Who Says Bi-partisanship Is Dead?

[Zoom-boing]

In the past two years, an institution supposedly paralyzed by gridlock has succeeded in passing the most consequential pieces of legislation it handles every year -- appropriations bills -- by 3-to-1 margins. In the past few weeks, Congress has increased the debt limit from $12.1 trillion to $14.3 trillion but made no effort to eliminate any wasteful or duplicative spending. Since 1994, both parties have worked together to create 90,000 new earmarks, with only a handful of earmarks going down to defeat.

The problem, therefore, is not gridlock. The problem is that Congress is working in a bipartisan fashion to make our economic future less secure. The facts show that Congress is controlled by a supermajority of members from both parties who believe it is fine to borrow and spend far beyond our means and avoid hard choices.

In the past decade, this consensus has helped put our nation on a path toward economic ruin. Total federal spending has doubled since 2000, increasing at three times the rate of inflation -- far faster than family budgets. By the end of 2010, our national debt will equal the size of our entire gross domestic product (GDP), which many economists view as a tipping point. A study released last month by economists Carmen Reinhart of the University of Maryland and Kenneth Rogoff of Harvard found that when advanced nations reach this tipping point they experience slower economic growth and face higher interest rates and inflation.

President Obama's appointment of a debt commission to address spending is an indirect rebuke of the spending supermajority when a direct rebuke would be more helpful. The American people believe we already have a commission to confront our debt. It's called the United States Congress. If members of Congress aren't up to that task, we don't need a new commission, we need a new Congress.

washingtonpost.com

 

[rightwinger]

In the grander scope of things, earmarks are a red herring. They account for a a tiny percentage of the total budget.
Fighting earmarks accounts to spending dollars to chase dimes

They are an ethical annoyance but are not worth stopping the entire process

 

[Avatar4321]

As I've always said. Bipartisanship is politicians of both parties joining together to screw us over.

 

[Murf76]

Great article. Tom Coburn is one of the few who really seem to get it.

My favorite bit:

The American people believe we already have a commission to confront our debt. It's called the United States Congress. If members of Congress aren't up to that task, we don't need a new commission, we need a new Congress.

Amen, Brother Tom. Amen.

 

[Murf76]

In the grander scope of things, earmarks are a red herring. They account for a a tiny percentage of the total budget.
Fighting earmarks accounts to spending dollars to chase dimes

They are an ethical annoyance but are not worth stopping the entire process

While it's true that earmarking only accounts for a small amount of Congressional spending... they, along with campaign finance, are the Devil's Road to Political Corruption.

Defending earmarking is defending corruption and vote-buying.
It's a pander to a local special interest.

It's WRONG to seize property (money) from all our citizens for the benefit of just a few. And it doesn't matter what the reason is. If a given community wants a new library, they need to get their hindparts engaged and have some bake sales and wash some cars. Because it's morally WRONG to rob other citizens who will enjoy no benefit in that library.

Legitimate Congressional spending will stand on its own merits.