficit will be compounded even more as the cost of gasoline has resulted in a drop in miles traveled … the driving milage drop has only exacerbated a problem, not created it. The HTF is funded almost exclusively by the 18.3 cents per gallon taxes paid on gasoline and 24.8 cents per gallon tax on diesel by the nation’s drivers and truckers. So will Congress use it’s Section 8 responsiblities and increase taxes to fund these need investments … and will the Minnesota delegation have members that make sure we get our monies returned back to the State?
Earmarks are not the problem … “pork-barrel” projects are.
With the projected shortfall and the increased needs, do you want the next President to decide how monies should be spent ? Those members of Congress that sign the “earmarks” pledge are not being responsible or responsive.
As voters evalute incumbents, they should look for the “Article 1” button and ask them if they are willing to embrace transparency in earmark funding. If so, they should get your vote.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Will John Kline Lobby Norm Coleman on Earmark Proposal
Have you made your 2009 New Year’s Resolution yet ?
Well, according to The Hill, the Senate Republican are scheduled to discuss a conference-wide rule change and policy statement regarding earmarks on Tuesday.
So, will John “Pork-Free” Kline lobby Norm “Minnesota’s $10,780,000 Man” Coleman ?
Will it make any difference ?
Well, first of all, the changes would take effect the first day of the next Congress. This is not the first time Republicans have tried this joke before as some Republicans called for a six month moratorium on earmarks … what a joke … we have a Fiscal Year … all the money gets authorized at year end, so what would 6 months due ?
This meeting is a result of a meeting at the beginning of the year which was reported by Roll Call.
Senate Republicans outlined a modest election-year agenda Wednesday based on the cooperative, bipartisan approach that new Republican Conference Chairman Lamar Alexander (Tenn.) has pushed while avoiding issues like immigration and earmark reform that have caused rifts within the party.
[SNIP]
Republican leaders … made it clear during the retreat that they would not support any effort by President Bush to strip earmarks from this year’s omnibus bill and saw no need to overhaul the practice … arguing any move {by Bush} to eliminate the earmarks would be an inappropriate infringement on Congress’ authority to appropriate funding.
[SNIP]
A Senator attending the retreat said later, "to the extent that the floor was open I didn't hear much opposition... I kept expecting to hear someone say 'yeah but earmarks are evil,' but I didn't."
Also, The Washington Examiner writes
“House Republican Whip Roy Blunt R-MO, has reportedly warned administration officials that meddling with earmarks will anger GOP members who are responsible for 40 percent of those in the 2008 spending bills.”
Republicans, based on their votes and comments by party leaders, are not serious about ending the use of earmarks.
And they shouldn’t.
All earmarks are not pork barrel spending. Without earmarks, the Executive Branch can spend funds as they deem appropriate.
For example, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention which issued grants to youth golf programs and other projects--often run by administration cronies.
Or, the $350 to $500 million spent on Al-Hurra -- "The Free One" –US sponsored Arabic television.
Or, even $2.4 million for COMIC BOOKS !
There are plenty of “projects” that should be carefully reviewed, that’s why transparency and accountability are important.
The Republican Senators policy change is just an election year campaign trick to garner some media attention … and like many New Year’s Resolutions will be long forgotten by mid-2009.
John Kline’s pork-free diet has only cost the State getting a fair return on the monies that Minnesota taxpayers have sent to Washington.
Well, according to The Hill, the Senate Republican are scheduled to discuss a conference-wide rule change and policy statement regarding earmarks on Tuesday.
So, will John “Pork-Free” Kline lobby Norm “Minnesota’s $10,780,000 Man” Coleman ?
Will it make any difference ?
Well, first of all, the changes would take effect the first day of the next Congress. This is not the first time Republicans have tried this joke before as some Republicans called for a six month moratorium on earmarks … what a joke … we have a Fiscal Year … all the money gets authorized at year end, so what would 6 months due ?
This meeting is a result of a meeting at the beginning of the year which was reported by Roll Call.
Senate Republicans outlined a modest election-year agenda Wednesday based on the cooperative, bipartisan approach that new Republican Conference Chairman Lamar Alexander (Tenn.) has pushed while avoiding issues like immigration and earmark reform that have caused rifts within the party.
[SNIP]
Republican leaders … made it clear during the retreat that they would not support any effort by President Bush to strip earmarks from this year’s omnibus bill and saw no need to overhaul the practice … arguing any move {by Bush} to eliminate the earmarks would be an inappropriate infringement on Congress’ authority to appropriate funding.
[SNIP]
A Senator attending the retreat said later, "to the extent that the floor was open I didn't hear much opposition... I kept expecting to hear someone say 'yeah but earmarks are evil,' but I didn't."
Also, The Washington Examiner writes
“House Republican Whip Roy Blunt R-MO, has reportedly warned administration officials that meddling with earmarks will anger GOP members who are responsible for 40 percent of those in the 2008 spending bills.”
Republicans, based on their votes and comments by party leaders, are not serious about ending the use of earmarks.
And they shouldn’t.
All earmarks are not pork barrel spending. Without earmarks, the Executive Branch can spend funds as they deem appropriate.
For example, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention which issued grants to youth golf programs and other projects--often run by administration cronies.
Or, the $350 to $500 million spent on Al-Hurra -- "The Free One" –US sponsored Arabic television.
Or, even $2.4 million for COMIC BOOKS !
There are plenty of “projects” that should be carefully reviewed, that’s why transparency and accountability are important.
The Republican Senators policy change is just an election year campaign trick to garner some media attention … and like many New Year’s Resolutions will be long forgotten by mid-2009.
John Kline’s pork-free diet has only cost the State getting a fair return on the monies that Minnesota taxpayers have sent to Washington.
