Posted on 12/30/2007 1:24:42 PM PST by Graybeard58
Unintended consequences usually are bad, but not always. Facing a year of lame-duck status, President Bush has a chance to bestow on America a gift he could not have given were it not for the 22nd Amendment, which limits presidential terms to two.
Specifically, it seems the president has constitutional authority to make the recent congressional pork-fest disappear.
As reported last week in The Wall Street Journal, most of the 11,331 earmarks — special-interest spending Congress members routinely parley into constituents' votes or campaign contributions — impose no constitutional obligations upon the executive branch. That's because the suspect earmarks appear in committee reports attached to a $516 omnibus spending bill, and were not approved by both houses.
Typically, earmarks range from "bring-home-the-bacon" public projects in Congress members' districts to expenditures that serve special interests on which members rely for campaign funding. As The Heritage Foundation notes in a paper by budget analyst Brian Riedl, many are shockingly vague, opening the door to theft and corruption.
For example, the farm bill includes a $3.7 million, six-word earmark: "Formosan Subterranean Termite, New Orleans, LA." Tucked into the energy and water bill is a $5 million, one-word earmark for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: "Tuscaloosa." Its sponsor is Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala.
President Bush isn't looking to the next election. Given his unpopularity, which rivals that of Congress, he probably won't be in much demand as a stump speaker next fall. Campaign contributions mean nothing to him because he's run his last race.
Fellow Republicans whose earmarks stand to fall victim to hard-hearted enforcement of the Constitution will complain and accuse him of being ungrateful, but at this point in his life, he can afford to be selfish.
Three years ago, after he won re-election, the president spoke of the political capital he had accumulated and how he intended to use it. Today, he has no political capital to speak of. You might say he's politically bankrupt — which also means he's debt-free.
Yes, but not quite. He still owes the millions of fiscal conservatives who gave him their votes in 2000 and 2004, thinking he would reverse the prodigious spending practices of past administrations and Congresses.
They're still waiting for him to fulfill his promise. The opportunity is upon him. Here's hoping he doesn't waste it.
Ping to a Republican-American Editorial.
If you want on or off this list, let me know.
The Alaska earmarks seem okay except I still don’t know what the Denali Commission is. Military base construction, some other infrastructure. No highways earmarked.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manue
“They’re still waiting for him to fulfill his promise. The opportunity is upon him. Here’s hoping he doesn’t waste it.”
And they’ll never see him fulfill that promise. He is far too spineless. As long as the Presidency does not have line-item veto power, there will be far too many excuses for allowing such pork spending to continue.
Congress may be unpopular, but the incumbents are almost assured of reelection, so they don't care what anyone thinks. Political campaigning is all about name recognition and $, which is the same reason RINO phonies like Rudy, Mitt, McCain, and Huckleberry lead the polls, and good guys like Hunter & Tancredo are ignored.
What if W said he was vetoing the pork as a gesture of affection for “our Muslim shitizhens, who share our longing for peash?” (Bushy pronunciations) That would confuse the liberal media.
bean soup, pea soup - all great uses of leftover ham :)
In response to criticism about earmarks uur Alaska senior congress critters defended their use. Essentially they said the money is there to be used, if we don’t get it, somedody else will. Absolutely no talk about getting rid of it. The money they grabbed does mostly go to military base improvements, which is needed. I just cannot stand this attitude though.
Yum, ham salad.
Conservatives need to take the offensive against earmarks. The rats promised that earmarks and pork spending would end. I do not see any change. The rats are feasting on earmarks without constraints.
To control federal spending, earmarks should be eliminated. States should be block granted funds. Local decision makers should decide spending priorities. Congress critters should be left out except for determining allocation formulas and overall budget amounts. Under no circumstances should a congress critters name be associated with any local spending.
Republicans should focus on earmark reform as a fundamental part of new contract with America.
Wouldn't the outcry be delicious?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.