Originally Posted By DAR K2M asked where do I want to start. <a href="http://www.cagw.org/reports/pig-book/2010/" target="_blank">http://www.cagw.org/reports/pi...ok/2010/</a> Some high er lowlights and things that could be cut: <<$29,992,000 by Senate Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Thad Cochran (R-Miss.) for 27 projects, including: $4,000,000 for the Jamie Whitten Delta States Research Center, Stoneville; $1,500,000 for Berryman Institute, Jack Berryman Institute, Utah and Mississippi Agriculture and Forestry Experiment Station; $1,002,000 for Mississippi Valley State University, curriculum development; $939,000 for the Agricultural Wildlife Conservation Center; and $231,000 for e-commerce research, because no one knows how to go online. $44,400,000 for 27 projects by Senate Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), including: $5,000,000 for the National Institute for Undersea Science and Technology at the University of Mississippi; $3,700,000 for marine aquaculture lab operations at the University of Southern Mississippi; $2,000,000 for remote infrastructure monitoring of natural hazards at the University of Mississippi and the University of Hawaii; $1,000,000 for the Center for Marine Education and Research-Ocean Expo-Learning Center at the Institute for Marine Mammal Studies; $1,000,000 for the University of Southern Mississippi for a technology industry partnership designed to transition space technologies into the commercial sector; and $500,000 for the University of Southern Mississippi for cannabis eradication. $465,000,000 for continued development and initial procurement of the alternate engine for the Joint Strike Fighter. The project has received $1.2 billion in pork since 2004. The Senate did not include any funds for the alternate engine in its version of the appropriations bill, but the House version prevailed in conference. On February 1, 2010 at his briefing on the fiscal year 2011 DOD budget, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said, “I’m fully aware of the political pressure to continue building the C-17 and to proceed with an alternate engine for the F-35, so let me be clear. I will strongly recommend that the president veto any legislation that sustains the unnecessary continuation of these two programs.” On February 25, 2010, Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell reiterated DOD’s position on the alternate engine, stating, “this money can clearly be better spent buying capabilities that our warfighters do need. This is a luxury we cannot afford.” No wonder that all 435 representatives and 100 senators refused to be identified with this massive waste of tax dollars. $51,693,000 for 13 projects by Senate Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.), including: $15,000,000 for North Dakota environmental infrastructure; $7,000,000 for the Center for Biomass Utilization; $5,000,000 for the Center for Nanoscale Energy; $4,000,000 for fossil fuel research and development; $3,000,000 for the National Center for Hydrogen Technology; and $1,900,000 for energy work force development in North Dakota. $51,693,000 for 13 projects by Senate Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.), including: $15,000,000 for North Dakota environmental infrastructure; $7,000,000 for the Center for Biomass Utilization; $5,000,000 for the Center for Nanoscale Energy; $4,000,000 for fossil fuel research and development; $3,000,000 for the National Center for Hydrogen Technology; and $1,900,000 for energy work force development in North Dakota. $4,283,375 for nine projects for financial literacy/education programs by Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), Senate Financial Services Appropriations Subcommittee member Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), House Financial Services Appropriations Subcommittee Ranking Member Jo Ann Emerson (R-Mo.), and House appropriators John Olver (D-Mass.) and Steven Rothman (D-N.J.), including: $3,150,000 for a financial education and pre-home ownership counseling demonstration project; $305,875 for a national program to improve financial literacy for the Girl Scouts of the USA; $250,000 for financial and technical assistance for the Western Massachusetts Enterprise Fund; and $100,000 for employment and financial counseling and assistance for Project Ezrah Needs, Inc. A Congress that can’t balance the nation’s budget should not be dictating where money should go to teach financial literacy. $102,142,500 for 90 projects for Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) State and Local Programs by 111 members of Congress, spread among 35 states, including towns such as Brigantine, New Jersey (population 12,647); Boerne, Texas (population 10,283); Alamosa, Colorado (population 8,745); and Shorter, Alabama (population 374). The amount directed to this program in fiscal year 2010 represents a 357.1 percent increase over the $22,345,000 spent in fiscal year 2009. Through State and Local Programs, FEMA attempts to prepare state and local governments to respond to incidences of terrorism or other catastrophic events. All of the funds should be distributed based on threat level priorities, rather than being based in part on which members of Congress are best at getting earmarks. $99,182,000, or 12.2 percent of the total of $813.8 million, for 67 projects by Senate Labor/HHS Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), including: $7,287,000 for the Iowa Department of Education to continue the Harkin Grant program ($32,633,000 has been earmarked for this program since 2005); $500,000 for exhibits at the Czech and Slovak Museum and Library in Cedar Rapids; $500,000 for exhibits at the National Mississippi River Museum and Aquarium in Dubuque; $400,000 for Orchestra Iowa to support a music education program; $400,000 to the AIB College of Business in Des Moines to continue recruiting and training captioners and court reporters and to provide scholarships to students; and $300,000 for the Iowa CareGivers Association in Des Moines for training and support of certified nurse assistants. Sen. Harkin has long been a determined crusader for pork. In a November 25, 2006 New York Times article, he claimed, “I happen to be a supporter of earmarks, unabashedly. But I don’t call them earmarks. It is ‘Congressional directed spending.’” $21,900,000 for two projects funding chapels: $14,400,000 by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.), House Military Construction Appropriations Subcommittee Ranking Member Zach Wamp (R-Tenn.), and Reps. John Tanner (D-Tenn.) and Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.) for a chapel complex at Fort Campbell, and $7,500,000 by Sens. Thomas Carper (D-Del.) and Ted Kaufman (D-Del.) and Rep. Mike Castle (R-Del.) for a chapel center at Dover Air Force Base. $17,000,000 added by the House for the International Fund for Ireland (IFI). According to information on IFI’s website, the program was established in 1986 to promote economic and social advance and encourage contact, dialogue and reconciliation between nationalists and unionists throughout Ireland. In a review of a glowing book about IFI released in January 2009, author Sean Donlon admitted, “While the fund will continue its work for the next couple of years it would be unreasonable to expect external support thereafter, especially in the current relatively stable political and security situation in Northern Ireland.” On June 17, 2009, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) introduced H.R. 2915, which would prohibit funding for the program amid indications from supporters that IFI will be phased out in the near future. Language in the conference report indicated that fiscal year 2010 would be the last year the United States would contribute to the program. CAGW has identified $281 million for this project since 1995. It appears that only if taxpayers find a four leaf clover will this unnecessary program die. And with that I'm out For the weekend
Originally Posted By mawnck For a grand total of $843,092,875. Congrats DAR! You just solved 6 thousandths of a percent of the national debt. Nice job.
Originally Posted By ecdc LMAO. Exactly. None of us likes the pork that Congressmen and women on both sides of the aisle pump into bills. But let's get serious: the way to save money is to cut the defense budget, which is more than something like the next 12 countries combined. But chances are you'll never hear a teabagger say we should cut that. And of course, any of the stuff DAR listed above gets cut, the people in that community will scream and holler about their jobs being ruined by Obama.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>For a grand total of $843,092,875. Congrats DAR! You just solved 6 thousandths of a percent of the national debt. Nice job.<< That's the problem. Sure, there is boondoggle spending like that illustrated above, but its a drop in the bucket. The real biggies are things like military spending, salaries and pensions for federal employees, etc. Things that are not easy to cut.
Originally Posted By Mr X Well DAR, now you and President Obama have something in common... ***President Obama announced this morning that he and his budget wizards have cut $17 billion from federal programs, from redundant reading initiatives to an obsolete "long-range radio navigation system." Obama was mocked by most people, ourselves included, for recently asking his Cabinet for a measly $100 million in savings, but $17 billion, that's much more impressive, right? No! The Washington Post notes that the "modest trims" represent "a tiny fraction of next year's $3.4 trillion budget"*** <a href="http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2009/05/17_billion_is_not_a_lot_of_mon.html" target="_blank">http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2...mon.html</a>
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt Be nice. At least DAR took the time to point out the things he'd like to see cut, unlike the Republicans, most of whom have not been clear about what they'd target. DAR are you for or against ending the Bush tax cuts?
Originally Posted By gadzuux Obama isn't the first to try that trick. Republicans have been trying to squirm away from questions about specifics they'd like to cut. Of course they do because there aren't $200 billion in cuts out there, unless you include defense, and/or entitlements like SSI and medicare. The GOP "contract" is empty posturing and they know it. They're just hoping that some supporters will fall for it.
Originally Posted By CuriouserConstance If they are openly admitting that they aren't willing to compromise and work to resolve the issues at hand, we should begin the process of removing them from their positions, and give them to people actually committed to resolution.
Originally Posted By FaMulan I'm so with you Constance. The right wingers have been screaming since the first day of this administration that things weren't being solved fast enough. They need to take what they've been throwing out. And ya know, if you dish it out, you have to be able to take it and I'm not sure these whiny-butt crybabies can.
Originally Posted By DAR <<DAR are you for or against ending the Bush tax cuts?>> I say end them then place a flat tax for everyone.
Originally Posted By DAR Doesn't the party that doesn't have the Presidency usually want to get rid of the party that does have the Presidency?
Originally Posted By fkurucz " say end them then place a flat tax for everyone." As regressive as a flat tax is, its fairer than the system we have now, where billioaires like Warren Buffet pay a smaller percentage of their income in tax than maiidle class taxpayers do. Of course the GOP will fight a flat tax tooth and nail, unless the suoer rich are allowed to continue sheltering their income. What they really favor is a VAT, which is super regressive.
Originally Posted By fkurucz "Doesn't the party that doesn't have the Presidency usually want to get rid of the party that does have the Presidency?" Of course they want to win the next election, but if they're to throw the counry under a bus to achieve that then I have a problem.
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
