• www.CAGW.org

    Got Waste?
    Please visit www.cagw.org
    or e-mail us at blog@cagw.org


    Register Now
    Donate Tell a Friend 2009 Pig Book Cover

    porker of the month blue

    1-800-
    BE-ANGRY

    RSS2XML
    My Yahoo


    Find us on Facebook

  • Public Policy Issues

  • Pages

  •  

    July 2009
    S M T W T F S
    « Jun    
     1234
    567891011
    12131415161718
    19202122232425
    262728293031  

  • Meta

Stimulus Website Needs More Money

Posted on July 10, 2009 by Dave Williams

The General Services Administration just announced a plan to spend $18 million to revamp Recovery.org.  Smartronix Inc., a Maryland-based firm,  who was awarded the contract, will receive the money in two increments, $9.5 million through January 2010 and then the  remaining $7.5 million throughout 2014.  The effort to shed much needed sunshine on the stimulus and recovery efforts is to be applauded, but this project seems like it will be costing too much and delivering too late. 

In comparison,  America’s first transparency and accountability website, USAspending.gov, was created in 2006 and is maintained for less than $1 million.  USAspemding.gov is a comprehensive and searchable database which lists every federal contract and expenditure by fiscal year.  It seems implausible that Recovery.gov needs $18 million for a re-design when USAspending.gov got up and running from the start for a small fraction of that.

The inflated price tag might have something to do with the fact that Smartronix is still new to Web design.  When considering awarding the contract, The Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board was looking for “an innovative, award winning, Web design and implementation firm with expertise on user-focused, data-driven Web designs.”  Strangely enough, Smartronix specializes in areas including “cybersecurity, custom enterprise software, systems design, and health IT.”  According to Informationweek, Smartronix hardly has any web design experience.  This is not to say they are inexperienced altogether; Smartronix has won more than  $260 million in federal contractsover the last decade, which is ironically, listed on the less expensive USAspending.gov.

Although Earl Devaney, chairman of the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board, is “pleased that another major milestone has been achieved,” one has to wonder what this milestone is.  Spending 18 times more to report on the stimulus than is needed for the rest of the federal government combined may break a record or two, but is certainly not a milestone to be celebrated.

Filed under: Pork | Leave a Comment »

There Was a Mouse in the House After All….

Posted on July 9, 2009 by Leslie Paige

They swore up and down that the stimulus bill would be free of the cloying stench of political inlfuence, that members of Congress would have no hand in directing the $787 billion in funds….well, we never believed for a nanosecond that this Congress, overcrowded as it is with Me-Too hacks and earmark grubbers, would have the discipline to let that kind of money go out the door without manipulation and behind-the-scenes earmarking.  

And our suspicions were warranted.   

Slowly but surely, it is leaking out that so-called “Recovery” funds are indeed going to fund the pet projects of various lawmakers. 

The latest evidence of this is today’s story in the Washington Times that $16.1 million of that money has been designated to save the San Francisco Bay area habitat of the salt marsh harvest mouse, a favorite of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.).

“Lo and behold, the government has announced that the mouse is getting its money after all,” House Minority Leader John A. Boehner said while standing beside a poster of the furry varmint. “Speaker Pelosi must be so proud.” 

The Ohio Republican continued, “So let’s get this straight: The stimulus isn’t creating jobs for American workers, but it is making sure American harvest mice have nice comfortable homes in the midst of the recession.” Mrs. Pelosi’s office was quick to dismiss the criticism. 

Pelosi spokesman Drew Hammill called the attack on the mouse “a tired and tried tale of Republican desperation,” noting that the mouse was never mentioned in the legislation and the project competed with other restoration jobs for funding. Mr. Hammill said the bay project benefited both the economy and the ecosystem. 

“Wetlands restoration projects, such as this one, not only create jobs, but improve the environment,” he said. “Wetlands filter contaminants from the waters of the bay, protect our shores against sea level rise, and provide habitat for a myriad of wildlife, including several endangered species. 

He stressed that the salt marshes are not in the speaker’s urban district and the harvest mouse never inhabited the city.

Love that last caveat….this gives a new meaning to the term “pet” project.

Filed under: Pork | Leave a Comment »

CBO Budget Projections Mask Cost of Obama’s Spending

Posted on July 8, 2009 by Roger Morse

Nicola Moore with the Heritage Foundation wrote a good item last week pointing out that Obama’s happy talk about how his massive government expansion will lead to our being able to spend our way out of the recession is misleading at best.

In her blog post, Obama’s Budget Is More Expensive Than Initially Thought, she highlights the fact that the Congressional Budget Office’s (CBO) estimates place the costs of President Obama’s budget in the best light possible.  Under those very dim lights, the CBO estimated that his spending orgy would only double the estimated deficits over the next 10 years.  So instead of doing nothing beyond the stimulus package and letting the deficits rise by $4.4 trillion over the next 10 years, the CBO said his proposed fiscal 2010 spending spree (yet to be enacted) would balloon the deficit to over $9.1 trillion.

However, Congressman Paul Ryan, the ranking Republican on the House Budget Committee asked the CBO to run the numbers again, but this time using interest rates that more closely resemble historical reality.  Ms. Moore’s post states,

Looking at three different interest rate scenarios, more accurate estimates of President Obama’s deficits would cost an additional $1.2 to $5.3 trillion, bringing the grand deficit-total to as much as $14 trillion.

Keep in mind that this still does complete the picture.  CBO is still using its economic assumptions from March 2009, which assumes that by the end of 2009 unemployment will top out at 9.4 percent.  In actuality, we’ve blown through that ceiling much earlier than expected and are now headed for double digits.

CBO still assumes:

On a fourth-quarter-to-fourth-quarter basis, the core con­sumer price index is forecast to increase just 1.4 percent in 2009, 1.0 percent in 2010, and 0.8 percent in 2011. 

It is difficult to imagine that when you print over $4 trillion of money in one year that it will have no effect on inflation.

CBO still assumes that when economic growth returns it will be robust, which would mean higher profits and incomes to tax for government revenue.

CBO also assumes that the government will be receiving over $600 billion in revenues from the auctioning off of carbon emissions permits under the Cap and Tax Climate Change legislation.  However, under the recently-passed House bill, that money won’t actually materialize because more than 85 percent of those permits are slated to be given away.

In August, CBO will be forced to swallow some more harsh reality when it publishes its mid-year review.  I suspect that CBO will still attempt to paint as rosy a picture of the economy as is feasible in order to placate the Democratic majorities in the House and Senate.  However, nobody should be surprised that the nation’s deficits will end up rising even higher as they react to a weaker economy with lower tax revenues and higher mandatory spending. 

 

Filed under: Bailouts, Budget, Deficit, Entitlements, Pork, Stimulus, Taxes, Waste | Leave a Comment »

More Checks to the Dead

Posted on July 7, 2009 by Roger Morse

Last week I wrote an article for the June issue of Wastewatcher entitled Stimulating the Dead.  Sending stimulus checks to dead people does not help the economy.

Little did I know that this is not a new practice of the Social Security Administration (SSA).  They have been doing this for years.  What’s worse is that they have known about it for years, but just can’t seem to fix the problem.

The Inspector General (IG) of the Social Security Administration just issued a report to the Commissioner of a study that began in January of 2008.  That’s right, 18 months ago SSA knew they were sending checks to people that their own files said were deceased.