Monday, March 24, 2008
How much is that Prebate Check Worth ?
When mail from the IRS arrives in my mailbox, it gets my immediate attention. Yet when I opened the Economic Stimulus Payment Notice from the IRS, my first thought was “How much did this mailing cost????”. Well, according to IRS spokesman John Lipold “notices are going out this month to an estimated 130 million households who filed returns for the 2006 tax year, at a cost $41.8 million.” So add $41.8 million onto $168 Billion that Bush has already approved.
Two thoughts.
First, at a Congressional hearing the IRS was questioned about scams yet, the IRS notice fails to warn consumers about that. The IRS response at the hearing was that Congressmen may want to include a warning in their mailings to their constituents.
Second, for a Congress member to issue that mailing it would be through the Franking Privilege. Karl Bremer penned an interesting article on how members of the Minnesota delegation use franked mail.
When Congressmen issue a mailing the cries arise from the opposition party that the incumbent is just trying to pander to the voters. Recently letters to the editors have appeared in Winona and Mankato newspapers chastising Congressman Tim Walz for a mailing that was sent discussing the Economic Stimulus Package. Not mentioned was that in 2005, then Republican Congressman Gil Gutknecht sent out 174,770 pieces of franked mail.
One of the concerns with franked mail should be whether it is target marketing or necessary information for constituents.
During the past decade, Members of Congress have begun patronizing innovative mailing list vendors to ensure that the mailings are sent to the right people. I found it interesting in 2006, that since I have a rural route address, I received a mailing from then Congressman Gutknecht concerning his ethanol legislation while friends in urban centers received mailings on illegal immigration. True, both are voter education, but I felt like a target.
In the House, the franked mail postage allowance is based on the number of addresses in each Member's district. Each Representative's mail allowance is combined with allowances for office staff and official office expenses to form a Member's Representational Allowance (MRA). Members may spend any portion of their MRA on franked mail, subject to law and House regulations. Within the limits of their MRA, House Members are not restricted as to the total amount they may spend on mass mailings.
Managing the MRA should be a fair tool for how well the Congressman is committed to exercising fiscal restraint. Many offices use funds still unexpended near the end of the year to stock up on supplies, upgrade or pay off existing equipment, and give staff bonuses.
In 2007, the Member's Representational Allowance was roughly $1.34 million ranging from $1.07 to $1.78 million. Congressman Walz reported that he will return approximately $100,000 in unspent funds from his 2007 MRA to the U.S. Treasury.
Next time voters in the Second District hear John Kline complain about earmarks they need to remind him of his 509,784 pieces of franked mail that he sent out in 2005 and question why his MRA spending was in excess of 96% of the maximum budgetary amount. A true fiscal hawk would find ways to trim his own budget ... like Rep. Virgil Goode (R-VA) who did without $518,036 of his MRA. Leadership begins by example.
= = =
And a follow-up comment concerning the Economic Stimulus which I opposed as wasteful spending. More proof that it was unwise, as the Center on the Budget estimates that Minnesota could lose $151 million dollars depending upon how it handles the bonus business depreciation.
And remember this is a Prebate … in other words, this is monies that you will receive in 2008 based on the assumptions that you will earn that payment when you report your income taxes in April 2009. Worse yet, the funding is from borrowed money … borrowing that will have to be paid by future generations.
Two thoughts.
First, at a Congressional hearing the IRS was questioned about scams yet, the IRS notice fails to warn consumers about that. The IRS response at the hearing was that Congressmen may want to include a warning in their mailings to their constituents.
Second, for a Congress member to issue that mailing it would be through the Franking Privilege. Karl Bremer penned an interesting article on how members of the Minnesota delegation use franked mail.
When Congressmen issue a mailing the cries arise from the opposition party that the incumbent is just trying to pander to the voters. Recently letters to the editors have appeared in Winona and Mankato newspapers chastising Congressman Tim Walz for a mailing that was sent discussing the Economic Stimulus Package. Not mentioned was that in 2005, then Republican Congressman Gil Gutknecht sent out 174,770 pieces of franked mail.
One of the concerns with franked mail should be whether it is target marketing or necessary information for constituents.
During the past decade, Members of Congress have begun patronizing innovative mailing list vendors to ensure that the mailings are sent to the right people. I found it interesting in 2006, that since I have a rural route address, I received a mailing from then Congressman Gutknecht concerning his ethanol legislation while friends in urban centers received mailings on illegal immigration. True, both are voter education, but I felt like a target.
In the House, the franked mail postage allowance is based on the number of addresses in each Member's district. Each Representative's mail allowance is combined with allowances for office staff and official office expenses to form a Member's Representational Allowance (MRA). Members may spend any portion of their MRA on franked mail, subject to law and House regulations. Within the limits of their MRA, House Members are not restricted as to the total amount they may spend on mass mailings.
Managing the MRA should be a fair tool for how well the Congressman is committed to exercising fiscal restraint. Many offices use funds still unexpended near the end of the year to stock up on supplies, upgrade or pay off existing equipment, and give staff bonuses.
In 2007, the Member's Representational Allowance was roughly $1.34 million ranging from $1.07 to $1.78 million. Congressman Walz reported that he will return approximately $100,000 in unspent funds from his 2007 MRA to the U.S. Treasury.
Next time voters in the Second District hear John Kline complain about earmarks they need to remind him of his 509,784 pieces of franked mail that he sent out in 2005 and question why his MRA spending was in excess of 96% of the maximum budgetary amount. A true fiscal hawk would find ways to trim his own budget ... like Rep. Virgil Goode (R-VA) who did without $518,036 of his MRA. Leadership begins by example.
= = =
And a follow-up comment concerning the Economic Stimulus which I opposed as wasteful spending. More proof that it was unwise, as the Center on the Budget estimates that Minnesota could lose $151 million dollars depending upon how it handles the bonus business depreciation.
