Cutting Pork In The Budget

[Annie]

In light of the spending for the hurricanes, not to mention the WOT, it seems a good time to prod our reps to do something. I've been meaning to get around to it, but my 7th graders have been sucking the life right out of me-thus far. Once I can turn the tables, watch out. Here's someone that is doing something. Links at site, notice he did get called the next day. Only those who haven't been involved feel the 'system doesn't work':

http://fearlesscritic.blogspot.com/2005/09/chambliss-responds.html

Monday, September 26, 2005
Chambliss responds
As promised, Candice from Senator Saxby Chambliss' office called today. Unfortunately, she could offer me no specifics -- neither on whether Chambliss would support my suggested cuts or on any of his own cuts that he could recommend.

She did say that Sen. Chambliss would also like to see cuts in federal spending. Candice ended the conversation by promising me that Tyler -- another aide, this one specializing in transportation issues -- would call me soon.

I've gotten the distinct impression from both Candice and from Tom Price's chief of staff that these aides don't appreciate my intrusions. They can't seem to understand why I'm bothering them or why I expect more of a response than a form letter assuring me that they share my concerns about the budget.

These guys have a tough job, and I understand that they can't just drop everything to answer my questions. But, I started this query a week ago now. (I sent my emails on Monday of last week and spoke to staffers in each office the following day.) I'm asking two very simple, direct questions. Do you support my cuts and can you identify cuts that you do support?

This is a representative democracy, and I voted for all three of these guys. This shouldn't be that hard, should it?

By the way, I should offer specific kudos to Johnny Isakson and his staffers. One of his aides called me on Friday and talked to me at length about these issues. Isakson's got my vote locked up for 2010!
Comments (3)

posted by Matt J. Duffy at 4:18 PM

 

[Annie]

and another, again with links:

http://www.dhogberg.com/2005_09_25_dhogberg_archive.html#112775984793301452

PORKBUSTERS UPDATE: GEORGE ALLEN

David Snepp, spokesperson for Senator George Allen (R-Virginia), did call me back pretty quickly about PorkBusters. Some of what he had to say was encouraging. He stated that for Senator Allen, “everything is on the table except tax increases.” “Any earmark could be considered,” he said, “and the Medicare drug benefit is even on the table.”



But on specifics, it was a bit disappointing. I listed the earkmarks in the post below, and he responded that “there was no reconsideration of specific earmarks at this point.” He claimed that “we are not far enough along in the process” to have specifics.

Finally, when I asked him if Senator Allen was going to sign the Citizens Against Government Waste “Hurricane Katrina No Pork Pledge,” Snepp admitted that they “didn’t know enough about the pledge.” I’ve emailed it to him, and we’ll see what response I get.

My main thought is this: If Nancy Pelosi can come up with specifics, why is it taking Senator Allen this much time to get “far enough along in the process”?


posted by David 2:33 PM 1 Comment

 

[Annie]

and NOT so responsive, including my own Senator Obama:

http://instapundit.com/archives/025817.php

PORK RESPONSE UPDATE: Reader Neema Salimi wrote Rep. Tom Lantos and reports: "Congressman Lantos sent me a form letter in response to my request that he cut pork to pay for Katrina spending. He doesn't even address it."

Salimi's right, as he forwarded the response. Click "read more" to read it.

UPDATE: Reader Mary Wlodarski sends a response she got: "I have been a regular reader of your blog for years and really love it! I sent both my senators, Durbin and Obama a letter asking them to review the budget in light of the need of our southern states, foregoing our projects to help out the gulf states. I only got response from Obama. He must have thought I was concerned about the pets in the budget, not the pork!"

Maybe he thought it was a pet pig? (I've put the letter she forwarded below, after the Lantos letter).

Read More »

As the catastrophe of Hurricane Katrina ripped through the Gulf coast, many of our neighbors lost loved ones, homes and jobs. We all have been touched by this overwhelming destruction.

At first, I was shocked and amazed seeing the human misery and devastation along the Gulf Coast. Now, I am outraged and angry that because of an utterly ineffective response, tens of thousands of people in New Orleans and other victims failed to get the food, water, medicine, and evacuation assistance they so desperately needed. These victims need assistance and the American people deserve answers.

While Congress has acted to provide funding, current programs simply will not be enough to rebuild communities, revive economies, and restore lives. Congress should provide the needed legislation to help local communities rebuild homes and hospitals, schools and stores, industries and infrastructure. Furthermore, we need an independent, blue ribbon, bipartisan Katrina Response Commission modeled on the highly successful 9/11 Commission to get answers to the many questions raised by this disaster.

The outpouring of public support has been tremendous and reassuring yet the road to recovery will be long and difficult. I will continue to work to do all I can and I know I can count on your support.

Cordially,


TOM LANTOS
Member of Congress

"The American people deserve answers" -- just not from him!

MORE: Here's the Obama letter:

Dear Mary:

Thank you for contacting me regarding Hurricane Katrina and rescue operations for the pets of evacuees. I appreciate hearing from you.

Among the many difficult and heartwrenching aspects of this tragedy has been the lack of resources to rescue and care for those pets left behind by evacuees who were unable to take them on evacuation transports. Fortunately, as news spread about the plight of these animals, several groups volunteered to travel into that dangerous environment to help rescue them.

