Bloggers 1, Smoke-Filled Room 0

MarkusQ writes "A few days ago a bi-partisan bill (PDF) to create a searchable on-line database of government contracts, grants, insurance, loans, financial assistance, earmarks and other such pork was put on 'secret hold' using a procedure that does not appear to be mentioned in the Constitution or in the Senate bylaws. This raised the ire of bloggers left and right and started an all out bi-partisan effort to expose the culprit by process of elimination. As it turns out it was our old friend the right honorable Senator from Alaska, Mr. 'Series of Tubes', Ted 'Bridge to Nowhere' Stevens."

Comments

Ackthpt's Theorem

[ackthpt]

It is said: Power corrupts, while absolute power corrupts absolutely.

My theorem: The longer any party or group remains in power the closer they come to corrupt.

While some may draw a bead on Mr. Stevens and his 37 years in office. Remember pork is often a reward for having been loyal at some point. It's not simply Sen. Ted Stevens rolling up his sleeves for a reach into the Pork Barrel, but his reward for long, loyal service to his contemporaries. There's doubtless a bit of influence due to his seniority, but he's been a good soldier when his party has needed some. We can expect a lot of red faces when same bi-partisan muck-rakers get their hands on the online database and equally glib Senators and Representatives have to answer for decades of funny business which has passed beneath the radar in a long game of "I'll scratch your back, if you scratch mine."

Re:Ackthpt's Theorem

[DaveJay]

Quick note: in theory that might be true, but then in theory if this happened on a regular basis, everyone would concentrate EVEN MORE on getting elected, and do EVEN LESS for the people once they got in, because they'd know that re-election was unlikely if not impossible -- even if they did a good job.

The ability to be re-elected is supposed to be a check on such behavior; it is supposed to incentivize good performance by offering an extension. Unfortunately, when the majority doesn't care enough about what's being done in office to know a person's track record, that incentive isn't worth much.

Re:Ackthpt's Theorem

[MindStalker]

As he said, "unless I've been especially happy with his performance"
Of course personally I'm most happy when they pass as few laws as possible, unless they are to reduce the governments power or unact some stupid law.

Re:Ackthpt's Theorem

[ctr2sprt]

The funny thing about that is that what most people term Pork Spending, IS doing something for the local people and businesses.

Which is the problem with pork: it does something for the local people and businesses.

The money ought to come from Alaska's state budget. I hope that's obvious. But it's a lot harder to find $223 million in a state's budget than in the fed's. Pretty much the only way Alaska could come up with that money is to increase taxes. There's no way that Alaskan taxpayers would approve a tax increase for such a stupid cause. So instead the politicians try to get the money from the fed's budget, where $223 mil is a drop in the bucket. It's essentially "free money" for a state like Alaska: of that entire sum, I'd be surprised if more than $1 mil came from Alaska due to its low population and relatively small economy.

Remember also that if all pork were eliminated, the feds could lower the income tax rate and not "lose money" (i.e. the deficit wouldn't increase). States could then institute or increase local income taxes without affecting the overall tax burden at all. The added revenues could be directed to improving schools, paying cops better wages, fixing the roads, etc. And because it's local politicians making those decisions and not Congressmen who've never even been to Alaska, the politicians can be more easily held accountable. (If a Senator from Massachusetts votes to reduce federal funding to the state of Alaska, there's absolutely nothing that Alaskan voters can do about it.)

I do get the impression that your tongue was at least partly in your cheek, but I wanted to make sure folks know why pork is bad. If you look at the list of pork projects, none of the seem bad... until you start to wonder why a taxpayer in Minnesota should have to pay to maintain local roads in Pennsylvania.

Re:Ackthpt's Theorem

[Minwee]

On the other hand, history has shown that the majority of voters are most happy when handed small bags of (their own) money shortly before election time.

Re:Ackthpt's Theorem

[regular_gonzalez]

An economy that won't get any bigger without investment. By the time they're done with that deal, the taxes on the McMansions alone will provide far more than the $223 mil. Which is why I say people against pork are rather shortsighted. Taking your ideas to their logical conclusion, we should give all of our money to the federal government, as it will invest it more wisely than any of us mere mortals can. Pretty ingenious idea; I wonder why it's never been tried before...

