Comments on: Republicans Introduce “Pork” List http://www.topfinanceblog.com/republicans-introduce-pork-list/ Financial News, Information, and Commentary Wed, 28 Jul 2010 02:49:03 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Mitch http://www.topfinanceblog.com/republicans-introduce-pork-list/comment-page-1/#comment-163 Mitch Thu, 05 Feb 2009 22:35:47 +0000 http://www.topfinanceblog.com/?p=125#comment-163 Thanks for stopping in, Justin. I want to comment on your last point first, that being that the country is already scared, as every single person is being touched by what's going on with the economy in some fashion, so I doubt there's anything he can say that would scare anyone. And, of course, we both know that President Obama hasn't even seen everything in this bill yet. He's pledged to look at every line item in the bill before signing it, but I don't remember anyone ever passing the line item veto, so I'm not even sure if he can eliminate something he doesn't want in there. Thanks for stopping in, Justin. I want to comment on your last point first, that being that the country is already scared, as every single person is being touched by what’s going on with the economy in some fashion, so I doubt there’s anything he can say that would scare anyone.

And, of course, we both know that President Obama hasn’t even seen everything in this bill yet. He’s pledged to look at every line item in the bill before signing it, but I don’t remember anyone ever passing the line item veto, so I’m not even sure if he can eliminate something he doesn’t want in there.

]]> By: Justin http://www.topfinanceblog.com/republicans-introduce-pork-list/comment-page-1/#comment-161 Justin Thu, 05 Feb 2009 21:21:15 +0000 http://www.topfinanceblog.com/?p=125#comment-161 As a Republican myself (although, let me note, not a Bush supporter), I do think there are a few other issues with the plan that are important to consider. As Mitch correctly pointed out, the pork items in this bill are to be expected. I will be the first to admit that if the tables were turned and Republicans wrote the bill, there would have been similar port items also. When you talk about spending $800 billion, it gets very easy to squeeze a few million into a pet project that you can show-off to your voters back home. One issue (and I apoligize for not having an accurate percentage here) is that a large portion of the "constructive spending" parts of the bill will not result in any immediate spending at all. There were many projects that wouldn't even require spending to start for about a year. I'm not saying that these are bad ideas, just that they shouldn't be part of an emergency stimulus bill if they don't "stimulate" job growth now. I would be much more comfortable with a far smaller and more targeted bill that addressed things to do "right now". I won't ramble any more on this topic until I see how things pan out in the Senate, but I do have to say that the fear tactics that Obama is using to gain support reminds me of very similar tactics used by the Bush administration. Suggesting that failure to pass the bill immediately could result in the country never turning around is not something our President needs to be telling people right now. We need to act quickly, but acting too quickly out of fear is rarely a good thing. We did this same thing with Iraq and we all know how well that turned out! As a Republican myself (although, let me note, not a Bush supporter), I do think there are a few other issues with the plan that are important to consider.

As Mitch correctly pointed out, the pork items in this bill are to be expected. I will be the first to admit that if the tables were turned and Republicans wrote the bill, there would have been similar port items also. When you talk about spending $800 billion, it gets very easy to squeeze a few million into a pet project that you can show-off to your voters back home.

One issue (and I apoligize for not having an accurate percentage here) is that a large portion of the “constructive spending” parts of the bill will not result in any immediate spending at all. There were many projects that wouldn’t even require spending to start for about a year. I’m not saying that these are bad ideas, just that they shouldn’t be part of an emergency stimulus bill if they don’t “stimulate” job growth now.

I would be much more comfortable with a far smaller and more targeted bill that addressed things to do “right now”. I won’t ramble any more on this topic until I see how things pan out in the Senate, but I do have to say that the fear tactics that Obama is using to gain support reminds me of very similar tactics used by the Bush administration. Suggesting that failure to pass the bill immediately could result in the country never turning around is not something our President needs to be telling people right now.

We need to act quickly, but acting too quickly out of fear is rarely a good thing. We did this same thing with Iraq and we all know how well that turned out!

]]> By: Mitch http://www.topfinanceblog.com/republicans-introduce-pork-list/comment-page-1/#comment-153 Mitch Wed, 04 Feb 2009 03:24:42 +0000 http://www.topfinanceblog.com/?p=125#comment-153 You're right, Frank, there are a number of things there that I think are fairly legitimate, though the way they're listed they do look somewhat suspect. Still, politics as usual means someone had to try to sneak some stuff in. You’re right, Frank, there are a number of things there that I think are fairly legitimate, though the way they’re listed they do look somewhat suspect. Still, politics as usual means someone had to try to sneak some stuff in.

]]> By: frank http://www.topfinanceblog.com/republicans-introduce-pork-list/comment-page-1/#comment-152 frank Wed, 04 Feb 2009 02:38:44 +0000 http://www.topfinanceblog.com/?p=125#comment-152 Besides the fact that this is such a low percentage of the total bill, they're also listing quite a few things that would also mean jobs, and jobs quickly. For example: -448 million to construct Homeland Security HQ -1.4 billion for rural waste disposal programs -6 billion to turn federal buildings 'green' (could also argue that this one would save money in the future) I admit that some of these sound kind of useless (the film one, certainly), and I also have no idea of the necessity of any of these (like Homeland Security's new digs). But isn't job creation supposed to be a big part of this thing too? Besides the fact that this is such a low percentage of the total bill, they’re also listing quite a few things that would also mean jobs, and jobs quickly. For example:

-448 million to construct Homeland Security HQ
-1.4 billion for rural waste disposal programs
-6 billion to turn federal buildings ‘green’ (could also argue that this one would save money in the future)

I admit that some of these sound kind of useless (the film one, certainly), and I also have no idea of the necessity of any of these (like Homeland Security’s new digs). But isn’t job creation supposed to be a big part of this thing too?

]]>