As soon as the resources were available, the United States Navy and National Guard began searching for and rescuing these pets in New Orleans and elsewhere in the Gulf Coast. The U.S.S. Tortuga moored near New Orleans, and the Tortuga's repair division began a search and rescue mission for abandoned pets. The crew members set up "Camp Milo and Otis," a makeshift kennel where medical care and shelter was provided for dogs, cats and other displaced animals from the city. The Department of Homeland Security also assisted by deploying Veterinary Medical Assistance Teams to provide medical care to pets and livestock, as well as provide any needed veterinary medical care for dogs involved in the rescue effort. And only days after the storm, SPCAs, Humane Societies and other pet welfare organizations from across the country joined the United States Navy and National Guard in attempting to rescue stray animals. Several thousand pets were rescued and sheltered around the state by late last week.

Individual citizens have helped with this effort as well. I was particularly heartened by stories like one in Grand Rapids Michigan, where an anonymous donor helped relocate 175 displaced dogs and cats. While it is tragic that so many pets remain left behind, that is yet another example of how humanity can shine through any disaster.

As you know, the lack of government planning for this disaster has drawn the ire of many Americans, and a substantial review process must take place to ensure that the same mistakes are not repeated. Planning for the rescue and care of pets should certainly be part of that discussion.

Thank you again for writing.

Sincerely,

Barack Obama
United States Senator


P.S. Our system does not allow direct response to this email. However, if you would like to contact me again, please use the form on the website: http://obama.senate.gov/contact/

Some people do have pet pigs. But still . . . .

Actually, what's most disturbing is that he has a form letter just for people who wrote their Senator about lost pets in Katrina. How many people do that? Enough to merit a form letter of their very own, I guess.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Cutting pork, just like raising or lowering taxes, isn't as simple as it might seem. Useless or not, there still are businesses depending on pork money to operate. There is no simple solution like trading a bridge to nowhere for a check to New Orleans.

 

[Annie]

Cutting pork, just like raising or lowering taxes, isn't as simple as it might seem. Useless or not, there still are businesses depending on pork money to operate. There is no simple solution like trading a bridge to nowhere for a check to New Orleans.

Sure it is, all the pols have to do is make a 'gentleperson's agreement' that all nonsense will be cut out for the next 2 years-ie Bridge to nowhere and others.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Sure it is, all the pols have to do is make a 'gentleperson's agreement' that all nonsense will be cut out for the next 2 years-ie Bridge to nowhere and others.

And in those two years, numerous businesses will go under, because a substantial part of their business is from pork.

Pork or not, jobs will be created by building a bridge to nowhere, and unless cutting that project means re-locating and employing the would-be bridge builders down in new orleans, there will be an adverse effect.

Pork spending doesn't just get burned, it goes to people's pockets. If you just one day cut it all without thinking about how to handle everyone who depended on the pork, you'll have a bit of a problem.

 

[Annie]

And in those two years, numerous businesses will go under, because a substantial part of their business is from pork.

Pork or not, jobs will be created by building a bridge to nowhere, and unless cutting that project means re-locating and employing the would-be bridge builders down in new orleans, there will be an adverse effect.

Pork spending doesn't just get burned, it goes to people's pockets. If you just one day cut it all without thinking about how to handle everyone who depended on the pork, you'll have a bit of a problem.

Yeah, a lot of it goes in people's pockets directly, with nothing to show of worth. Sorry, better to cut the deficit and taxes, let the wealth go to those that know how to grow it-which is NOT any level of government. They only consume, not grow wealth.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Yeah, a lot of it goes in people's pockets directly, with nothing to show of worth. Sorry, better to cut the deficit and taxes, let the wealth go to those that know how to grow it-which is NOT any level of government. They only consume, not grow wealth.

This is precisely the problem with deficit spending. When you cut out all the worthless projects, the economy is going to take a hit. I'm not saying they shouldn't be reduced, or even cut entirely, but some forethough is needed as it relates to all the private contractors who exist largely on govenment money.

The shipping industry, for example. If you cut the pork from the maritime budget... the only reason there are any shipyards at all in the states is because of government money. Now, if you want to talk about cutting pork but maybe easing up on restrictions that make it impossible for a US ship builder to compete commercially with a Korean ship builder... well then I'm all ears.

 

[no1tovote4]

This is precisely the problem with deficit spending. When you cut out all the worthless projects, the economy is going to take a hit. I'm not saying they shouldn't be reduced, or even cut entirely, but some forethough is needed as it relates to all the private contractors who exist largely on govenment money.

The shipping industry, for example. If you cut the pork from the maritime budget... the only reason there are any shipyards at all in the states is because of government money. Now, if you want to talk about cutting pork but maybe easing up on restrictions that make it impossible for a US ship builder to compete commercially with a Korean ship builder... well then I'm all ears.

Both should be done. It should not be the purview of the government to keep a business afloat, or to create conditions in which they cannot compete. Both are equally offensive to a free market.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Both should be done. It should not be the purview of the government to keep a business afloat, or to create conditions in which they cannot compete. Both are equally offensive to a free market.

In today's world, that would mean big time pay cuts for a lot of blue collar workers. American labor is way too expensive to compete with the rest of the world. I'm all for free market; if the Koreans will work for 2 pennies and a handshake... well then fine...

 

[Adam's Apple]

Very good website to get the "skinny" on pork in the budget. Numerous articles, all researched.

http://www.pork-reports.blogspot.com