In just one sample from the report, it states:

A beneficiary died in April 1990. In May 1990, SSA recorded the beneficiary’s date of death on her Numident record. The Numident death entry referenced a New York City death certificate number. However, SSA did not record the death entry on the beneficiary’s payment record and continued issuing monthly benefit payments. As of October 2008, SSA’s records indicated this individual was in current payment status and received $1,185 in monthly retirement benefits. We requested and obtained the beneficiary’s death certificate from the City of New York Bureau of Vital Records. The death certificate confirmed the beneficiary died in April 1990. In October 2008, SSA terminated benefit payments to this deceased beneficiary. However, from May 1990 through October 2008, SSA issued 222 improper payments, totaling approximately $210,000, to this beneficiary. Our review of available information indicated that someone cashed these check payments. To date, SSA has not recovered any of the improper payments.

The report makes some recommendations to the SSA, including the suggestion that SSA should determine the living status of the thousands of beneficiaries who SSA records show as deceased.  The IG further recommends that for Social Security recipients that are confirmed to be dead, the SSA should terminate benefits and attempt to recover the improper payments.  (Would it be too snarky to insert a “Duh” here?  I guess I just did.)

But as the recently deceased pitchman Billy Mays might have said, “But wait, there’s more!”

A previous SSA IG report from October 2002 identified the same problem and made the same recommendations, adding that the SSA needed to establish a schedule to conduct periodic routine data integrity matches to ensure the problem didn’t happen again.

To quote Yankee great Yogi Berra, “This is Déjà vu all over again.”

Filed under: Budget, Corruption, Deficit, Entitlements, Pork, Retirement, Social Security, Stimulus, Taxes, Wastewatcher | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Lawmakers Travel in Style, Courtesy of American Taxpayers

Posted on July 6, 2009 by Erica Gordon

Many Americans are unaware that the military maintains a specially outfitted VIP fleet out of Andrews Air Force Base that can cost up to $10,000 per hour to operate.  Members of Congress often take advantage of these military aircraft for overseas travel, even in instances where commercial flights are readily available and more cost-effective. 

On July 3, 2009, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported that Senator Arlen Specter (D-Pa.) toured seven countries with his wife, an aide and two military officials on a private military jet.  The trip left taxpayers holding a whopping $70,000 bill.  

The WSJ noted:

A Journal analysis of 60,000 travel records shows that lawmakers disclosed spending about $13 million in 2008 on overseas congressional delegations, or codels. That is nearly a tenfold increase since 1995, the analysis shows.

But the total tab disclosed by Congress is only a fraction of the true cost to taxpayers, according to the Journal’s analysis.

Under a 1970s law that authorizes taxpayer-funded codels, lawmakers only must disclose how much they spent on lodging, meals, ground transportation and other incidental expenses. Members of Congress also must make public their spending on commercial airfare, though most lawmakers fly on military planes, which don’t have to be disclosed.

Though military aircraft is necessary when flying into war zones or U.S military installations overseas, the military fleet is too often used to shuttle members back and forth to locations served by commercial airliners. 

Congressman Walter Jones (R-N.C.) recently introduced H.R. 3036, a bill that would bring transparency to taxpayer-funded overseas trips taken by members of Congress.  It’s time lawmakers are held accountable for every trip taken on the taxpayer’s dime.

Filed under: Pork | Leave a Comment »

Budgetary Slight-of-Hand on Climate Tax Bill

Posted on June 29, 2009 by Roger Morse

Last week the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) put out a distorted partial scoring of H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy Security Act (commonly referred to as Waxman-Markey, but we like to call it the cap-and-tax bill).  The report stated that the cost of the bill is only $175 per family per year.  Now that figure is only for the year 2020 and comes with a lot of footnotes that need to be carefully read. 

Speaker Pelosi was so delighted that the report ignored the huge destructive effects this legislation would have on the economy and enormous exploding costs on future generations that she wants to ram the bill through the House before anyone figures that out.

Fortunately, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) ran an excellent editorial uncovering this budget gimmickry.  The WSJ wrote:

A closer look at the CBO analysis finds that it contains so many caveats as to render it useless.

For starters, the CBO estimate is a one-year snapshot of taxes that will extend to infinity. Under a cap-and-trade system, government sets a cap on the total amount of carbon that can be emitted nationally; companies then buy or sell permits to emit CO2. The cap gets cranked down over time to reduce total carbon emissions.

To get support for his bill, Mr. Waxman was forced to water down the cap in early years to please rural Democrats, and then severely ratchet it up in later years to please liberal Democrats. The CBO’s analysis looks solely at the year 2020, before most of the tough restrictions kick in. As the cap is tightened and companies are stripped of initial opportunities to “offset” their emissions, the price of permits will skyrocket beyond the CBO estimate of $28 per ton of carbon. The corporate costs of buying these expensive permits will be passed to consumers.

Essentially, the cap-and-tax bill sets a bunch of landmines that will damage the economy.  CBO then did a damage assessment before the bombs have gone off.  All they are reporting is the little bit a dirt that was removed to plant the landmine.

But that isn’t enough of a distortion.  The WSJ piece goes on to point out:

The biggest doozy in the CBO analysis was its extraordinary decision to look only at the day-to-day costs of operating a trading program, rather than the wider consequences energy restriction would have on the economy. The CBO acknowledges this in a footnote: “The resource cost does not indicate the potential decrease in gross domestic product (GDP) that could result from the cap.”

The hit to GDP is the real threat in this bill. The whole point of a cap-and-trade scheme is to hike the price of electricity and gas so that Americans will use less.  These higher prices will show up not just in electricity bills or at the gas station, but in every manufactured good, from food to cars.  Consumers will cut back on spending, which in turn will cut back on production, which results in fewer jobs created and higher unemployment.  Some companies will instead move their operations overseas, with the same result.

This is the equivalent of CBO saying that the landmine will only redistribute some dirt when it is thrown into the air after the explosion.  It misses the whole point of the landmine – which is to spread destruction.  Just as the landmine will do far more serious damage to the human that steps on it or a vehicle that runs over it, the cap-and-tax provisions will do widespread, nasty damage to its intended target – the economy.

Let’s examine what CBO means when it slips in a footnote stating, “The resource cost does not indicate the potential decrease in gross domestic product (GDP) that could result from the cap.”  

The National Black Chamber of Commerce did an excellent study on the collateral damage caused by this bill, which CBO’s footnote alludes to.  The study found that the cap-and-tax bill is a “jobs” bill.  The problem is that this bill kills jobs.  It may create some temporary green jobs, but it kills many, many more.  After the landmine explodes on the economy by 2030, this bill will lead to a net decrease of 2.5 million jobs.

This result is confirmed by the results in Europe.  This study illustrates the devastating effects these environmental mandates have had on the economy in Spain.  It points out that Spain’s efforts to create green jobs is enormously expensive and, on net, a job killer.  For every “green job” created, 2.2 other jobs were destroyed.  What’s worse is that each of these now “green jobs” required a subsidy of over $750,000 with new wind energy jobs costing Spanish taxpayers $1.4 million.

Now you know why CBO wanted to cover up this mess with an oblique footnote.

Filed under: Budget, Deficit, Energy, Pork, Regulation, Taxes | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

Spend Green to Be Green?

Posted on June 25, 2009 by Erica Gordon

Members of the House are expected to vote as early as tomorrow on the Waxman-Markey ‘cap-and-trade’ bill.  Though cleverly hidden, this bill will impose massive new taxes on all Americans.  Apparently, proponents seem to think that this is just what we need at a time when the economy is failing and the national debt has skyrocketed to $11.4 trillion: more taxing and more spending.  

The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis found that by 2035 the Waxman-Markey legislation would result in $9.4 trillion in GDP losses, raise an average family’s annual energy bill by $1,241, and destroy 1,145,000 jobs. 

That’s a hefty price to pay, especially for a bill that, according to numerous studies, will have virtually no environmental impact.  Climatologist Chip Knappenberger has found that in the year 2050 with an 83 percent emissions reduction (as called for in the legislation), the temperature reduction is only nine hundredths of one degree Fahrenheit, equivalent to just two years of avoided warming.  So much for being ‘green.’  The only thing this bill will do is spend green, and lots of it.

For those who can’t imagine the bloated bureaucratic mess this bill will create, I have included a flow chart below, courtesy of the House GOP Conference. 

Waxman-Markey Chart

Filed under: Budget, Deficit, Energy, Environment, Reform, Regulation, Taxes, Technology, Transportation, Waste | 2 Comments »

If A Tree Falls in Brazil, Why Should U.S. Taxpayers Care?

Posted on June 25, 2009 by Dave Williams

Because the Cap and Trade Bill (The Waxman-Markey Clean Energy Bill) has a little known provision that affects trees in Brazil and beyond.  According to the Washington Times: 

The provision, called “offsets,” has been attacked by both environmentalists and business groups as ineffective and poorly designed. Critics contend it would send scarce federal dollars overseas to plant trees when subsidies are needed at home, while the purported ecological benefits would be difficult to quantify.

The offsets “would be a transfer of wealth overseas,” said William Kovacs, vice president for environmental affairs at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

This bill is a mess and this offset provision shows just how clueless Congress is.  Passing the legislation will put a dagger in the heart of an economy already on life support.  The same Washington Times article also noted:

“The international offsets market is not a huge or cheap market,” said Joseph Romm, a climate expert at the center. “By 2020, the U.S. could be spending $4 billion on international offsets.”

Waxman-Markey is a lose-lose proposition for taxpayers and businesses.

Filed under: Pork | Leave a Comment »

Going, going,…almost Gone!

Posted on June 24, 2009 by Dave Williams

The Transportation Authorization Bill is set to expire at the end of the fiscal year (September 30) and the trust fund is running dangerously low.  According to Politico:

Amid all its other budget woes, the Obama administration now estimates it will need $20 billion in new savings or revenues to shore up the finances for the highway trust fund until after the 2010 elections.   Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood confirmed the $20 billion figure to POLITICO after meeting with senators at the Capitol on Monday evening. And with the trust fund running dangerously low by late August, its shaky finances can’t be ignored much longer by Congress.

This should come as no shock to anybody because events such as skyrocketing gas prices and the recession have contributed to people driving less and less thereby reducing the amount of money collected for the trust fund.

According to Politico, the solution that is being sought is to pass an 18 month extension:

LaHood is pressing for an 18-month reauthorization that will carry the fund through next year’s elections and set the stage for a major debate then on a long-term answer to the problem of declining revenues from federal gasoline taxes. The administration remains opposed to any increase now in the 18.3-cents-per-gallon levy but appears willing to dip into other revenue raisers in the president’s budget in order to close the budget gap.

If only Congress and the previous administration would have listened to CCAGW in 2005.  In a letter to Congress, CCAGW complained about the $24 billion in pork barrel projects:

CCAGW, Taxpayers for Common Sense Action Group, National Taxpayers Union, the Club for Growth, Americans for Prosperity, and FreedomWorks all agreed in their letter to President Bush that exceeding the budget ceiling by $2.5 billion was “reason alone” for a veto.  The groups cited several other reasons for opposing the legislation: 

  • H.R. 3 includes an $8.5 billion rescission of past budget authority that takes effect on September 30, 2009, the last day the bill remains in force, which is a reduction in spending that is not likely to occur.  Added to the $2.5 billion Congress approved above the President’s “ceiling” of $284 billion, this would break the President’s spending limit by $11 billion.
  • There are nearly 6,500 pork-barrel projects stuffed into the bill by members of Congress that total more than $24 billion, or nearly 9 percent of the total spending.
  • The President’s expressed goal of halving the deficit by 2009 would be subverted if he signed the bill, especially in light of the rescission shenanigans.

Oh, if Congress and the President only would have listened to us.  They didn’t and now they are in a bit of a pickle.   Congress and the President  need to show some courage and drop health care and cap and trade and address transportation ASAP.

Filed under: Earmarks, Transportation | Leave a Comment »

Joint Strike Fighter Doesn’t Need an Alternate Engine

Posted on June 23, 2009 by Leslie Paige

A great op ed in today’s Ft. Worth Star Telegram.  The author concisely deconstructs each of the other sides very weak arguments in favor of an alternate engine. 

The Defense Department should have one mission; building and maintaining the best-trained, best-equipped American war-fighting infrastructure at a price taxpayers can afford.  Maintaining the industrial base and being a make-work program should not be its highest priority.  

We don’t find ourselves saying this often, so let me say it loud and clear:  WE AGREE WITH PRESIDENT OBAMA…it is time to ground the alternate engine program.

Filed under: Pork | 1 Comment »

Flying Turtles…Part Two!

Posted on June 23, 2009 by Leslie Paige

My earlier post on how $3.4 million in “stimulus” money is being used by the Florida State Department of Transportation to build an eco-passage for turtles elicited a humorous response from a “shell-shocked” Florida resident, Russell Price, a self-employed businessman in real estate development and concerned taxpayer, who wrote: 

 

The proposed new turtle tunnel will be located under US 27 N  in Leon County Florida outside of Tallahassee.  Presently, there is already a large 10′ wide by 8′ high culvert under the road that the turtles apparently do not like and therefore do not use. 

A simple temporary filter fence, installed at an estimated cost of under $5000  by volunteers directed by a biologist who was conducting a turtle study, has functioned well for the past nine years.  Successful lobbying by turtle enthusiasts, coupled with the availabilty of “free” Barrack Bucks, has accomplished what local elected officials have previously been unwilling to do; fund the $3,400,000 new and improved permanent turtlebahn, guranteed to carry no turtles to nowhere faster. 

Government spokespeople, sensing public outrage and increased scrunity, have become highly creative in their defense of the expenditure.  They now cite public safety as one of the prime reasons behind the construction, even though no one can cite a single incident of a flying or waddling turtle causing an auto accident.  In lieu of actual accident data of turtle-caused auto accidents, shocking visual imagery of flying snapping turtles crashing into drivers’ windshields at 60 miles per hour was floated in off-the-cuff comments by the spokesman. 

If stimulus money is being spent on projects like this one in Florida’s capital city, where the project actually received public scutiny and still is moving forward, one can only imagine the projects that are being funded that are located in areas where public scrutiny is missing.

Thanks for the update and the laugh…..still no signage, though?