And remember this is a Prebate … in other words, this is monies that you will receive in 2008 based on the assumptions that you will earn that payment when you report your income taxes in April 2009. Worse yet, the funding is from borrowed money … borrowing that will have to be paid by future generations.
Sunday, March 09, 2008
John [Pork-Free] Kline Votes with Money on Mental Health Parity
Do campaign contributions affect how members of Congress vote on legislation ?
According to CongressDaily, NRF Employee Benefits Policy Counsel Vice President Neil Trautwein, who testified before John Kline’s Subcommittee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions opposing the House bill, said active lobbying on the part of his group kept the 268-148 vote well below a veto-proof margin, which was a concern.
Do you think the following groups would support H.R. 1424 Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act of 2007 ?
• Aetna
• American Benefits Council
• Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association
• ERISA Industry Committee
• National Association of Health Underwriters
• National Association of Manufacturers
• National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors
• National Business Group on Health
• National Restaurant Association
• Retail Industry Leaders Association
• Society for Human Rescource Management
• The National Retail Federation [NRF]
• U.S. Chamber of Commerce
These are the groups that voiced opposition to this legislation.
On the flip-side, other groups, such as American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, Child Welfare League of America, Mental Health America, etc., were in favor of this legislation.
Dan Newman, of MAPLight.org which looks at correlations between campaign contributions and legislation points out that "Simply put, candidates who take positions contrary to industry interests are unlikely to receive industry funds and thus have fewer resources for their election campaigns than those who vote in favor."
MAPLight reports that groups gave an average of $22,693 to legislators who voted No on this bill, compared to $14,183 to legislators who voted Yes. The disparity is 160% more money given to a No vote.
This begs the question: Are “Earmarks” more of a problem then the influence of lobbyists ?
As previously stated, there are No Earmarks in this legislation.
But the lobbyists influence is still there and without a Veto-proof majority, Kline’s NO VOTE is in sync with big money.
Kline and NRF's Neil Trautwein argued for the Senate version. As it was pointed out during the debate "one thing is clear, the bill is better for patients than the Senate bill, yet the cost is almost exactly the same.”
Republican Senator Norm Coleman said “that he considers the House bill to be the stronger version between the two chambers.”
Readers may want to monitor the Federal Elections Commission listing of John Kline contributors and MAPlight’s listing of top industries to see how the various interests attempt to influence legislative outcomes.
Kline maybe on a “Pork-free diet”, but he may serve his district better if he just said NO to special interests.
According to CongressDaily, NRF Employee Benefits Policy Counsel Vice President Neil Trautwein, who testified before John Kline’s Subcommittee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions opposing the House bill, said active lobbying on the part of his group kept the 268-148 vote well below a veto-proof margin, which was a concern.
Do you think the following groups would support H.R. 1424 Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act of 2007 ?
• Aetna
• American Benefits Council
• Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association
• ERISA Industry Committee
• National Association of Health Underwriters
• National Association of Manufacturers
• National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors
• National Business Group on Health
• National Restaurant Association
• Retail Industry Leaders Association
• Society for Human Rescource Management
• The National Retail Federation [NRF]
• U.S. Chamber of Commerce
These are the groups that voiced opposition to this legislation.
On the flip-side, other groups, such as American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, Child Welfare League of America, Mental Health America, etc., were in favor of this legislation.
Dan Newman, of MAPLight.org which looks at correlations between campaign contributions and legislation points out that "Simply put, candidates who take positions contrary to industry interests are unlikely to receive industry funds and thus have fewer resources for their election campaigns than those who vote in favor."
MAPLight reports that groups gave an average of $22,693 to legislators who voted No on this bill, compared to $14,183 to legislators who voted Yes. The disparity is 160% more money given to a No vote.
This begs the question: Are “Earmarks” more of a problem then the influence of lobbyists ?
As previously stated, there are No Earmarks in this legislation.
But the lobbyists influence is still there and without a Veto-proof majority, Kline’s NO VOTE is in sync with big money.
Kline and NRF's Neil Trautwein argued for the Senate version. As it was pointed out during the debate "one thing is clear, the bill is better for patients than the Senate bill, yet the cost is almost exactly the same.”
Republican Senator Norm Coleman said “that he considers the House bill to be the stronger version between the two chambers.”
Readers may want to monitor the Federal Elections Commission listing of John Kline contributors and MAPlight’s listing of top industries to see how the various interests attempt to influence legislative outcomes.
Kline maybe on a “Pork-free diet”, but he may serve his district better if he just said NO to special interests.
Monday, February 25, 2008
Question for John Kline :
Are Comic Books Pork Barrel Spending ?
Congressman John Kline (R-MN-02) is on a crusade against earmarks, yet the question needs to be asked if ”earmarks” are the problem or “pork-barrel spending” ?
Kline and many of his fellow Republicans have launched a media blitz challenging other Congressman not to request ”earmarks”. Obviously, it’s the basis of the November elections strategy when challengers like Dick Day, party managers like Ron Carey, and even President Bush will tell us that ”earmarks” are the problem. Politicians are salesmen – selling a message – and like any good snake oil salesman, beware of the claims. The implied target is the Democrats, yet for change to occur, Republicans can lead by example … if they are serious.
Not all ”earmarks” are pork barrel spending projects; “Earmarks” may be abused as pork barrel spending projects, but they essentially are instructions by Congress to ensure that monies are spent according to the peoples’ wishes. The Constitution under Article I Section 9 empowers Congress with the powers of appropriations.
One of the ways that the ”earmarks” campaign is being waged is through The Club for Growth RePORK Card of all members' votes on 50 anti-pork amendments. And based on that assessment, Second District Congressman Kline gets a perfect score at 100 % while First District Congressman Tim Walz fails with 0%. Ron Carey was quick to issue a Press Release to announce this meaningless assessment.
A couple of observations concerning this analysis.
First, by and large, Republicans are not so clear on this issue. In the old Tom DeLay days, the legislation moved if a Majority of the Majority (Republicans) wanted it … so if a majority in the Republican caucus approved it got put to a floor vote where the Democrats could participate. So based on that logic, how would these 50 anti-pork amendments have fared … 41 would have passed. And the votes were not overwhelming as a minimum of 80 Republicans approved of these amendments. Overall, only one anti-pork amendment did pass … it had a bare margin of 6 votes from Republicans but the Democrats had a 69 vote margin.
The GOP needs to change its act, before Ron Carey's MN-GOP should be so loudly congratulating one of its members.
Second, the RePORK Card seems to ignore the largest area of spending. The Defense Appropriation had 2,161 earmarks valued at $7.9 billion. Surely, there must be some “pork-barrel spending” in this appropriation .... I suspect that you could write a book about it … maybe even a COMIC BOOK [see below].
Now, John Kline has sworn off earmarks and has recently convinced Michele Bachmann to join him, while other members of Congress still request funding for various programs … albeit, the benefit may be for more than just the requestors home area. For example, First District Congressman Tim Walz has requested $125,000 for the Sheriffs Youth Program of Minnesota, Inver Grove Heights, MN for chemical dependency treatment services. The SHERIFFS YOUTH PROGRAMS OF MINNESOTA serves various locations throughout Minnesota (Austin, Hayward, Mankato, Isanti, Waverly, Winona, St. Cloud, and Rochester) which means they serve Bachmann, Oberstar and Walz districts.
Are programs that treat chemical dependency important ?
The day after Bush’s State of the Union (during which he complained about "earmarks"), he visited the Jericho Program,where he said, "Addiction is hard to overcome. As you might remember, I drank too much at one time in my life." The Jericho Program is part of Bush’s earmarked programs having received over $1.3 million in federal dollars.
So, is it okay for Bush to spend millions but Congressman Walz shouldn’t try to help people in our state ?
So, if funding may be a good idea for chemical dependency programs, are there any wasteful “pork-barrel” programs that should be eliminated ?
Of, course.
With all those earmarks in the DOD authorization, surely some programs should be questioned.
How about eliminating funding COMIC BOOKS ?
That’s right … the US Government is currently requesting bids - M68450-08-Q-0021 : The dollar value of the award is not anticipated to exceed $2,400,000.00. The resulting award will be a Firm Fixed Price contract. The detailed specifications for the twelve (12) issues of 6th Brigade Comic Book series are as follows: Requesting the design, production and distribution of 12 issues of 60,000 comic books per issue for a total of 720,000 comic books of the 6th Brigade Comic Book series to highlight the professionalism of the Iraqi Special Operations Forces (ISOF) and to enhance the public perception of the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) as a capable, well-trained, and professional fighting force IAW Information Operations Objectives as outline in the Multi National Force West Operation Order MNF-W (OPORD) dated September 2007.
That's right, folks ... $2.4 million for COMIC BOOKS !
How long have we been in Iraq … and has our success been delayed because the Comic Books haven’t conveyed the proper message ?
It is commonly accepted that the resolution in Iraq is not a military solution but an economic and political solution. When former First District Congressman Gil Gutknecht returned from his only visit to Iraq, he said the key was economic and the need to get jobs for Iraqis.
So, if Comic Books are the key, why don’t the Iraqis produce them ?
Frankly, Americans don’t know the Iraqi culture much less the language … I suspect more cartoonist have read The Far Side then can read Farsi … or Arabic, Dari, Pashto, or any of the other languages spoken in the region.
Instead of John Mr. Earmark-Free Kline proclaiming a "pork-free diet" why doesn't he scrutinize the Bush budget and comment on the "necessity" of Bush's earmarks.
How hard can that be in a $3 trillion spending plan?
For example, Aircraft and weapons: $45.6 billion, a $4.9 billion increase, which would include purchases of fighter planes such as the F-22A. The F-22 was originally designed as an air superiority fighter for use against the Soviet Air Force. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) sent a 13-page letter on June 20, 2006 to then-House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman C.W. (Bill) Young urging Congress to stop funding this program due to its high cost and the fact that the aircraft is out of date. The GAO said, "DOD has not demonstrated the need or value for making further investments in the F-22A program." The GAO also noted that the F-22s "are not sufficient to be effective in the current and future national security environment." There are 22 test F-35 aircrafts that are more modern, effective, and cheaper. In 2003, Popular Science reported the F-22 had a price tag of $120 million each while the F-35 cost $35 million. In June 2006, the GAO report raised the F-22's numbers, concluding that the multi-year contract would drive per-plane costs up to $183 million from $166 million.
Sadly, Bush’s FY2009 does not adequately fund the on-going Global War on Terror … and before they authorize another supplemental spending bill, Congress first needs to look at other DOD spending.
The Republicans loudly protesting “earmarks” is strictly an election-year ploy when they --and the Democrats-- need to take a serious look all spending.
Kline and many of his fellow Republicans have launched a media blitz challenging other Congressman not to request ”earmarks”. Obviously, it’s the basis of the November elections strategy when challengers like Dick Day, party managers like Ron Carey, and even President Bush will tell us that ”earmarks” are the problem. Politicians are salesmen – selling a message – and like any good snake oil salesman, beware of the claims. The implied target is the Democrats, yet for change to occur, Republicans can lead by example … if they are serious.
Not all ”earmarks” are pork barrel spending projects; “Earmarks” may be abused as pork barrel spending projects, but they essentially are instructions by Congress to ensure that monies are spent according to the peoples’ wishes. The Constitution under Article I Section 9 empowers Congress with the powers of appropriations.
