P.T. Barnum once said that you can fool some of the people all the time, all of the people some of the time, but you can never fool all of the people all of the time. The last part of the quote by Barnum is becoming less and less true. It does appear that you can fool most of the people most of the time. Look no farther than the most recent election for proof.
The GOP, Tea Party and the conservative press rallied the American voter to the cry of government should be smaller and spend less. It was a simple message that many could not argue with. We were and continue to spend more money than we take in as a government. The budget has only been balanced in one administration in the past 40 years. The rally cry has become so strong that the right is going to take a shot at repealing the Heath Care Bill, legislation that every President back to Nixon has publicly shown support for.
But running for office is one thing, being in office is another. It is the same old story. Two items have come up in the past two weeks since the election: Will you stop asking for earmarks, known as "pork" and subsidies to farmers and big oil, for example who receive billions in support for sometimes not growing a crop? The answer to that question has been remarkably muted. It would seem that those who have been among the most vocal and powerful in saying that spending is out of control are now backing away from pledges of spending less when it comes to representing their own districts or states even if it means continuing to spend. The premise in the first place is ridiculous. A representative's job is to bring back money and jobs to their district or state. THAT is one of the primary functions when sent by us to Washington.
But when you say that you are going to Washington to clean up the corruption and stop the out of control spending and then still want the same old money for your district, nothing has changed. That is nothing more the pure hypocrisy. The loudest squawkers were once again the Republications. For the past two years they have sat with their hands crossed refusing to help bail out the economy. They railed against the stimulus and even pledged very publicly not to participate in it. But when it came to actually getting the money, they lined up quietly and took it like everyone else. They went back to their districts and states and stood in front of the golden shovels as the ground was being broken, posed for the photos that appeared in the local paper and took credit for all the great new projects happening locally. Then they went back to Washington and criticized the administration for spending too much money. This is speaking out of both sides of your mouth at its best.
But now that the Republicans are no longer the minority party in the House of Representatives and have added to the seat count in the Senate their actions are going to be more visible.
So let's start with Mitch McConnell (R) Kentucky. He recently said that his biggest priority was to get Obama out of the White House in two years. You would think that he would be a big opponent of earmarks and higher spending. Well, if you have ever seen him on a Sunday morning political talk show, you know that he is a master of dodging questions and issues. McConnell has requested 158 separate earmarks during the past two years totaling just over $957 billion. He recently said that stopping these earmarks would not save any money but reluctantly said that he will heed the wishes of the GOP and Tea Party and support a ban on these very same earmarks.
13 Democrats on the House Farm Committee lost their jobs earlier this month. Among the new crop of new congresspeople, Vicki Hartzler of Missouri supported by the Tea Party. The Hartzlers own a farm equipment business and a farm and received $750,000 in over the past 15 years. She beat Ike Skelton Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. Speaking out of both sides of her mouth, she said that she is committed to reduce government spending but added that farming is a matter of national security. Food needs to be grown in the US. If you take that tact isn't pretty much everything a matter of national security? Health care, Jobs, manufacturing. After all isn't "Life, Liberty and the Persuit of Happiness" in our Bill of Rights?
Next up further proof you can really fool some of the people in Minnesota all of the time. Michelle Bachmann. She herself is a critic of farm subsidies but her family has received as much as $50,000 in farm subsidies. She listed the subsidies on her personal income statement as part of the Bachmann family farm. He father in law has received as much as $250,000 in farm subsidies although Bachmann herself has not been involved. Good for Michelle. She recently stated that she is for extending the Bush tax cuts for the most wealthy but would oppose an extension on jobless benefits. Let them eat cake, right Michelle?
The last two, freshmen representatives somehow got away with unseating their opponents railing against government spending while themselves being on the government dole. Newly elected representative Kristi Noem (R) South Dakota has taken $3 million over the past 15 years although gave up her share in the ranch that received the subsidies just last year. Finally the last newly minted representative, gospel singer Stephen Fincher of Tennessee. His family has taken $3.2 million in the past ten years.
Isn't it great that when poor folks get a handout it is called welfare. But when farmers or oil companies get a handout it is a subsidy. Where are these free market Republicans when money is getting passed out to big business? The reality is that if they contribute to you at election time, you better contribute to them!
The good news is that a new five year Farm Bill is up for debate in 2012. This bill known for subsidizing farmers and guaranteeing them a price and in some cases paying them for NOT growing crops will be contentious. Call on Bachmann, Noem, Hazler and Fincher will be the first to say that we should end subsidies for farmers and all who are committed to a free market economy. If you are concerned about socialism or communism this is where you might just want to begin.
But the you've got to be kidding me award actually goes to the private sector. The Ricketts family owns the Chicago Cubs. Daddy Joe was founder of TD Ameritrade. So all that stock market money you made and lost last decade allowed Joe and son Tom to purchase the Chicago Cubs. Tom runs the Cubs as Chairman. Tom wants $300 million in taxpayer money in the form of bonds to renovate Wrigley Field. Now this would be only mildly irritating if the story stopped there. But dad Joe took part of your money lost in the stock market and now his money in the form of commissions and profits and put it to good use: he has been an outspoken critic of taxpayer earmarks. In a matter of fact he put his money where his mouth is and founded Taxpayers Against Earmarks. The sole purpose of this foundation is to educate americans about wasteful spending in government. Perhaps he should start with a stern lecture to his son.
Who is to blame for allowing this hypocrisy to continue? The press. It is their job to ask tough questions and get answers that are direct. It is all too often that the questions are just dodged or not asked at all.
Remember, we are entitled to the best government we deserve.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment