This is from me 2 years ago.
Here's the notes from a talk I did for my government class recently. The talk and the savagely ranting essay both scored me a 90.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pork Barrel Politics
Websterss Dictionary traces ˜pork barrel politics" back to around 1905 and defines it as
Mostly comprised of earmarks (specific line items) and mostly appearing in appropriation bills which are passed by congress and signed into law by the president it has been estimated that since 1991.. appropriations pork? totals $100 billion dollars!
The total amount of appropriations bills signed off by the American president each year?
13!
Some examples:
$375,000,000 for an un-requested and unneeded amphibious assault ship in the state of Mississippi (pushed in by Senate majority leader Trent Lott)
$700,000 for the admiral theatre in Bremerton, Washington by Senator Norman Dicks
$500,000 for the Olympic tree program in Senator Richard Bennetts home state for the 2002 Olympics.
The 1999 Transport Equity Act (TEA-21) was a bill to authorize surface transportation for the next 6 years throughout the US. $9.3 billion in demonstration projects were incorporated in the final draft to ensure a solid support base for passage of the bill. It catered for ˜national priority transportation subjects like a parking garage. A pedestrian walkway and highway beautification programs!!
Some people say this highlights flaws in the democratic system, whereby elected representatives have relatively short terms in office and must be seen to be doing something for their electorate….
Others say it is the democratic system at work and pork barreling is critical because it encourages a consensus among elected officials who hold disparate views. Remembering that there is no real parties in America and hence no need for discipline and voting the party line.
An American politician once described it as
'every election is a sort of advance auction of stolen goods'
Waste and marginalization of local authority
Of the 1999 Military Construction bills 500 earmarks, this spent 42% of the bills money. The TEA-21 had 1850 earmarks and the energy and water appropriations bill alone held 1800 earmarks!! In 1987, demonstration projects from the highway bill alone only covered 37% of the total cost of the 51 of its 66 earmarks. Any projects that are left unfilled or are rejected because local councils cannot match the funds... the unspent pork-money goes directly to the presidents coffers!
The desired results of the demo projects are not consulted with local authorities either. Oregon was told for instance that its TEA 21 funds MUST be spent on
*building a bicycle path parallel to 42 street to connect with an existing path
*build right of way improvements
*improve foot access to a light rail station
*build another bike path
This is regardless of whatever other projects may need to be done in that state. Federal government pork is sent with its own list of priorities which marginalizes the power of local governments… who are of course not going to want that pork to end back in the gilten trough of the president so if the price is right they will build it.
The federal government is now changing the phrase ˜demonstration projects" to "high priority projects", further evidence of their wish to micromanage their states in a big brother knows best fashion.
How can it stop?
Moral Suasion has been attempted with some limited success. This is a use of influence and persuasion by certain people in positions of power. Representatives William H Natcher and George E Brown Junior, who are heads of the house appropriation committee and the house science committee respectively worked to reduce pork spending in bills they viewed. It did reduce the figures somewhat however, ten amendments that they stripped from the energy and water bill reappeared in the defence appropriations bill several days later and this bill was signed so swiftly that they were unable to mount a resistance to it.
Legislative measures. In 1995 Bill Clinton was given the power to veto line items(a power which took effect on Janurary 1st 1997) and he did so by stripping $355 million in pork from the 1998 pork barrel spending much to the annoyance of certain members of congress. However in mid 1998 the Supreme Court stripped the president of this power when it ruled it as unconstitutional. Some proposals were spoken of in congress that would limit pork barrel spending but no real opposition was heard to it which is why now, PBS is increasing from 25 to 1000 times faster than it did twenty years ago and will soon form a large part of the appropriation budget.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Just thought you should all know.
Here's the notes from a talk I did for my government class recently. The talk and the savagely ranting essay both scored me a 90.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pork Barrel Politics
Websterss Dictionary traces ˜pork barrel politics" back to around 1905 and defines it as
Pork, otherwise known as demonstration projects are projects that are usually highly visible (i.e. infrastructure, buildings etc) which Senators or members of the house of reps insert into appropriation and authorization bills to attempt to win favour with their home state.a government appropriation that provides funds for local improvements designed to ingratiate legislators with their constituents
Mostly comprised of earmarks (specific line items) and mostly appearing in appropriation bills which are passed by congress and signed into law by the president it has been estimated that since 1991.. appropriations pork? totals $100 billion dollars!
The total amount of appropriations bills signed off by the American president each year?
13!
Some examples:
$375,000,000 for an un-requested and unneeded amphibious assault ship in the state of Mississippi (pushed in by Senate majority leader Trent Lott)
$700,000 for the admiral theatre in Bremerton, Washington by Senator Norman Dicks
$500,000 for the Olympic tree program in Senator Richard Bennetts home state for the 2002 Olympics.
The 1999 Transport Equity Act (TEA-21) was a bill to authorize surface transportation for the next 6 years throughout the US. $9.3 billion in demonstration projects were incorporated in the final draft to ensure a solid support base for passage of the bill. It catered for ˜national priority transportation subjects like a parking garage. A pedestrian walkway and highway beautification programs!!
Some people say this highlights flaws in the democratic system, whereby elected representatives have relatively short terms in office and must be seen to be doing something for their electorate….
Others say it is the democratic system at work and pork barreling is critical because it encourages a consensus among elected officials who hold disparate views. Remembering that there is no real parties in America and hence no need for discipline and voting the party line.
An American politician once described it as
'every election is a sort of advance auction of stolen goods'
Waste and marginalization of local authority
Of the 1999 Military Construction bills 500 earmarks, this spent 42% of the bills money. The TEA-21 had 1850 earmarks and the energy and water appropriations bill alone held 1800 earmarks!! In 1987, demonstration projects from the highway bill alone only covered 37% of the total cost of the 51 of its 66 earmarks. Any projects that are left unfilled or are rejected because local councils cannot match the funds... the unspent pork-money goes directly to the presidents coffers!
The desired results of the demo projects are not consulted with local authorities either. Oregon was told for instance that its TEA 21 funds MUST be spent on
*building a bicycle path parallel to 42 street to connect with an existing path
*build right of way improvements
*improve foot access to a light rail station
*build another bike path
This is regardless of whatever other projects may need to be done in that state. Federal government pork is sent with its own list of priorities which marginalizes the power of local governments… who are of course not going to want that pork to end back in the gilten trough of the president so if the price is right they will build it.
The federal government is now changing the phrase ˜demonstration projects" to "high priority projects", further evidence of their wish to micromanage their states in a big brother knows best fashion.
How can it stop?
Moral Suasion has been attempted with some limited success. This is a use of influence and persuasion by certain people in positions of power. Representatives William H Natcher and George E Brown Junior, who are heads of the house appropriation committee and the house science committee respectively worked to reduce pork spending in bills they viewed. It did reduce the figures somewhat however, ten amendments that they stripped from the energy and water bill reappeared in the defence appropriations bill several days later and this bill was signed so swiftly that they were unable to mount a resistance to it.
Legislative measures. In 1995 Bill Clinton was given the power to veto line items(a power which took effect on Janurary 1st 1997) and he did so by stripping $355 million in pork from the 1998 pork barrel spending much to the annoyance of certain members of congress. However in mid 1998 the Supreme Court stripped the president of this power when it ruled it as unconstitutional. Some proposals were spoken of in congress that would limit pork barrel spending but no real opposition was heard to it which is why now, PBS is increasing from 25 to 1000 times faster than it did twenty years ago and will soon form a large part of the appropriation budget.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Just thought you should all know.
Last edited by XstrangerdangerX (2006-04-23 15:01:15)