One of the ways that the ”earmarks” campaign is being waged is through The Club for Growth RePORK Card of all members' votes on 50 anti-pork amendments. And based on that assessment, Second District Congressman Kline gets a perfect score at 100 % while First District Congressman Tim Walz fails with 0%. Ron Carey was quick to issue a Press Release to announce this meaningless assessment.
A couple of observations concerning this analysis.
First, by and large, Republicans are not so clear on this issue. In the old Tom DeLay days, the legislation moved if a Majority of the Majority (Republicans) wanted it … so if a majority in the Republican caucus approved it got put to a floor vote where the Democrats could participate. So based on that logic, how would these 50 anti-pork amendments have fared … 41 would have passed. And the votes were not overwhelming as a minimum of 80 Republicans approved of these amendments. Overall, only one anti-pork amendment did pass … it had a bare margin of 6 votes from Republicans but the Democrats had a 69 vote margin.
The GOP needs to change its act, before Ron Carey's MN-GOP should be so loudly congratulating one of its members.
Second, the RePORK Card seems to ignore the largest area of spending. The Defense Appropriation had 2,161 earmarks valued at $7.9 billion. Surely, there must be some “pork-barrel spending” in this appropriation .... I suspect that you could write a book about it … maybe even a COMIC BOOK [see below].
Now, John Kline has sworn off earmarks and has recently convinced Michele Bachmann to join him, while other members of Congress still request funding for various programs … albeit, the benefit may be for more than just the requestors home area. For example, First District Congressman Tim Walz has requested $125,000 for the Sheriffs Youth Program of Minnesota, Inver Grove Heights, MN for chemical dependency treatment services. The SHERIFFS YOUTH PROGRAMS OF MINNESOTA serves various locations throughout Minnesota (Austin, Hayward, Mankato, Isanti, Waverly, Winona, St. Cloud, and Rochester) which means they serve Bachmann, Oberstar and Walz districts.
Are programs that treat chemical dependency important ?
The day after Bush’s State of the Union (during which he complained about "earmarks"), he visited the Jericho Program,where he said, "Addiction is hard to overcome. As you might remember, I drank too much at one time in my life." The Jericho Program is part of Bush’s earmarked programs having received over $1.3 million in federal dollars.
So, is it okay for Bush to spend millions but Congressman Walz shouldn’t try to help people in our state ?
So, if funding may be a good idea for chemical dependency programs, are there any wasteful “pork-barrel” programs that should be eliminated ?
Of, course.
With all those earmarks in the DOD authorization, surely some programs should be questioned.
How about eliminating funding COMIC BOOKS ?
That’s right … the US Government is currently requesting bids - M68450-08-Q-0021 : The dollar value of the award is not anticipated to exceed $2,400,000.00. The resulting award will be a Firm Fixed Price contract. The detailed specifications for the twelve (12) issues of 6th Brigade Comic Book series are as follows: Requesting the design, production and distribution of 12 issues of 60,000 comic books per issue for a total of 720,000 comic books of the 6th Brigade Comic Book series to highlight the professionalism of the Iraqi Special Operations Forces (ISOF) and to enhance the public perception of the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) as a capable, well-trained, and professional fighting force IAW Information Operations Objectives as outline in the Multi National Force West Operation Order MNF-W (OPORD) dated September 2007.
That's right, folks ... $2.4 million for COMIC BOOKS !
How long have we been in Iraq … and has our success been delayed because the Comic Books haven’t conveyed the proper message ?
It is commonly accepted that the resolution in Iraq is not a military solution but an economic and political solution. When former First District Congressman Gil Gutknecht returned from his only visit to Iraq, he said the key was economic and the need to get jobs for Iraqis.
So, if Comic Books are the key, why don’t the Iraqis produce them ?
Frankly, Americans don’t know the Iraqi culture much less the language … I suspect more cartoonist have read The Far Side then can read Farsi … or Arabic, Dari, Pashto, or any of the other languages spoken in the region.
Instead of John Mr. Earmark-Free Kline proclaiming a "pork-free diet" why doesn't he scrutinize the Bush budget and comment on the "necessity" of Bush's earmarks.
How hard can that be in a $3 trillion spending plan?
For example, Aircraft and weapons: $45.6 billion, a $4.9 billion increase, which would include purchases of fighter planes such as the F-22A. The F-22 was originally designed as an air superiority fighter for use against the Soviet Air Force. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) sent a 13-page letter on June 20, 2006 to then-House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman C.W. (Bill) Young urging Congress to stop funding this program due to its high cost and the fact that the aircraft is out of date. The GAO said, "DOD has not demonstrated the need or value for making further investments in the F-22A program." The GAO also noted that the F-22s "are not sufficient to be effective in the current and future national security environment." There are 22 test F-35 aircrafts that are more modern, effective, and cheaper. In 2003, Popular Science reported the F-22 had a price tag of $120 million each while the F-35 cost $35 million. In June 2006, the GAO report raised the F-22's numbers, concluding that the multi-year contract would drive per-plane costs up to $183 million from $166 million.
Sadly, Bush’s FY2009 does not adequately fund the on-going Global War on Terror … and before they authorize another supplemental spending bill, Congress first needs to look at other DOD spending.
The Republicans loudly protesting “earmarks” is strictly an election-year ploy when they --and the Democrats-- need to take a serious look all spending.
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Don’t tell Ron Carey, but Norm Coleman leads Earmarks race
The Taxpayers for Common Sense (TCS) has evaluated the FY2008 appropriations bills and determined that Congress inserted 12,881 earmarks worth $18.3 billion into FY2008 spending bills. Congress also documented more than $20 billion in presidential earmarks.
