Everyone's a drama queen about pork

[NorthSideSox72]

of course the system's flawed, because we're humans and we're not perfect. every ONE of us on this board would do the exact same things these senators do - and that is to make sure projects for OUR constituents get put into motion so that WE can get re-elected. Mind you, this is their JOB, and just like all of you, they'd like to keep it. Of COURSE that means we may end up wasting money on some things that may be "less important" from a general perspective, but it's the way it works, and some times you just gotta live with that.

 

and a point that Rex made, not all earmarks are bad. in fact, most of them probably aren't bad. And, like I said, as long as the main measure gets passed, who cares what earmarks are attached (obviously to a point, of course). Is it more important to get a budget passed, or to argue for weeks over the pork?

There are other alternatives - like passing the budget as is, and combining the pork/earmarks/mini-projects into seperate bills, or doing an amalgamated district grant system as I suggested.

 

You are correct that not all are bad, in fact, many are not I am sure. Its that by adding them to a different bill of any kind, you create a bad situation at multiple levels:

 

1. Some of it is wasteful or overreaching, at a time when the budget is already a mess. And 1 or 2% is still a big number.

 

2. Some Congresspeople end up getting bigger shares than others on a regular basis, which is unfair.

 

3. It puts the people in Congress in a position to not be able to make an intelligent vote. If you agree with a bill in general, but there is an amendment in there that is not what you or your district want, what do you do? You are going to be wrong either way, just as the President would look bad if he had, or had not, signed this bill. It essentially takes away the ability of Congress to do its PRIMARY JOB - passing or not passing legislation in a way that best represents their constituents, and the country.

 

Earmarks are bad, even if their content may be good to some people. And its not about being a drama queen, its about wanting better government and better governance.

 

[southsider2k5]

of course the system's flawed, because we're humans and we're not perfect. every ONE of us on this board would do the exact same things these senators do - and that is to make sure projects for OUR constituents get put into motion so that WE can get re-elected. Mind you, this is their JOB, and just like all of you, they'd like to keep it. Of COURSE that means we may end up wasting money on some things that may be "less important" from a general perspective, but it's the way it works, and some times you just gotta live with that.

 

and a point that Rex made, not all earmarks are bad. in fact, most of them probably aren't bad. And, like I said, as long as the main measure gets passed, who cares what earmarks are attached (obviously to a point, of course). Is it more important to get a budget passed, or to argue for weeks over the pork?

 

I care.

 

What's $10,000,000,000 between friends right? Like I said, if it is a good cause, make it stand up on its own merits. Don't hide it in another bill because you know it is the only way it would pass.

 

My point is that it shouldn't be their job to waste money simply for the reason that "Everyone else is doing it." Why not actually try to do thinks more effeciently? It is our elected representives jobs to not only look at what is good for the district, but also to look collectively at what is good for the nation. Them getting re-elected is the last reason something should be happening. Crap like this is how we end up with entire departments of government that complete wastes of time and taxpayer money.

[Reddy]

I care.

 

What's $10,000,000,000 between friends right? Like I said, if it is a good cause, make it stand up on its own merits. Don't hide it in another bill because you know it is the only way it would pass.

 

My point is that it shouldn't be their job to waste money simply for the reason that "Everyone else is doing it." Why not actually try to do thinks more effeciently? It is our elected representives jobs to not only look at what is good for the district, but also to look collectively at what is good for the nation. Them getting re-elected is the last reason something should be happening. Crap like this is how we end up with entire departments of government that complete wastes of time and taxpayer money.

I'm sick of this high horse people get themselves on. each of us would do the exact same thing to protect our job. it's our JOB. how we make money. and they don't want to lose it any more than you or I want to lose ours. Principle is all well and good until you have to be the one in the position to stand by it.

[Balta1701]

Wow, did this thread get nasty during the night.

[kapkomet]

I'm sick of this high horse people get themselves on. each of us would do the exact same thing to protect our job. it's our JOB. how we make money. and they don't want to lose it any more than you or I want to lose ours. Principle is all well and good until you have to be the one in the position to stand by it.

Well, here's your problem then, reddy. Their JOB is to represent our interests. Their JOB should be to be government representatives for the United States of America, not bought off when it's convenient. Their JOB needs a new job description. Their JOB shouldn't be to be an elected official for life. Their JOB should be to be the public servant that they are and get the f*** out when they have been there too long. You want real change in Washington? Put in term limits. Then you would actually see people doing the right thing a lot more often because it wouldn't become about their JOB staying in Washington forever so they can pull s*** like this.

[Balta1701]

Put in term limits. Then you would actually see people doing the right thing a lot more often because it wouldn't become about their JOB staying in Washington forever so they can pull s*** like this.

The worst-run state in the country with perhaps the strongest term limits in the country says hi.

[kapkomet]

The worst-run state in the country with perhaps the strongest term limits in the country says hi.

Ok, now why is that, then?

 

And why is it better to have Teddy, Mitch McConnel, Byrd, etc. etc. etc. up there for half their life? Government was never intended to be a career (not as representation, anyway).

 

 

[Balta1701]

Ok, now why is that, then?

 

And why is it better to have Teddy, Mitch McConnel, Byrd, etc. etc. etc. up there for half their life? Government was never intended to be a career (not as representation, anyway).