Filed under: Pork | 1 Comment »

National Broadband Plan Should be Guided by Private Sector not Government Officials

Posted on June 19, 2009 by Dave Williams

For a number of years, CAGW has been dedicated to eliminating waste and inefficiency in government. Particularly, CAGW emphasizes the importance of the government taking as small a role in theprivate sector as possible.  This is especially true with technology.  On June 17, 2009, Liya Palagashvili, Koch Fellow and Summer intern at CAGW, had the opportunity to attend a broadband symposium hosted by the Internet Innovation Alliance (IIA) on “Developing a National Broadband Strategy: Deployment, Adoption, and the Stimulus.” IIA hosted a number of notable speakers who addressed a variety of significant issues facing broadband.

Here are Liya’s findings:

An interesting fact provided by John Horrigan, Associate Director of Pew Internet and American Life Project, was that home broadband adoptions had increased by 8% since last year (now standing at 63% of adult Americans who use broadband at home), despite the current financial hardship. Low-income Americans (earning less than 20k/year), high school graduates, senior citizens, and rural Americans experienced the greatest growth in broadband adoption since May 2008. Another point to note is that in areas with multiple broadband providers (a.k.a. areas of increased competition), the average monthly price of broadband is lower than in areas that contain only one, or two suppliers of broadband. John Horriganshowed that the average monthly price of broadband in areas with one supplier is $44.70 and in areas of more than four suppliers is $32.00—economic theory working in practice!

Furthermore, Mike Gallagher from the Entertainment Software Association explained the importance of broadband and video games. He also provided some fun statistics on video gamers:

  • Average gamer is 35 years old
  • Women represent 40% of all gamers
  • 25% of all gamers are over the age of 50
  • 70% of businesses use video games to train new employees
  • Over 400 Academic institutions now offer video game programs and courses
  • Dance, Dance, Revolution is used in over 1,300 schools in 31 states as part of their Physical Education Program

Also present at the symposium was Ron Packard, the chief executive officer and founder of K12, who highlighted the benefits of national broadband for online education. Ron Packard explained the dilemma for students of low-income families who often cannot afford to move or attend a private school if their public school provides poor education. A possible solution for that student is to participate in online education, which has the same level of quality as regular schools (arguably) and at a decent price tag.

Other speakers addressed ways to make broadband affordable to all Americans and ways to bring broadband to un-served communities. Howie Hodges from the One Economy Corporation proposed having tax incentives for providers and buyers of broadband as a way of expanding it.  

A rather ironic speech was given by the governor of West Virginia, Joe Manchin III, on the importance of not relying on federal funding. He alluded that the federal government should not be a provider for many state projects. Note: this is coming from the governor of the 5th ranked state of Pork Per Capita, whose pork amounted to $257,635,000 in fiscal year 2009.

While listening to the speakers at this symposium, it dawned upon me that the government getting involved in this national broadband strategy will crowd out and hinder many private sector innovations. The private sector has done a phenomenal job in recent innovations and we have seen an unreal jump in both the speed and quality of broadband in such a short period. Although universal broad has become a policy goal, I am hesitant about the capabilities and success of the public sector in this already, privately-enriched field. For example, just recently Free Press held a conference expressing the need for government to mandate an all-you-can-eat pricing mechanism to protect high-volume users. Companies are concerned that all-you-can-eat pricing mechanism completely abandons and punishes the high majority of non high-volume users. This is analogous to saying that a casual user who checks e-mails and sends a few photos here and there should pay the same as the teenager who is downloading thousands of songs and High Definition movies.

 

Policies such as the all-you-can-eat pricing mechanism are a perfect example of why government involvement in this industry would actually cause more harm than good. A public choice analysis of government involvement further illustrates this point and leaves me no other choice but to ask the government to stay out of the private sector.

Thank you Liya, well put.  Now that you understand this, let’s hope more government bureaucrats and politicians get the message.

Filed under: Internet, Technology, Telecommunications | 1 Comment »

Good News: Stimulus Money Grounds Flying Turtles!

Posted on June 16, 2009 by Leslie Paige

This is the kind of quote we jaded waste warriors wait for.  Today’s AP has a story about the fact that Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) released a preliminary report on how states are using stimulus money. 

In his 45-page report, which you can find here, Dr. Coburn mentions $3.4 million that was used by the Florida Department of Transportation to construct an “eco-passage” on I 27, which is really a little tunnel under a road for wildlife trying to cross, especially turtles which, as you can imagine, just don’t have the steam to get across the roads without being crushed. 

It gets so much better, though, because in this ”say-anything” culture, it isn’t enough to defend this ridiculous use of federal tax dollars by just saying it saves turtles (and by the way, wasn’t the goal of the $787 billion “stim” bill to save jobs?). 

No, instead, Josh Boan, the Florida Transportation Department’s natural resources manager, perhaps recognizing for the first time just how lame the explanation was when it was described out loud, to a reporter, felt compelled to add that ”In addition to protecting wildlife, he said the project is needed for safety: turtles hit by vehicles can become flying projectiles.“

We live for this stuff, really.  But what about signage for the turtles?  Shouldn’t we at least use some of that money to create itty-bitty, but clearly marked signs so the turtles know where the eco-passages are?

Filed under: Pork | 3 Comments »

Competition, Government Style

Posted on June 15, 2009 by Leslie Paige

Prepare to see a lot more of these sorts of stories:  today’s WSJ describes the birth of a new breed of entrepreneur – someone who excels not at manufacturing a better widget or outselling his/her competitor, coming up with a revolutionary breakthrough in technology or medicine.  No, in the brave new big-government era that is sweeping the nation, the next-gen entrepreneur is going to be that go-getter who is…savvier at cadging at the federal trough for stimulus money!

Since the onset of the financial crisis nine months ago, the government has become the nation’s biggest mortgage lender, guaranteed nearly $3 trillion in money-market mutual-fund assets, commandeered and restructured two car companies, taken equity stakes in nearly 600 banks, lent more than $300 billion to blue-chip companies, supported the life-insurance industry and become a credit source for buyers of cars, tractors and even weapons for hunting.

The effects are rippling into nooks of the economy far beyond Wall Street and Detroit’s troubled car industry. The massive intervention has shifted the way companies do business in a host of ways — not all of them intended by the government. Increasingly, companies big and small are competing on the basis of their ability to tap government money. A divide is opening between gets and get-nots.

Filed under: Pork | Leave a Comment »

Monuments to Me: Crumbling Infrastructure?

Posted on June 15, 2009 by Leslie Paige

Today’s Roll Call has an illuminating article about the behind-the-scenes struggle in the House over Appropriations Chairman David Obey’s (D-Wisc.) intent to block earmarks for “Monuments to Me!”:  that is buildings, roads or facilities that will bear the name of the member of Congress who earmarked the taxpayer money for it. 

In this case, the culprit is Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), who is apparently miffed that Obey intends to deny her request for an earmark for the Maxine Waters Employment Preparation Center.  If you have ever been privy to one of Maxine Waters’ outbursts, be glad you were not in the meeting…and be afraid for Obey. 

Appparently Obey is attempting to quietly preempt a bid by some Republican lawmakers to pass a statute that would ban the practice altogether:

An amendment by Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas) banning “monuments to me” passed on the Federal Aviation Administration authorization bill last month with just two Members voting in opposition, and a similar McCaul amendment passed on the military construction and Veterans Affairs appropriations bill last year.

McCaul had promised to offer his amendment on every appropriations bill this year, with the first bills scheduled to hit the floor this week.

Republicans have made the issue the cornerstone of their call for additional earmark reforms, targeting funding for the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service at the City College of New York and the John Murtha Johnstown-Cambria County Airport in Johnstown, Pa., among others. The Murtha airport in particular has received significant attention in recent months because of the millions Murtha has steered to it and the dearth of passengers it handles….

Further on in the Roll Call article:

“If that in fact is happening, it means there’s a recognition among an increasing number of Members that these ‘monuments to me’ are a really bad thing that the public believes is emblematic of waste and self-dealing,” Rep. John Campbell (R-Calif.) said.

“If this is the Obey policy, it is a big victory for us,” said Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), the only appropriator who does not request earmarks and one of the chief critics of earmarks named for Members.

Kirk said the growing opposition to “monuments to me” reflects mounting concerns by the public about the record deficit and the fact that some of the most powerful Members who have projects named after them also are facing ethics clouds.

Roll Call reporters Steven T. Dennis and Tory Newmyer made good use of a quirky little feature we have on our CAGW website called Byrd Droppings, which lists many of the roads, facilities, and buildings names after the Grand Daddy of Monuments to Me, Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.):

But longtime appropriator and former Senate Appropriations Chairman Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) may be the most memorialized of all. The anti-earmarking group Citizens Against Government Waste has devoted a section of its Web site to chronicling more than 30 home-state projects named for him, including the Robert C. Byrd Locks and Dam, the Robert C. Byrd Academic and Technology Center, the Robert C. Byrd Clinic at the West Virginia School of Osteopathic Medicine, the Robert C. Byrd High School, the Robert C. Byrd Visitor Center at Harpers Ferry National Historic Park, and several roads and highways.

Check out this old YouTube chestnut in which Byrd whimsically describes his facility at getting taxpayer money to name facilities after himself. 

And, lest we all forget who else is fond of absconding with your tax dollars to erect Monuments to Me, check out this video of Rep. Don Young, in which he states that he and (former) Sen. Ted Stevens are the second largest economy in the state of Alaska (it runs 9:40, but the good stuff starts at about 2:30 into the clip).

Filed under: Appropriations, Budget, Corruption, Earmarks, In The News, Media Hits, Pig Book, Pork, Reform, Video, Waste | Leave a Comment »

Microsoft on Obama’s Corporate Tax Policies? See ya….

Posted on June 9, 2009 by Leslie Paige

Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer was quoted in a June 8 op ed by Commentator Kevin Hassett on Bloomberg News .  Ballmer was apparently in D.C. last week speaking somewhat disparagingly about President Obama’s corporate tax proposals.  Specifically, Ballmer was reacting to Obama’s latest salvo against American businesses who have subsidiaries abroad and his intention to tax them at higher rates:  

“It makes U.S. jobs more expensive,” Ballmer said, “We’re better off taking lots of people and moving them out of the U.S.”

Kevin Hassett asks the multi-trillion-dollar question:  If entrepreneurial all-American competitive giants like Microsoft are making the calculation that they would be better off taking their businesses elsewhere, then who could afford to stay?

Filed under: Pork | Leave a Comment »

Keep the Internet Tax-Free

Posted on June 8, 2009 by Leslie Paige

The Louisiana State House voted 81-9 on Thursday, June 4 to levy a 15-cent monthly charge on Internet access in the state. 

But is this charge a tax, or a usage fee?  The sponsor, Rep. Mack “Bodi” White (R-Denham Springs) is claiming the latter.  The money will help fund the division of the Louisiana Attorney General’s office that Investigates internet crimes, chiefly sex crimes against children.

One Louisiana lawmaker voiced his displeasure with the bill in a June 5, 2009 Associated Press article:  “Today it’s Internet access.  Tomorrow, what’s it going to be?  A subscription to DirecTV?” said Rep. Austin Badon, D-New Orleans.  “I don’t think we should start instituting a revenue stream for every criminal element that’s out there.”

Pertinent national questions are being raised as a result of this legislation, chiefly, whether it is in violation of the Internet tax moratorium.  Renewed in November, 2007 by former President George W. Bush, the Internet tax moratorium prohibits state and local government from taxing both Internet access and commerce.  The seven-year ban is set to expire on November 1, 2014.

Taxpayers should be worried about a slippery slope on this issue.  While raising money to combat Internet sex crimes seems reasonable, once a tax is successfully levied for this purpose, other “worthy” causes will line up for their share of additional “fees” on Internet access and/or commerce.

There is hardly any debate in Louisiana as to the role that an Internet free from taxes played in making online commerce such a substantial part of the economy.  The Louisiana State Senate should reject the House bill not only because it could violate the Internet tax moratorium, but also because a tax increase or “usage fee” is not necessary to increase funding to prosecute Internet sex crimes.  On May 19, 2009, Citizens Against Government Waste and the Pelican Institute for Public Policy issued the 2009 Louisiana Pork Report.  The report included hundreds of millions of dollars in wasteful spending, including $29.8 million in overtime in 2008 to state workers in just two agencies, the Department of Health and Hospitals and the Louisiana State Police Department; $4 million to a private golf club, the Tournament Players Club in Avondale, which hosts the annual Zurich Classic; $1,000,000 for the New Orleans Center for Creative Arts – Riverfront High School, though no purpose is specified; $400,000 for an expo center for Ascension Parish; $230,000 for six museums, including the Louisiana Political Hall of Fame and Museum; and $100,000 each to the Girl Scouts, Boy Scouts, and the Boys and Girls Club.

Filed under: Pork | Leave a Comment »

No net neutrality in National Broadband Plan

Posted on June 8, 2009 by Tom Schatz

On April 8, 2009, the Federal Communications Commission issued a notice of inquiry (NOI) to develop a plan to ensure that Americans have access to broadband capability.  The NOI on this National Broadband Plan was issued as a result of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, or the stimulus plan, which included $7.2 billion to expand broadband access throughout the nation.  On June 5, 2009 Citizens Against Government Waste responded to the notice of inquiry and explained how net neutrality would adversely affect broadband access and the future of the Internet.

The letter to the FCC explained that net neutrality can generally be defined as a system that would allow Internet users to access any information on the web regardless of the content without restrictions or limitations imposed by Internet Service Providers (ISP).  While that sounds reasonable, net neutrality really means a government-regulated Internet.

 In order to regulate the Internet to assure that everyone is receiving equal access to information on the web, the federal government will inevitably need to create an office of monitors to make sure that ISPs are not denying anyone or controlling access to certain web pages.  The cost to taxpayers to create this army of Internet moderators could sky rocket into the tens of millions of dollars.  When the federal government is spending trillions of dollars to “save” the economy, the last thing the government needs to do is spend more of the taxpayers’ money to regulate the Internet.

Another adverse consequence of network neutrality would be the chilling effect on innovation and the increase in illegal activity.  For example, a company would have few incentives to spend money to upgrade and expand its system if there were limitations on the content they could provide, resulting in minuscule rewards or returns on their investment.  Without the ability to make judgments and manage their networks, ISPs would have no power to stop the transmission of illegal content.