Evaluating the Minnesota Congressional Delegation, Norm Coleman leads the list with $10,780,000 solo earmarks while Keith Ellison and John Kline have requested zero earmarks.
Solo earmarks may not tell the total story, since funding can also cross-district needs. Kline for example did not assign his name to any project while all of Ellison earmarks were ones that the President wanted. Looking at the delegation in this manner, Kline would be first followed by Bachmann at $3,787,600; Walz in third at $9,562,500, then Ramstad at $12,472,300, and on.
Not all earmarks are pork-barrel spending.
They can be good projects that “promote the general Welfare” for the citizens. Article I Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution is clear … Congress controls the purse .. (No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law).
Bush’s FY2009 budget is a sham.
Yet as TCS documents above, presidential earmarks outnumber Congressional earmarks.
For example, Bush knows that the continuation of the Lewis & Clark Regional Water System (and other similar projects) will be funded by Congress. By not including these dollars in his request, he understates what funding is required to make the fiscal imbalance not as large as it is. Water and other related projects requests totaling about $1.8 billion -- some date back to 2000 (or essentially throughout Mr. Bush's presidency) -- are awaiting funds.
South Dakota Congresswoman Stephanie Herseth Sandlin [D], Iowa Congressman Steve King [R] and Minnesota Congressman Tim Walz [D] have issued a joint statement of support for the Lewis & Clark Regional Water System project that would serve the three states.
The Lewis & Clark Regional Water System will deliver safe drinking water from aquifers near Vermillion, S.D., to roughly 300,000 people in a 5,000 square mile area.
Lewis & Clark will be funded … and it will be an earmark in the budget … and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. This is not “pork-barrel” wasteful project.
It’s a game. And part of the game may be who will sign their name to the earmark ?
I question how John Kline can say that he serves the people when he does not support any earmarks. I am proud that Tim Walz is fighting for our well being.
Why do I mention Ron Carey ? When The Club For Growth issued their RePork Card on House of Representatives votes on earmarks, Carey was quick to issue a press release condemning Walz. Will he be so quick now to acknowledge Coleman’s use of earmarks ? (More on the RePork Card in a future commentary.)
We can debate about what is wasteful spending … I question $97,000 to continue the "Lighten Up, Iowa" anti-obesity initiative, but believe that is in the country’s best interest to have a clean water supply. It will be easy for people to denounce earmarks, but we need a serious discussion about what the projects are.
Evaluating the Minnesota Congressional Delegation, Norm Coleman leads the list with $10,780,000 solo earmarks while Keith Ellison and John Kline have requested zero earmarks.
Solo earmarks may not tell the total story, since funding can also cross-district needs. Kline for example did not assign his name to any project while all of Ellison earmarks were ones that the President wanted. Looking at the delegation in this manner, Kline would be first followed by Bachmann at $3,787,600; Walz in third at $9,562,500, then Ramstad at $12,472,300, and on.
Not all earmarks are pork-barrel spending.
They can be good projects that “promote the general Welfare” for the citizens. Article I Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution is clear … Congress controls the purse .. (No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law).
Bush’s FY2009 budget is a sham.
Yet as TCS documents above, presidential earmarks outnumber Congressional earmarks.
For example, Bush knows that the continuation of the Lewis & Clark Regional Water System (and other similar projects) will be funded by Congress. By not including these dollars in his request, he understates what funding is required to make the fiscal imbalance not as large as it is. Water and other related projects requests totaling about $1.8 billion -- some date back to 2000 (or essentially throughout Mr. Bush's presidency) -- are awaiting funds.
South Dakota Congresswoman Stephanie Herseth Sandlin [D], Iowa Congressman Steve King [R] and Minnesota Congressman Tim Walz [D] have issued a joint statement of support for the Lewis & Clark Regional Water System project that would serve the three states.
The Lewis & Clark Regional Water System will deliver safe drinking water from aquifers near Vermillion, S.D., to roughly 300,000 people in a 5,000 square mile area.
Lewis & Clark will be funded … and it will be an earmark in the budget … and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. This is not “pork-barrel” wasteful project.
It’s a game. And part of the game may be who will sign their name to the earmark ?
I question how John Kline can say that he serves the people when he does not support any earmarks. I am proud that Tim Walz is fighting for our well being.
Why do I mention Ron Carey ? When The Club For Growth issued their RePork Card on House of Representatives votes on earmarks, Carey was quick to issue a press release condemning Walz. Will he be so quick now to acknowledge Coleman’s use of earmarks ? (More on the RePork Card in a future commentary.)
We can debate about what is wasteful spending … I question $97,000 to continue the "Lighten Up, Iowa" anti-obesity initiative, but believe that is in the country’s best interest to have a clean water supply. It will be easy for people to denounce earmarks, but we need a serious discussion about what the projects are.
Friday, February 22, 2008
Could U2 Earmark a Rock for Infrastructure Concert for Wilmar ?
Investment in infrastructure seems to be a continual need … regardless if it is in Africa or Wilmar.
While President Bush is in Africa reviewing his five-year, $1.2 billion plan to cut malaria deaths in half in the hardest-hit countries, communities in America are languishing behind needed investments.
As compassionate Americans, we applaud his desires for a better world, but ask how our local communities can get their projects funded?
No doubt that the work of Bono involving Secretary of the Treasury Paul O’Neill in a tour of Africa made an impact. In Uganda, O’Neill remarked "Forty-five percent of the people don't have clean water. The amount of money that's required to give everyone here clean water is maybe $25 million." Later, he cited the example of Ghana's need for clean water supplies, noting that in many cases, it could be solved by drilling $5,000 wells.
At that time, Bono was asked about a Rock for Infrastructure Tour with his band U2. I doubt that Bono thought he would have to earmark a stop in Wilmar, but I wonder if that is what it will take.
