advertisement

The world-famous Internet site of the Nationally Syndicated Neal Boortz Show!

Search Boortz.com
Enter search terms:
Browse Boortz.com
Today's Nuze

"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it."

Frederic Bastiat

HERE COMES THE PORK AGAIN

By
Neal Boortz
@ July 14, 2010 8:32 AM
Permalink | Comments (19) | TrackBacks (0)

Yup ... the porkers are stirring. Look! There they are approaching the taxpayer trough yet again. After all ... an election is on the horizon. This election, though, is a bit different for Democrats. They definitely don't want to go to their home districts and run on a national agenda. Their survival may well depend on separating themselves from Obama's big-government movement. So ... tout the pork! Democrats are going into their home districts and saying "Look at this sidewalk? Look at this pedestrian bridge! Look at this new community center! I did these things for you! Don't you want to send me back to Washington?"

The problem here is that these politicians and their constitutions just can't see a pedestrian bridge or a weasel crossing under a road in some national park as being so expensive that it really had anything at all to do with our increasing debt. Maybe the politicians know better .. but the voters may not.

Are you one of those Americans who suffer from thousands of dollars of credit card debt? Think about this now ... you have an $8,000 balance on your credit card and really nothing to show for it. You can't point to any one large purchase that created this burdensome debt load. If you check your statements you'll see that you created that debt bit-by-bit. There's a $40 fill-up at the gas station here, $35 in groceries there. Then you charge some movie theatre tickets and the next day it's $4.60 at Starbucks. None of these expenditures are going to bury you ... but time goes by, the charges add up, and suddenly you're sitting there trying to figure out how you got in this situation.

Same thing for government and our national debt. That pedestrian sky bridge in El Paso, or that new composting restroom in a Madison, Wisconsin park aren't exactly going to break the bank. But you get 435 members of the House, toss in 100 Senators ... every one of them trying to impress the local voters with these pork items ... and suddenly things are out of control.

I have something that could lead to a fix. I've been proposing this for years. I actually managed to have something like this introduced as legislation in the Georgia General Assembly about 10 years ago .. and it went nowhere. I just call it the "Taxpayer's Addendum."

How does it work? Well, let's apply it to congressional pork. I would propose that every single time a lawmaker proposes an earmark as part of an appropriations bill in Washington the request must be in writing and the Taxpayer's Addendum should be added to the request. Here's how it might read:

"I, ___ (politician's name) ________ do hereby swear and affirm that it is my considered position and belief that it is more important for the government to spend the necessary sums for the completion of the project outlined herein than it would be for the person who actually worked for and earned these funds to be permitted to retain those funds for the payment of their person expenses; including expenses related to basic necessities of life such as food, transportation, shelter, clothing and healthcare."

How many of these politicians do you think would be willing to actually walk up to a wage earner and physically take the money out of that person's pocket to pay for some of this pork? Yeah ... the number would be somewhere near zero I suspect.

Categories:



0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: HERE COMES THE PORK AGAIN.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://boortz.com/blogging/mt-tb.cgi/80845

Jamie Dupree's Blog

If you enjoy Neal's daily chat with Jamie Dupree, you'll love Jamie's Blog! Check it out for analysis of the campaigns and goings on in Washington D.C.

Cristina Gonzalez and Laura Nunemaker assist in the daily preparation of Nealz Nuze!


Avg. rating: N/A

What others are saying

  • @pagan
    Right on! You said it better than I can! The trouble is that the political class over more than 200 years now has steadily eroded the Constitution and abrogated more and more power to itself. They have done this in many different ways, and using the Constitutional amendment route after brainwashing a majority of ignorant voters is the sleaziest of all tactics. Lenin refined Marxism by demonstrating how power can be used to promote this evil ideology and progressives the world over have been running with it ever since. The USA most likely can survive an Obama presidency just as it has survived other catastrophes such as the Civil War, Pearl Harbor and 9/11, but in the long term it is unlikely to survive Obama voters.
  • On Point Pagan posts!!!!
    Great great post and yes it would be so much better to take everything back to the state level.
  • @DW
    I'm assuming you know that is the way it originally worked until we passed the 16th amendment authorizing the income tax.

    And you are correct, that is the answer. It is sad to see even conservatives debating the best way to "control" the spending at a Federal Level, when the real answer is not to let the Federal Level do the spending at all.

    Why should we, as citizens of a state, have to go crawling to our Federal representatives, who in turn go crawling to the great imperial federal government, to get OUR OWN MONEY BACK?

    Why do you think all the States are in such bad economic shape? Because we have put all our eggs in one basket, as the old saying goes. It really is our own fault; Californians let it happen because they figured they could get more back from Floridians, Floridians let it happen because they figured they could get more back from New Yorkers, etc. etc.

    It really is just the biggest ponzi scheme in the history of the world. Each state has given up more of its power and taxing authority to the Federal Government in hopes that what they get back will be greater than what they put in. The problem is we broke the biggest check and balance that existed in the constitution, the power of the States to compete; because now, as we are seeing, the country fails as a whole economically when you remove that check.

