War spending?

Congress is profiteering on the war
by funding special interests, Libertarians say

WASHINGTON, DC -- The bill funding the war in Iraq has become jam-
packed with so many special-interest favors -- such as a $250 million
grant for Southern catfish farmers -- that Congress should be ashamed
to vote for it, the Libertarian Party says.

"Unfortunately, wartime looting isn't confined to Iraq," said Geoffrey
Neale, the party's national chairman. "Politicians in Washington, DC,
are using the fog of late-night legislating to cover their tracks as
they funnel money to their political supporters."

As a House-Senate conference committee negotiates the final details of
legislation funding the Iraq war, Democrats and Republicans are
scrambling to insert dozens of special-interest riders. Though the $80
billion package was stalled by disagreements on Wednesday, it is
expected to be completed within days and presented to President Bush.

According to an estimate by Rep. Ron Paul, R-TX, the bill contains $20
billion in "wartime pork," or spending that has no connection with the
war in Iraq or the battle against terrorism.

"By turning the bill into a spigot for special interests, Congress is
profiteering on the war -- and that should anger every American,"
Neale said.

One especially egregious example: Republican Sen. Thad Cochran inserted
language that would funnel $250 million to Southern catfish farmers,
many of them in his home state of Mississippi, under the guise of
providing drought relief for livestock producers.

Other "war-time pork" includes:

* $69 million to fund a "Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust," named after
the former Missouri Congressman.

* A measure intended to prevent a German company, DHL Worldwide
Express, from competing with Federal Express and United Parcel Service
in the delivery of military cargo. During the 2002 election cycle, UPS
gave $1.5 million to Democratic and Republican candidates and $300,000
to the Republican National Committee, Neale noted.

* $98 million for an agricultural research lab in Iowa, and $250
million in other Agriculture Department grants.

* $3.2 billion to extend unemployment benefits for airline employees.

* $11 million for Congressional salaries and expenses.

* A total of $12.4 million for the Library of Congress, the
Congressional Research Service, the General Accounting Office and the
U.S. Court of International Trade.

* $8 billion in foreign aid for nations that are supposedly helping the
fight against terrorism, including Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, Slovenia
and Djibouti.

"It's disgraceful that politicians who publicly brag about supporting
our troops are privately using this war as a device to enrich special
interests and benefit their own re-election campaigns," Neale said.

"The Libertarian Party is challenging Mr. Bush to veto this bill.
Maybe that will send a message to the politicians who insist on
conducting business as usual in Washington, DC -- while their fellow
Americans are dying in Iraq."

[Dionysos]

Seriously, do you think this is the only time shit gets stuck into a bill that doesn't fit? Right now we have a prime example with the rave act being stuck on the national Amber alert system bill. This isn't a new practice, it's just not noticed by the public most of the time.

[Adam D]

Yeah, I don't think any of those are any more assraping of the budget than any other year's fiscal budget. It is kind of absurd that all this money is being directed at unnecessary programs and funds like "$69 million to fund a "Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust," named after the former Missouri Congressman" when extra money is being put towards war, taxes are getting cut, and key education and social service programs are getting reduced to block grants that will ultimately be used by red lining states to patch holes in the state budget rather than for the programs they were intended.

Wouldn't it actually be fun if a Prez could get elected with no special interest money, the line item veto, and a penchant for killing subsidization?

Actually, our economy has operated for so long with government subsidies, it would be interesting to see what would happen if we started killing all of them off... Has anyone ever run across any economics-oriented material that would theorize what would happen if all subsidization stopped?

[Adam D]

true capitalist market-based competition.


See Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations"