Driving liberals, dhimmis and illegal alien apologists absolutely insane since 2005...


By RHarrison | 27 July 2006 | Blogs, US Congress | 2 Comments

There is a national movement (which is probably too grand a term) of bloggers who are trying to reduce the amount of pork in legislation.  Their primary tool is attention.  These bloggers have been pointing out projects that Congress has agreed to fund which may not be the best use of taxpayers’ money.  The Alaska bridge to nowhere was one of their first victories.

There are a few Members of Congress who have been supporting efforts to limit pork.  Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) is the most vocal, but Rep. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) has also been doing good work.  Over the past few weeks he has introduced a series of 19 amendments designed to strip specific line-item projects out of the budget.  All of his amendments failed.

However, by forcing votes on the amendments, each member of the House of Representatives had to go on record 19 times on whether they supported projects like Hydroponic Tomato Production in Ohio ($180,000) or the National Grape and Wine Initiative ($100,000).  A complete list of the 19 projects, and more information on Porkbusters, can be found at the Club for Growth.

In Virginia, the results were disappointing.  All of our representatives voted for the majority of the projects.  Drake, Scott, Forbes, Goode, Goodlatte, Moran (surprise!), Boucher, and Wolf voted for every single project.  Jo Ann Davis, Cantor and Tom Davis all voted to end funding for three of the projects, but voted yes on the other 16.

Overall, Democrats were more supportive of the programs than Republicans, but the distinction was not great.  I don’t think the slogan “We’re not quite as irresponsible with your money as the other guys” is a winner.  The Republicans look to do poorly this fall in part because Conservatives are not happy with Congress’ willingness to spend like, well, Democrats.  Flake has shown, once again, that Republicans in Congress are not notably more fiscally conservative than Democrats.

Taken individually, many of the 19 programs may have merit – but that’s the problem.  Most government programs have merit on some level.  Almost all help somebody.  Being a fiscal conservative isn’t about opposing programs that don’t do any good.  It is about asking if a program ought to be the government’s responsibility, and then asking if the gains to all taxpayers out-weigh the cost to all taxpayers. 

Clearly, Virginia’s Representatives haven’t been asking these questions.  

(BVBL: Covering Virginia Politics so the Mainstream Media Doesn’t Have To)

(Hat Tip: Instapudit)

The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.

BVBL is not a charity and your support is not tax-deductible.

You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed.


  1. Anonymous said on 28 Jul 2006 at 12:15 pm:
    Flag comment

    Trying to find a good spot to share this… from a Judy Feder e-mail. Is this true, that Wolf won’t debate? Or just not on that issue?

    As oil companies report obscene profits (Exxon alone made $10.4 billion last quarter, or $1,318 dollars per second!), my opponent, Frank Wolf, has refused to debate me on gas prices and energy policy. He apparently knows voters will reject his record of doing big favors for George Bush’s friends in the Oil Industry. After 26 years in Washington, it seems Frank Wolf no longer believes he is accountable to his constituents.

  2. RHarrison said on 28 Jul 2006 at 1:24 pm:
    Flag comment

    I doubt Wolf would agree to a debate on just energy policy. It is too narrow and cedes too much ground to Feder. A regular debate, covering a variety of issues, would be both more valuable and more favorable to Wolf.

Comments are closed.

Views: 3219