    Think where we would be if these FEDERAL programs didn’t even exist; the Department of Education, the Social Security Administration, the IRS, the FDA, the EPA, pretty much any federal department that doesn’t have a direct role in national security or international trade. Just think if each state decided on its own how to or whether to run education, retirement, tax policy, food safety, environmental concerns, etc.. What you would end up with is ingenious and innovative ways of addressing these issues that we haven’t even thought of yet.

    Yes, there would be failures, but they would be limited to the State where they were tried and much easier to fix and clean up at a State level rather than a Federal Level. And other states would all learn from the failures and also learn from the successes. And it would be a self correcting system; because the States would always be limited in how big they could grow because PEOPLE COULD LEAVE.

    It was the greatest concept of a government system ever created by man and we blew it with the 16h (federal income taxes) and the 17th (election of senators by popular vote vs appointment by the state) amendments.

    We cannot expect people with that type of power and control not to use it to stay in power and control, the ONLY answer is to take the power away.
  • spelling fix
    Just a spelling error (the only thing the statists can nitpick is trivia vs. substance, but let's not encourage them)...

    "their person expenses;" should read "their personal expenses;"
  • Piggy
    That is one cute snoot!
  • Example of neal being out of touch
    He thinks you spend 35.00 at the grocery store.
  • MPercy
    Good info, but I'm still a proponent of term limits, which is a sure-fire guarantee to end earmarks.
  • How to stop the pork
    Here's an idea: We stop paying taxes to the Federal government. We only pay taxes to our state. The federal government bills the states for the services provided for the country as a whole (defense, immigration, etc.). The proportion of the bill is based on the proportion of the population in each state. This eliminates the need for congress critters to try to get money back to their states.
  • We need a line item federal budget
    If earmarks are the only way to appropriate funds for congressional districts, then the federal budget appropriation process is flawed.

    We need a line-item budget, just like the private sector. Wow, what a novel idea.

    All arguments about which RINO or which Dimocrap earmarked what or how much is irrelevent. No one here seems to get this. Most of us conservatives have been hollering for this for years.
  • Easy way to get rid of pork
    Vote out all conservatives and their bridges to nowhere.
  • stepcousin
    I don't think the article or any other comments singled out Democrats as the only party guilty of earmark spending. R's certainly do it too, and are often near or on the top of the leaderboard of shame for their piggishness.

    But consider that the D's control the House, Senate, and The WH, and you get behaviors like this:

    All earmarks in the proposed Homeland Security spending bill for 2011 went to Democrats — save one.

    Rep. Joseph Cao (La.) was the only House Republican to win a Homeland Security earmark: $800,000 for Federal Emergency Management Administration state and local programs and an emergency operations center in New Orleans. Every other earmark was sponsored by a Democrat.

    Cao's earmark does cut against the one-year earmark moratorium that Boehner and other GOP leaders have called for. While most of House GOP members are complying with the temporary ban, Cao, Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska) and Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) haven't committed to it.

    ------

    And GOP leader John Boehner has never used an earmark in all his years in Congress. And in the last omnibus spending bill, 39 0f the 178 Republican House members did not have earmarks in the omnibus. Only 3 D's out of 257 did not accept earmarks.
  • it's everywhere
    Republicans are guilty of pork projects, too. Term limits is the only answer. Unseat these scumbags and put them back to work in the private sector.
  • A parody based on the title
    Neal,Royal,Belinda,Webwench: I figured that since you all are broadcast geniuses, you guys could come up with a "Paul Shanklin" styled parody "Here Comes The Pork Again", set to the tune of "Here Comes the Rain Again", by the Eurythmics.
  • Slow down Cowboy...
    Last time I looked, Johnny Isaakson and Saxby Chambliss have helped their home districts out a little too. I don't think you'll ever convince politicians or voters to relinquish their pet spending projects...it's like Christmas, I know how much you care about me by the quality of the stuff you give me...
  • that's the system
    How do we go about changing the system?
    Until then, each Rep/Sen is going to do what they can for their respective areas, all the while doing very little to advance the nation as a whole.
  • I think you're wrong
    You say that you think that no politician would be willing to walk up to a person and take the money from them to do something that helps them stay in office? I'm not so sure - these people are so full of themselves and so arrogant that I would not put it past them to be that bold and brazen. After all, these people actually believe that they are better equipped to control our personal funds than we are. So, why WOULDN'T they feel entitled to take the money from us personally? (BTW, I really like your credit card debt analogy - that's one of the best explanations of how we got into this mess in the first place... easy credit for politicians!)
  • $4.60 At Starbucks?
    What did you buy? A stir stick?
  • Optimism
    Maybe the more pork we have in Washington, the less likely we'll have more Muslim politicians.
  • DUHH!
    Why do you think "they're all a bunch of crooks -- except for MY guy -- He's OK"
send to a friend  view as printer-friendly  RSS feeds
advertisement
advertisement
advertisement