The Willmar City Council has authorized the city to file for a state loan to finance construction of the new wastewater treatment plant and conveyance system, estimated at $87.2 million.
The new estimate is up $7 million from a December 2005 facilities plan estimate of $80.2 million. Willmar’s project is among a pool of requests totaling about $1.8 billion. Some date back to 2000 (or essentially throughout Mr. Bush's presidency) and are awaiting funds.
Senators Norm Coleman and Amy Klobuchar and Representative Collin Peterson have been requested to assist in the federal grant.
If they succeed, will they be charged with “pork barrel spending” ?
Essentially, this would be an earmark … an instruction within an appropriations bill that designates monies to a specific project. The Constitution under Article I Section 9 empowers Congress with the powers of the purse. The departments and agencies of the executive branch may not spend any money that Congress has not appropriated, or use federal money for any purpose that Congress has not specified. Although the Congress may provide agencies with a funding, if they do not specify which projects should be funded, the agency would be liberty to spend it as they see fit.
With the 9% cost increase over the past two years, the longer the project is delayed the more it will cost. As a fiscal conservative, I was disappointed when Congress passed and Bush signed a $168 billion H.R. 5140: Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 , but the one shining star of fiscal restraint was Congressman Peterson who voted against it.
The business tax cuts included in the stimulus package are unwise. A 2006 paper published by the Federal Reserve Board shows that the economic bang for the buck of "bonus depreciation" for businesses is very modest.
The personal rebates may be spent – possibly buying products that were made in China, thus helping their economy, not ours - or may be put in savings depending upon the recipients needs.
A better stimulus would have been the passage of S. 1926 National Infrastructure Bank Act of 2007 which has been introduced by Senators Dodd and Hagel with co-sponsors Clinton, Obama and others. Disappointingly, neither Coleman nor Klobuchar have signed on. Frankly, I don't understand why Coleman with an upcoming election has not signed on. Do you think Barak Obama's speech in Janesville, Wisconsin at a GM assembly plant helped him excite his voters :
For our economy, our safety, and our workers, we have to rebuild America. I'm proposing a National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank that will invest $60 billion over ten years.
This investment will multiply into almost half a trillion dollars of additional infrastructure spending and generate nearly two million new jobs -- many of them in the construction industry that's been hard hit by this housing crisis. The repairs will be determined not by politics, but by what will maximize our safety and homeland security; what will keep our environment clean and our economy strong.
Invest in America.
Did you know that a recent Veterans Affairs Department report found that 18 percent of the veterans who sought jobs within one to three years of discharge were unemployed, while one out of four who did find jobs earned less than $21,840 a year?
Hire a Vet.
While President Bush is in Africa reviewing his five-year, $1.2 billion plan to cut malaria deaths in half in the hardest-hit countries, communities in America are languishing behind needed investments.
As compassionate Americans, we applaud his desires for a better world, but ask how our local communities can get their projects funded?
No doubt that the work of Bono involving Secretary of the Treasury Paul O’Neill in a tour of Africa made an impact. In Uganda, O’Neill remarked "Forty-five percent of the people don't have clean water. The amount of money that's required to give everyone here clean water is maybe $25 million." Later, he cited the example of Ghana's need for clean water supplies, noting that in many cases, it could be solved by drilling $5,000 wells.
At that time, Bono was asked about a Rock for Infrastructure Tour with his band U2. I doubt that Bono thought he would have to earmark a stop in Wilmar, but I wonder if that is what it will take.
The Willmar City Council has authorized the city to file for a state loan to finance construction of the new wastewater treatment plant and conveyance system, estimated at $87.2 million.
The new estimate is up $7 million from a December 2005 facilities plan estimate of $80.2 million. Willmar’s project is among a pool of requests totaling about $1.8 billion. Some date back to 2000 (or essentially throughout Mr. Bush's presidency) and are awaiting funds.
Senators Norm Coleman and Amy Klobuchar and Representative Collin Peterson have been requested to assist in the federal grant.
If they succeed, will they be charged with “pork barrel spending” ?
Essentially, this would be an earmark … an instruction within an appropriations bill that designates monies to a specific project. The Constitution under Article I Section 9 empowers Congress with the powers of the purse. The departments and agencies of the executive branch may not spend any money that Congress has not appropriated, or use federal money for any purpose that Congress has not specified. Although the Congress may provide agencies with a funding, if they do not specify which projects should be funded, the agency would be liberty to spend it as they see fit.
With the 9% cost increase over the past two years, the longer the project is delayed the more it will cost. As a fiscal conservative, I was disappointed when Congress passed and Bush signed a $168 billion H.R. 5140: Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 , but the one shining star of fiscal restraint was Congressman Peterson who voted against it.
The business tax cuts included in the stimulus package are unwise. A 2006 paper published by the Federal Reserve Board shows that the economic bang for the buck of "bonus depreciation" for businesses is very modest.
The personal rebates may be spent – possibly buying products that were made in China, thus helping their economy, not ours - or may be put in savings depending upon the recipients needs.
A better stimulus would have been the passage of S. 1926 National Infrastructure Bank Act of 2007 which has been introduced by Senators Dodd and Hagel with co-sponsors Clinton, Obama and others. Disappointingly, neither Coleman nor Klobuchar have signed on. Frankly, I don't understand why Coleman with an upcoming election has not signed on. Do you think Barak Obama's speech in Janesville, Wisconsin at a GM assembly plant helped him excite his voters :
For our economy, our safety, and our workers, we have to rebuild America. I'm proposing a National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank that will invest $60 billion over ten years.
This investment will multiply into almost half a trillion dollars of additional infrastructure spending and generate nearly two million new jobs -- many of them in the construction industry that's been hard hit by this housing crisis. The repairs will be determined not by politics, but by what will maximize our safety and homeland security; what will keep our environment clean and our economy strong.
