Just Say No to Pork

No, not the "other white meat." According to Wiktionary, the second meaning for "pork" is funding proposed or requested by a member of Congress for special interests or his/her constituency as opposed to the good of the country as a whole. That is the topic for today.

Lately there has been much obstreperous banter regarding earmarks, including the Bridge to Nowhere and the bribes-for-earmarks scandal that landed U.S. Rep Duke Cunningham in prison. However, not every earmark is considered pork, and not all pork arrives in the form of an earmark. The group Citizens Against Government Waste employs seven general conditions for a Congressional project to make it to their Pig Book: Not specifically authorized; Not competitively awarded; Not requested by the President; Greatly exceeds the President's budget request or the previous year's funding; Not the subject of congressional hearings; or Serves only a local or special interest. In 2006, 9,963 projects made it to CAGW's infamous Pig Book. These projects come with a hefty price tag for the taxpayer: $29 billion in 2006 alone. What are some of these projects? Here are a few of the most egregious, taken from the CAGW website: $13,500,000 for the International Fund for Ireland, which helped finance the World Toilet Summit; $6,435,000 for wood utilization research; $1,300,000 for berry research; and $500,000 for the Sparta Teapot Museum in Sparta, N.C. Remember, there are 9,959 wasteful expenditures that I am not listing here in the interest of brevity!

The incoming Democratic leaders for the U.S. Congress claim they will remove all earmarks from the unfinished spending bills that the Republicans dumped in their laps before Congress adjourned for the year. Wow, that sounds like a step in the right direction, especially for the "tax and spend" party. My regular readers know most of my Humble ire is directed towards the left in general and the Democrats in particular. This time do the Dems deserve a pat on the back for this newfound budgetary restraint? I would love to say yes, but I remain dubious of their intentions. Some of the money will likely shift to programs the Democrats feel have been shortchanged from the President's budget.

As a Nation we simply must get a handle on government spending. Our demographics will shift as the baby boomers enter retirement and leave the workforce, causing tax receipts to decrease as Medicare and other expenditures increase. My Humble prediction is that the United States is headed for some serious budgetary problems, beginning in about ten years. I hope to be proven wrong.

Humble Patriot's Reading Assignments:
Dems to Wipe Out Pet Projects in Bills
Byrd to Give Up W.Va. Projects