If net neutrality were to be implemented, innovation and investment into the Internet would decrease and tens of millions of taxpayer dollars would be spent to monitor every decision made by an ISP.  The Internet today provides a competitive market that encourages research and investment into the web and that market should remain free of unnecessary government interference.  That means the National Broadband Plan must be free of net neutrality restrictions.

Filed under: Pork | Leave a Comment »

Looks Like Somebody is Getting Stimulated….

Posted on June 8, 2009 by Leslie Paige

The Cincinnati Enquirer reports today that so-called stimulus funds are being used to stem teen pregnancy! 

The city of Covington, for example, has broken down its line items as small as $1,650 each – to replace 117 curb ramps in the neighborhood around Decoursey and Winston avenues, to make them handicapped-accessible. Cincinnati is giving out grants as small as $8,556 for a program to prevent teen pregnancy and violence.

The list of local applications for the Community Development Block Grants also includes $61,200 for sidewalks in Forest Park, $93,000 for air conditioners in Sharonville and $56,008 for playground renovations in Hamilton.

This is what we were all afraid of back when the U.S. Conference of Mayors published their ridiculous “Shovel Ready” lists.

The money to prevent teen pregnancy is obviously patently ridiculous in a stimulus bill, but after reading the Enquirer story, somebody needs to explain how installing air conditioners will stimulate the economy long-term. 

And where will these jobs go once the air conditioners are installed?  What happens to those workers once the curb ramps have been emplaced?  This is an absolutely ass-backwards strategy if your goal is to retrain, nurture and retain future skilled employment over the long-term.  On the other hand, if your goal was just to shovel pork into the district and create lame make-work projects, then you are definitely on point.

Filed under: Pork | Leave a Comment »

CAGW David Williams Takes on The Big Spenders on FBN

Posted on June 5, 2009 by Leslie Paige

CAGW VP for Policy David Williams was on Fox Business Network this week taking a big-spending member of Congress to task for claiming we can’t get out of our current economic crisis by cutting wasteful spending.  We beg to differ.

Filed under: Pork | Leave a Comment »

Obama, the Dems, Healthcare and “The Need for Speed”

Posted on June 5, 2009 by Leslie Paige

If you are “of a certain age,” as I am, you will probably recall that famous, cringeworthy line from the movie Top Gun when Tom Cruise’s character Maverick and his buddy Goose are swaggering along the tarmac while they announce that they feel “the need; the need for speed.”  (And then they do this really lame high-five, embarrassing, really, but never mind). 

President Obama and the Democratic leadership in Congress have a vested interest in pushing through healthcare legislation at breakneck speed.  It is essential that the taxpayers never actually understand what this legislation does; which is to engineer a government takeover of our healthcare sector, which comprises 18 percent of our economy.  Today’s WSJ opines on the administration’s strategy of jamming this legislation through as quickly as possible.

Yesterday at the American Enterprise Institute, we got a full overview of the thorny issues and problems involved, the unbelievable costs associated with the move, and the political landscape, which appears ripe for rocket-like passage. 

The estimable Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) believes that it is inevitable that the House will pass a plan that contains a government-run option, the gateway to the single payer system that the left so desperately wants.  Read the materials.  

Suffice it to say that the most important thing on the taxpayers’ to-do list is to defeat any government-run health insurance option.  The Obama administration and its allies in Congress will be throwing up a lot of smoke and mirrors, so it will be critically important to keep an eye on the target, which is to eliminate the government-run option in order to then move toward a competitive, consumer and patient-driven model for all Americans.     

The administration and the House leadership intend to introduce a bill right after July 4th and have the whole thing wrapped up by the end of August, with perhaps only 35 hours of debate between the House and the Senate.

They key is to slow the juggernaut down, to demand concrete details (they either don’t have them or they don’t want to reveal them for fear of a justifiable backlash). 

So far, the administration and its allies have painted a rosy scenario (of course, who wouldn’t?), but taxpayers and consumers must continue to demand answers to questions such as:

How much will a government-run insurance plan cost and what data are you basing those assumptions on? (Think Medicare and Medicaid on steroids). 

Who will run the new bureaucracy?  (Think Medicare and Medicaid on steroids)

How will a government-run plan actually control the increasing costs of healthcare?  (It won’t.  Medicare is a government-run single payer plan and it is scheduled to become insolvent beginning in 2019….how much sense does it make to essentially expand Medicare or create another government-run single payer plan?).

Will the Plan contain individual mandates?

The only good thing to come out of the movie Top Gun was the song Danger Zone, by Kenny Loggins….and that is exactly where the Obama healthcare reform plan is heading.

Filed under: Budget, Deficit, Entitlements, Healthcare, In The News, Medicare/aid, Reform, Regulation, Taxes, Video, Waste | Leave a Comment »

Chopper Down…

Posted on June 2, 2009 by Leslie Paige

The Navy announced that the VH-71 Presidential helicopter program has been terminated.  CAGW had urged the Pentagon to deliver the choppers and retool the second, more expensive increment of the program to bring it in at a (more) reasonable budget. 

Under normal circumstances the cancellation of a major Pentagon procurement contract might be cause for celebration among waste warriors.  Unfortunately, in this case, the taxpayers may lose bigtime and the President himself is going to continue to tool around in a Vietnam-era chopper in a post-9/11 world.

No word yet on when and how they intend to replace the current aging fleet of presidential choppers…and what will become of the five that are almost ready for delivery.  A Pentagon procurement never gets cheaper the longer you put it off, there rae substantial maintenance costs associated with the current aging fleet, not to mention the penalties and fees taxpayers will incur from the contract’s cancellation.  

It is beginning to feel like Bizarro World around here….maybe we should have advised them to cancel the program and they would have kept it going!

Filed under: Budget, Defense, Homeland Security, In The News, Media Hits, Technology, Transportation, Waste | Leave a Comment »

Keeping His Eye on the Ball…and Chain

Posted on June 2, 2009 by Leslie Paige

Today’s Hill reports that Rep. Pete Visclosky (D-Ind.) has decided to step away for the day to day chairmanship of his Energy and Water Appropriations subcommittee for the fiscal year 2010 appropriations season in order to focus on the ethics investigation that is tightening around him. 

According to the Hill, Visclosky made the announcement after it became public last week that the feds had descended on his congressional and campaign offices with subpoenas.  He is currently under scrutiny for his involvement in the growing PMA scandal; an investigation into the possibility that he and perhaps other members of Congress may have exchanged earmarks for illegal campaign contributions (say it ain’t so!).  

Just for giggles, let’s jump into the wayback machine and revisit one of our favorite Visclosky moments, back in July of 2007, when the intrepid Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) was trying to get to the bottom of the origins of one of John Murtha’s earmarks. 

The earmark certification letter filed by Rep. Murtha had claimed that the money was going to something called the Center for Instrumented Critical Infrastructure, which, oddly, didn’t actually exist.  Instead, Rep. Flake’s staff had discovered that the earmark was going to another favored Murtha earmark recipient, Concurrent Technologies Corporation (nobody knows what they do either, by the way, so don’t ask).   

Anyway, Rep. Visclosky was standing in for his pal John Murtha on the House floor as Jeff Flake was trying to go all Da Vinci code and get to the bottom of the murky mystery and Rep. Visclosky’s response when asked who was actually getting the money is priceless:

Visclosky:  “At this time, I do not know.  But if it does not exist then the monies could not go to it.”  (This little gem comes about 2:30 into the clip, but make sure to watch it yourself and don’t miss Jeff Flake’s facial expressions after that Kafkaesque statement). 

This is the kind of arrogant doubletalk that Rep. Visclosky and his ilk have mastered as they blow smoke on the floor of the House and on TV – not sure how well that sort of  bunk is going to go over with the FBI.

Filed under: Pork | Leave a Comment »

Alternative Engine – Still a Bad Idea

Posted on June 2, 2009 by Dave Williams

On April 14, 2009 Citizens Against Government Waste released its 2009 Congressional Pig Book.  One of the highlighted projects was $465 million for an alternate engine for the Joint Strike Fighter.  The funding was part of $6.2 billion in Defense pork that was anonymously added to the appropriations bill:

$465,000,000for the continued development of the F-136 engine as an alternative engine in the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program.  The JSF is $55 billion over its budgeted cost, according to the Government Accountability Office (GAO).  Congress has added funding for an additional engine in order to supposedly increase competition and flexibility for pilots.  However, according to a February 24, 2009 United Press International article, the money was allotted, “despite the fact that the winning engine had already prevailed in half a dozen public and private competitions and despite the fact that no other part of the plane would be competed once production commenced.”  CBS News reported on July 30, 2007 that the Air Force and two independent panels concluded that the second engine is “not necessary and not affordable” and that the professed savings from competition “will never be achieved.”  No wonder that all 435 representatives and 100 senators refused to be identified with this massive waste of tax dollars.

It even won an Oinker, “The When Alternate Pigs Fly Award.”  Less than a month later, President Obama highlighted the engine as a way to cut spending and save money.  According to the The Hill newspaper:

President Obama singled out the elimination of the engine’s funding in remarks Thursday on the budget, which proposes $17 billion in cuts. About half of those cuts come to defense programs, most of which were previously announced.

Obama said the alternative engine built by General Electric and Britain’s Rolls-Royce  is one of several “unnecessary defense programs that do nothing to keep us safe.” He also noted the Pentagon has resisted funding for the engine for years.
“The Defense Department is already pleased with the engine it has,” Obama said. “They do not want — and do not plan to use — the alternate version. That’s why the Pentagon stopped requesting this funding two years ago. Yet it’s still being funded.”

Now comes more evidence that the engine is not needed.  In a May 29, 2009 article in Aviation Week, the Pentagon stated that:

Funding development of a second engine from within the existing F-35 budget would cut production by dozens of aircraft and push up program costs, the Joint Strike Fighter’s program chief warns in an interview with Aviation Week.

Marine Corps Brig. Gen. David Heinz further warned that:

Funding the F136 within the existing budget would require cutting six aircraft from the 30 planned in Fiscal 2010, Heinz says. This would make aircraft in subsequent years more expensive, pushing back international purchases and compounding the problem because the partners could not afford early aircraft, he says.

Earmarking money for the second engine will put both the country and taxpayers at risk.

Filed under: Appropriations, Budget, Defense, Earmarks, Pork | Leave a Comment »

UK Official Resigns Over Expense Scandal – I am Jealous!

Posted on May 19, 2009 by Dave Williams

It is never a good sign when Americans have to look overseas for a taxpayer victory.   On May 8 the British based taxpayer group, the Taxpayers Alliance helped unearth a scandal worthy of front page tabloid coverage, UK MPs who flagrantly abused expenses.  According to the Associated Press:

Britain’s Daily Telegraph published details of claims related to 13 ministers and offered examples of hundreds of other bills submitted by lawmakers to Parliamentary authorities.The documents revealed how some lawmakers used lax regulations to accumulate hefty bills to pay for housing taxes and costs of furnishing homes, while others claimed for trivial amounts — including a packet of ginger snaps worth about $1, two cans of cat food and an ice cube tray.  One lawmaker claimed the cost of servicing the swimming pool of his country home, while another paid for a hunter to catch moles who’d invaded his garden, according to the newspaper.

In response to this, the Taxpayers Alliance and the London-based Daily Mail launched a campaign to bring the guilty MPs to justice.  According to the Daily Mail article:

The Daily Mail today backs a move to bring to justice MPs whose flagrant abuse of expenses has shamed Britain.  We are joining forces with the Tax-Payers’ Alliance to launch a campaign for the private prosecutions of backbenchers and ministers who have pocketed thousands of pounds through dishonest claims.  The campaign follows seven days of extraordinary disclosures which have dragged the reputation of British politics to a shameful low point.

And today, it has just been reported by Fox News and the Associated Press that the speaker of the British House of Commons resigned:

The powerful speaker of the British House of Commons resigned Tuesday because of a backlash over excessive expense claims by lawmakers, marking the first time in three centuries a speaker has been forced out.  Though Michael Martin has not been caught up in recent revelations about lawmakers expenses — reimbursements for chandeliers, moat cleaning and mortgage payments have outraged taxpayers — he was blamed for creating a climate in which such excesses were allowed.

This is a scandal that can happen anywhere in the world.  It is frightening to imagine what members of Congress are hiding here in the U.S.

The British Speaker did the honourable (”u” inserted out of respect for the British, not a typo) thing.  If only US politicians would follow suit.  There are many taxpayer offenses that they could answer for.

Congratulations Taxpayers Alliance and keep up the good work.

Filed under: International, Scandal | 2 Comments »

Orszag, Thou Protesteth Too Much!

Posted on May 7, 2009 by Leslie Paige

It speaks volumes, I think, that Obama’s Director of Management and Budget Peter Orszag has already had to come out with a statement denying that the President’s proposed budget cuts of $17 billion for 2010 are “not a side show.” 

Breitbart News is quoting him:

“I’m going to come back and say, under any set of assumptions, finding the 17 billion dollars a year, I don’t think, is a side show,” White House budget chief Peter Orszag said on MSNBC.”

Wow, that is so sweet and we admired and respected Peter Orszag when he as with the Congressional Budget Office, back when he was still believable.  But, if he is already denying it, you know they are already thinking it. 

In fact, CAGW supports cutting much of what is in the president’s list.  It’s just that, coming from the president that just saddled future generations with trillions on debt and doubled the federal budget to $3.5 trillion and is bailing out almost anyone who asks, it is a bit hard to take.  

And it ain’t just us.  The Washington Post wasn’t impressed and quoted a Brookings Institution scholar:

The plan is less ambitious than the hit list former president George W. Bush produced last year, targeting 151 programs for $34 billion in savings. And like most of the cuts Bush sought, congressional sources and independent budget analysts yesterday predicted that Obama’s, too, would be a tough sell.

“Even if you got all of those things, it would be saving pennies, not dollars. And you’re not going to begin to get all of them,” said Isabel Sawhill, a Brookings Institution economist who waged her own battles with Congress as a senior official in the Clinton White House budget office. “This is a good government exercise without much prospect of putting a significant dent in spending.”

The Associated Press yawned:

Those savings are far exceeded by a 2 1/2-inch thick volume detailing Obama’s generous increases for domestic programs. And instead of devoting the savings to defray record deficits, the White House is funneling them back into other programs.

And from McLatchy News Service:

Obama first submitted a $3.55 trillion fiscal 2010 budget outline in February, offering his general priorities and overall spending and tax plans. Congress last week adopted his plan with some spending cuts of its own, but with few major changes. Its $3.4 trillion budget would reduce this year’s anticipated $1.7 trillion deficit to $620 billion by fiscal 2012.

The president faces a bumpy road ahead at the Capitol before his plan can be implemented, because many of the programs he wants to cut or eliminate have staunch defenders. Even Start, for instance, was a Bush administration target, but strong support in the House of Representatives kept it funded.

A great friend in the Keystone State responds:

In the face of the massive budget, it’s amusing to hear Orszag tell us that $17 billion in cuts isn’t chump change.  It seems only a year or so ago that Congressional Dems were saying that $17.7 billion or so in earmarks was pretty much insignificant “when compared to overall spending.”  Our local rep told us incessantly that earmarks were “less than 1 percent of the total budget.” Nothing to see here, folks, move along…”

 Wait!  That was last year!

 So, what’s changed except the letter behind the name of the current occupant of the White House?

Filed under: Appropriations, Bailouts, Budget, Defense, Deficit, Earmarks, In The News, Pork, Reform, Stimulus, TARP, Waste | Leave a Comment »

EPA Chief Lisa Jackson: Auto Czar

Posted on May 6, 2009 by Leslie Paige

Recently, new EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson gave an interview to National Public Radio.  It runs about 6  minutes long and covers the Chrysler bankrupcy, the new administration’s plans for cap & trade legislation, and its views on climate change; the usual claptrap that we have already come to expect.  Try to listen to it all.   

The fun part begins at about 3:25 in, when Jackson says, among other things: 

“What this country needs is a single national road map that tells automakers who are trying to become solvent again what kind of car it is they need to be designing and building for the American people.”

Well, at least they are coming right out and saying it finally!  So much for Obama’s statement that he doesn’t want to be in the auto manufacturing biz.    

When NPR interviewer Michelle Norris half-heartedly challenges Jackson’s statement, Jackson protests, very weakly:

Norris:  Is that the role of government, though?  I mean, that doesn’t sound like free enterprise.

Jackson:  Well (sigh), it is free enterprise….in a way…um, uh, you know, first and foremost the free enterprise system has us where we are this very second (laughter) and so some would argue that the government has a much larger role than we might have when Henry Ford rolled the first car off the assembly line…”

Exactly what does Jackson mean in the last sentence?  Anyone?

By the way, that “some would argue” cliche seems to be one of Jackson’s most prized phrases…like a verbal tic, she said it repeatedly during the interview.  I was hoping that Norris would press her at least once with a follow up, asking “someone like who?”, but that may be a Bridge Too Far for NPR (baby steps, baby steps). 

Let’s just be grateful that a reporter at least advanced the case for the free enterprise system, even if it sounded more like a “hold-your-nose-and-pretend-to-seek-both-sides-of-the-argument” moment for NPR; so, hat’s off, sort of, to Norris.

You can also read the Manhattan Institute’s Steve Malanga’s excellent observations about that interview, etc., here.

Filed under: Pork | Leave a Comment »

A Line Finally Drawn? Or A Line Finely Drawn?

Posted on May 5, 2009 by Leslie Paige

News Flash:  President Obama is reported to have finally drawn some sort of line in the sand when it comes to taxpayer funded bailouts.  According to this story on Breitbart, the President has come to the conclusion that there will be no bailouts for the newspaper industry.  

There is nothing to prevent members of Congress from stepping into this fray, however.   In fact, one senator has already introduced legislation to do just that:

A US senator recently introduced legislation aimed at helping US newspapers by giving them tax breaks as non-profit organizations, an arrangement similar to that enjoyed by public broadcasting outlets, which survive on tax-deductible contributions from listeners.

What we need to hear from the President now is that he will veto any legislation that bails out the fourth estate.

Filed under: Pork | Leave a Comment »

Feds Biggest Sugar Daddy For States

Posted on May 5, 2009 by Leslie Paige

USA Today reports today that aid from the federal government now tops revenues from state sales, property, and income taxes.  According to the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Economic Analysis,  federal grants account for 15 percent of the states revenues, income taxes come in at -11 percent, property taxes contribute about 2 percent, and other taxes account for another 2 percent. 

As revenues from sales and property taxes have declined during this recession, federal aid from the Obama administration’s “stimulus” package as well as other federal aid coming in through the federal agencies is becoming more and more of a crutch.  

This should be driving a lot of questions among taxpayers about what this trend portends for the future of state budgets and taxpayers.  

The power of the federal government has been a growing trend over the last few years; we have seen increasing federalization of state law enforcement, for example, with the expansion of the COPS program and the JAG/Byrne grant programs. 

One comment from a state legislator captures much of the concern:

“This money isn’t manna from heaven. It comes with a price,” says Indiana state Sen. Jim Buck, a Republican.  He worries that the federal money will leave states under greater federal control and burden future generations with debt.

The recession has become the perfect excuse for some power-hungry politicians to expand the reach of the federal government and dictate terms.  And the growth in federal spending isn’t over yet….

Filed under: Bailouts, Budget, Deficit, In The News, State Issues, Stimulus, Taxes | Leave a Comment »

Sen. Specter – A Pig By Any Other Name (or political party) Would Still Smell

Posted on April 28, 2009 by Dave Williams

The political world is abuzz with the defection of Republican Senator Arlen Specter to the democratic party.  Besides giving Democrats a 60/40 majority in the Senate (assuming Al Franken wins the Minnesota Senate race) this isn’t a big deal from the perspective of the American taxpayer.

Sen. Specter has always been a big spender and an advocate of big government.  In Citizens Against Government Waste’s recently released Pig Book, Sen. Specter received

Here are some highlights of his work:

$21,600,000 for 12 projects in the Interior Appropriations Bill including:  $3,500,000 for the Glatfelter Tree Farm; $1,000,000 for the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area; $500,000 for a wastewater improvement project in Reading and $200,000 for a wastewater improvement project in Milford.

$37,479,000 for 186 projects in the Labor/HHS/Education Appropriations bill including:  $95,000 each for Mount Aloysius Community College for college preparatory exams; Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh for renovations and equipment; Washington and Jefferson College in Washington for science education outreach programs.  In an amendment proposed during the Senate debate on the Omnibus Appropriations Act, Sen. Coburn targeted the three earmarks outlined here, which were obtained by a lobbying firm under federal investigation for making campaign donations in exchange for political favors for the firm’s clients.  The vote on that amendment failed 43-52.  No surprise: Sen. Specter voted against the amendment.

In fact, in the Labor/HHS/Education Appropriations Bill

In the 2007 Council for Citizens Against Government Waste (CCAGW) rating, Sen. Specter scored a 29% (that means that he voted in the interest of the taxpayer only 29% of the time) and his lifetime rating is 49%.  In a strange twist of fate, he will go from being one of the lowest rated Republicans to the hightest rated Democrat.

Specter’s departure from the Republican party leaves an opening on the appropriations committee for a Republican.  The first order of business should be to appoint Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) as an appropriator.  This will ensure that there will be one advocate of the taxpayer on the appropriations committee.  And, if this happens I will be participating in that long anticipated snow ball fight in H-E- (double hockey sticks).

Filed under: Appropriations, Earmarks, Pig Book, Pork | Leave a Comment »

Next Page »