Invest in America.
Did you know that a recent Veterans Affairs Department report found that 18 percent of the veterans who sought jobs within one to three years of discharge were unemployed, while one out of four who did find jobs earned less than $21,840 a year?
Hire a Vet.
Monday, August 20, 2007
Does Jim Oberstar Know Best ?
Quick, how many of you recall the 50’s television program Father Knows Best ?
Well, not only is that a question but the series was actually based on the question: Does Father really know what is best ? Yes, Jim Anderson could not only lose his temper, but occasionally be wrong.
If Jim Anderson could be wrong, could Jim Oberstar also be wrong ? Not according to Oberstar when it comes to who knows best about transportation funding.
On Sunday, CSPAN Newsmaker program, link , Rep. James Oberstar (D-MN), Transportation Committee, Chairman was interviewed by John Hughes, Bloomberg News, Transportation Reporter & Kevin Diaz, Minneapolis Star Tribune, Washington Correspondent.
Diaz had previously reported that Oberstar plans to offer a temporary 5-cent-a-gallon gas tax for a national reconstruction program. Diaz speculates that this could be a campaign issue that some such as freshman Democrat Tim Walz may not want to have to vote on due to the higher taxes. (Personally, I find that speculation unprofessional … either get a quote as Diaz did from Ramsted but don’t take a quote from the executive director Club for Growth and imply that is Walz’s position.)
Oberstar correctly argued that the gas tax is a pure user tax. Yet, Norm (TaxCut and Spend) Coleman says ”I'm not yet prepared to accept a gas tax increase as the solution" and backs Bush’s assertion that it is a matter of priority.
In this case, both Oberstar’s user fee and Coleman’s prioritization makes sense.
Many Republicans embrace the idea of a Consumption-Based Taxes, so is Coleman’s reluctance that he does not want to actually vote for a tax increase … especially in a pre-election year ?
Where Oberstar fails is his impassioned defense of earmarks. He stated that Congress has a better idea on where the monies should be spent than individual state's Department of Transportation. That is a problem. A Congressman should consult with the state’s DOT and ensure that their needs are addressed. When the Congressman and the DOT disagree, there needs to be input from the state Legislature. The SAFETEA-LU 2005 legislation includes funding that Minnesota’s DOT did not rate as a high priority …that’s wrong. The complaints concerning the Alaska Bridge to Nowhere were expressed loud and clear by fiscal conservatives and the Main Stream Media … but they still got in the final bill. But that doesn’t mean that the monies are being spent … just last week officials of Lee County Florida turned down $10million for a project they did not want.
Recent polls indicate that Congressional performance is unsatisfactory in the voters mind. There were a number of reasons why Democrats defeated Republicans in 2006 … and corruption and earmarks were at the top of the list.
Congressman Oberstar, in this instance, you don’t know best. Blindly accepting the earmark system does not make sense. Yes, earmarks can be purposeful. They need to be discussed with state DOT and represent fairness in allocating the monies based on the America’s needs.
Well, not only is that a question but the series was actually based on the question: Does Father really know what is best ? Yes, Jim Anderson could not only lose his temper, but occasionally be wrong.
If Jim Anderson could be wrong, could Jim Oberstar also be wrong ? Not according to Oberstar when it comes to who knows best about transportation funding.
On Sunday, CSPAN Newsmaker program, link , Rep. James Oberstar (D-MN), Transportation Committee, Chairman was interviewed by John Hughes, Bloomberg News, Transportation Reporter & Kevin Diaz, Minneapolis Star Tribune, Washington Correspondent.
Diaz had previously reported that Oberstar plans to offer a temporary 5-cent-a-gallon gas tax for a national reconstruction program. Diaz speculates that this could be a campaign issue that some such as freshman Democrat Tim Walz may not want to have to vote on due to the higher taxes. (Personally, I find that speculation unprofessional … either get a quote as Diaz did from Ramsted but don’t take a quote from the executive director Club for Growth and imply that is Walz’s position.)
Oberstar correctly argued that the gas tax is a pure user tax. Yet, Norm (TaxCut and Spend) Coleman says ”I'm not yet prepared to accept a gas tax increase as the solution" and backs Bush’s assertion that it is a matter of priority.
In this case, both Oberstar’s user fee and Coleman’s prioritization makes sense.
Many Republicans embrace the idea of a Consumption-Based Taxes, so is Coleman’s reluctance that he does not want to actually vote for a tax increase … especially in a pre-election year ?
Where Oberstar fails is his impassioned defense of earmarks. He stated that Congress has a better idea on where the monies should be spent than individual state's Department of Transportation. That is a problem. A Congressman should consult with the state’s DOT and ensure that their needs are addressed. When the Congressman and the DOT disagree, there needs to be input from the state Legislature. The SAFETEA-LU 2005 legislation includes funding that Minnesota’s DOT did not rate as a high priority …that’s wrong. The complaints concerning the Alaska Bridge to Nowhere were expressed loud and clear by fiscal conservatives and the Main Stream Media … but they still got in the final bill. But that doesn’t mean that the monies are being spent … just last week officials of Lee County Florida turned down $10million for a project they did not want.
Recent polls indicate that Congressional performance is unsatisfactory in the voters mind. There were a number of reasons why Democrats defeated Republicans in 2006 … and corruption and earmarks were at the top of the list.
Congressman Oberstar, in this instance, you don’t know best. Blindly accepting the earmark system does not make sense. Yes, earmarks can be purposeful. They need to be discussed with state DOT and represent fairness in allocating the monies based on the America’s needs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
![Vote 60](http://img%20src=http://img.inkfrog.com/pix/ravendog/clic.gif%20border=”0"){kind=link}