Frankly yes. Compared to the absolute mess out in this state, I'd rather have Mitch McConnell, Eric Cantor, prostitute-boy, etc., in our state than the people we currently have.

 

All that term limits have done in California is reduce the possibility of compromises and pushed the state closer to bankruptcy because no one up there knows how to work the system to get anything passed. Everything winds up in gridlock. It is an absolute disaster. Term limits that push out effective legislators as they're learning how to be effecive legislators is a key part (but not the biggest part) of the problem.

 

This doesn't mean that term limits can't be done correctly and put in place such that they can help. But pretending that term limits are a panacea is simply wrong. California's credit rating right now is worse than any other state, because the only thing the state can do to solve its budget problems is borrow money. California's term limits take out people who might have been able to work around that, and push things even faster towards the margins.

[southsider2k5]

I'm sick of this high horse people get themselves on. each of us would do the exact same thing to protect our job. it's our JOB. how we make money. and they don't want to lose it any more than you or I want to lose ours. Principle is all well and good until you have to be the one in the position to stand by it.

 

So I take it you are against things like Universal Heath Care, changing enviormental standards, ending oil dependence, rasing the minimum wage, etc. All of these things have people's jobs tied to them, and they are just doing their jobs to protect the status quo, right? Principle is all well and good until you have to be the one in the position to stand by it.

[Reddy]

So I take it you are against things like Universal Heath Care, changing enviormental standards, ending oil dependence, rasing the minimum wage, etc. All of these things have people's jobs tied to them, and they are just doing their jobs to protect the status quo, right? Principle is all well and good until you have to be the one in the position to stand by it.

listen, it doesn't matter what it SHOULD be and it doesn't matter what you WANT it to be. The truth of the matter is that people DO make careers out of politics and, that being the case, they try to protect that career. Keep in mind, that while they are doing this they are also doing what the people they represent WANT them to be doing. You said their job is to REPRESENT the people, and most of this pork is just that - senators trying to get projects passed that help THEIR constituents and, in the process, help them get re-elected.

 

in the end, the crux of my argument was this: if YOU or anyone else on this board were in their position, would you really do any different? look at it this way. all of the congressmen in office think that they can do some good for their constituents, otherwise they wouldn't be there. nobody starts in politics from a corrupt point of view (a generalization, but generally true). how many of them feel like they can get ALLLL of their goals accomplished in one term? not many. so, therefore, they must seek re-election. how do you get re-elected in order to ensure that all of your plans have a chance to come to fruition? you throw some pork on a bill that helps out the people that put you there. it's a cycle, it continues, it's the way it is, it's not all bad, it's not worth the uproar.

[southsider2k5]

listen, it doesn't matter what it SHOULD be and it doesn't matter what you WANT it to be. The truth of the matter is that people DO make careers out of politics and, that being the case, they try to protect that career. Keep in mind, that while they are doing this they are also doing what the people they represent WANT them to be doing. You said their job is to REPRESENT the people, and most of this pork is just that - senators trying to get projects passed that help THEIR constituents and, in the process, help them get re-elected.

 

in the end, the crux of my argument was this: if YOU or anyone else on this board were in their position, would you really do any different? look at it this way. all of the congressmen in office think that they can do some good for their constituents, otherwise they wouldn't be there. nobody starts in politics from a corrupt point of view (a generalization, but generally true). how many of them feel like they can get ALLLL of their goals accomplished in one term? not many. so, therefore, they must seek re-election. how do you get re-elected in order to ensure that all of your plans have a chance to come to fruition? you throw some pork on a bill that helps out the people that put you there. it's a cycle, it continues, it's the way it is, it's not all bad, it's not worth the uproar.

 

I'm sorry but that is a total copout. This is the same behavior that Wall Street exhibited WHILE HAVING NO DUTY TO REPRENT THE GOOD OF ANYONE BUT THEMSELVES, and yet they are being paraded and crucified as some kind of greedy pariahs. Congress does it, and they are just doing their jobs. That is a load of crap. Maybe if our representatives remembered to look out for the good of the country instead of themselves, things wouldn't have gotten nearly as bad as they have gotten, and continue to be.

[Reddy]

I'm sorry but that is a total copout. This is the same behavior that Wall Street exhibited WHILE HAVING NO DUTY TO REPRENT THE GOOD OF ANYONE BUT THEMSELVES, and yet they are being paraded and crucified as some kind of greedy pariahs. Congress does it, and they are just doing their jobs. That is a load of crap. Maybe if our representatives remembered to look out for the good of the country instead of themselves, things wouldn't have gotten nearly as bad as they have gotten, and continue to be.

you're totally missing the "doing good for their constituents" part of my argument aren't you?

[kapkomet]

you're totally missing the "doing good for their constituents" part of my argument aren't you?

No, I think you're missing it. It shouldn't be an excuse to just do what the hell ever you want carte blanche because it gets you elected. These people are supposed to be above themselves and be about we, the people.

[southsider2k5]

you're totally missing the "doing good for their constituents" part of my argument aren't you?

 

And you are missing the immediate gratification part of mine. Just because its "good" doesn't mean it is necesarily good in the long run, especially when we are running ginourmous debts to do this. If these things are really "good" let them stand up on their own merits. Why is that so scary? If a district really needs something, let it pass its own muster, instead of being hidden in something else because they know they can get away with it.