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

The other white meat.

[ColdWetDog]

Ted Stevens and his counterpart in the House of Representatives, Don Young, are very popular in Alaska for the very reason everyone on Slasdot is up in arms - Pork.

The Knick Arm bridge is seen as a shot in the arm for local developers and construction critters. Remember, pretty much the only economic engines in Alaska are Oil and Government. Nothing else but a bunch of trees, rocks and the occasional brown bear.

So they bring in the Pork. Christ, half of Anchorage is named Ted Stevens this or Ted Stevens that. It's a GOOD thing. Really. It's representative government at its finest....

The other way to look Mssrs. Stevens and Young is that they are pretty cheap dates. For one genuine vote in the House or Senate, you need only to bribe a couple hundred thousand people. You got the money, honey, they've got the time.

Re:The other white meat.

[cayenne8]

"Ted Stevens and his counterpart in the House of Representatives, Don Young, are very popular in Alaska for the very reason everyone on Slasdot is up in arms - Pork."

And the only way to get rid of this, is to dry up the 'well'.

First, Let's not give the feds taxes directly!! They should have to depend fully on the states for their finances. This would not only help dry up 'pork' funds, but, might would also cut out what I find to be one of the nastiest things, having the Feds take tax dollars, then use them as blackmail over the states in order to get them to legislate laws the Feds really should have no power over. Witholding hwy funds really chaps my ass, and it is their fav. thing to do.

Lastly, the more I hear about it, maybe we need to go back to having the Senators appointed by the state's legislature rather than general elections, that would keep them more loyal to their state's interest, rather than the national political parties' interests.

From the Wikipedia Article

[TheRaven64]

In his speech on the senate floor, Stevens threatened to quit Congress if the funds were removed from his state.

It sounds like they missed an opportunity there...

Ok, but....

[crhylove]

Is anybody going to actually press charges and put this guy in jail? Can we PLEASE start jailing all the politicians that are breaking the constitution left and right, STARTING with every one who voted for the patriot act?

These people need to go to jail. How do we get them there?!?!

rhY

Re:Scoreboard is a Little Off

[SanityInAnarchy]

I have never known a man who didn't make similar comments about his wife.

I have also never known a man who has lost his wife and didn't grieve.

Re:Here's The Icing On The Cake

[hey!]

I wonder if it might be because THE BRIDGE WILL BE CHEAPER TO RUN THAN THE FUCKING FERRY? Possibly?

Well, that would have to be the world's most expensive ferry service on a per passenger basis before that argument holds water; by several orders of magnitude.

223 million dollars is a lot of money, which would certainly pay for a lot of ferry operations many times over if invested at a normal rate of return. And that's assuming we need to give free ferry service; ferries normally charge tolls which cover their operating expenses.

If you don't believe that, consider this: The ferry in question serves 50 people, and covers one mile. It's probably a rather small and slow ferry. By way of contrast, Woods Hole, Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket Steamship Authority serves on the order of 160,000 residents of Martha's Vinyard and Nantucket, with routes that go from about two miles to something around twenty. This means they run very large ferries and run them frequently. The Authority's operating budget is $69 million dollars, and it serves 3,200 times the residents over many times the distance. And it pays for itself.

But in this "short-term" only country of the USofA, it's not surprising everyone's seeing the expenses up-front and not the savings down the line.

I love it when Republicans sound like deranged Democrats. Even accepting your dubious proposition, where would the Federal Government be if Uncle Sam pulled out his checkbook and funded every project on the basis that it creates long term cost savings for somebody (other than Uncle Sam)? That's the sort of thing you're supposed to fund with bonds.

As a liberal Democrat, I'm not against investing Federal money in communities in every case of course. But such investments should serve larger national purpose. This project is to benefit certain individuals, not the nation at large. And (surprise) it's not the residents of the Island. It's for the benefit of politically connected developers who want to make a buck treating the Federal budget as their personal piggybanks.

Best said...

[Z34107]

Alexis de Tocqueville said it best, at the time of Our Great Country's inception:

The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money.