Jump to content

Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.

- - - - -

Congress sneaks pork into Sandy relief bill

  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#1    F3SS



  • Member
  • 9,791 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pittsburgh

  • Father of Twins

Posted 29 December 2012 - 06:01 PM

These people are so out of control. Man, I feel like revolting so bad. I'm completely sick of these people taking advantage of us. We need to be able to fire these scumbags between elections. We need short limits.


The Senate approved a $60.4 billion recovery package on Friday intended to help the states affected by Hurricane Sandy in November. Appearing on “Cavuto” on Friday night, American Majority Action spokesman Ron Meyer said the bill was also packed with tons of “pork” spending, some of which won’t even occur until after 2013.

Some of the pork spending reportedly goes towards projects that have nothing to do with Hurricane Sandy or the victims, including millions of dollars for tree planting in areas untouched by Sandy and a new roof for the Smithsonian Museum. When an elected representative appropriates government spending for local projects to help his or her district, it is know as “pork barrel” spending.

“Why was this in the emergency bill for Sandy? It doesn’t make any sense.” Only $1 out of every $6 — $9 billion of the $60 billion will be spent in 2013. That means 85 percent doesn’t come until 2014 and beyond. That’s not immediate relief. What this bill is fundamentally is a pork bill.”

Instead, Meyer suggested the Senate should’ve passed a $9 billion “loan” to the states affected by Sandy instead of sneaking in all the wasteful spending before the end of the year.

“It’s disgraceful to load a bill like this that has good motives, that has good intentions that is going to help people, with pork,” he added. “Why are you putting your own projects in it. It’s disgraceful. It’s typical of Washington.”

In an email to TheBlaze, Meyer explained that $1 out of every $20 spent in the Sandy bill will go to “non-relief-related pork.”

#2    preacherman76


    Ntwadumela- He who greets with fire

  • Member
  • 12,644 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:in the depths of my mind

Posted 29 December 2012 - 06:10 PM

Unfreakin real. Short of revolt, these people are just never going to get it.

Some things are true, even if you dont believe them.

#3    Ealdwita


    Hwít éoredmæcg

  • Member
  • 5,275 posts
  • Joined:08 Jun 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 29 December 2012 - 06:43 PM

I'm becoming increasingly convinced that a similar element exists within the millions of £'s of 'Foreign Aid' scattered all over the world by the handful by our wonderful, caring government for vital projects like lesbian coffee mornings in Zambia and guinea-pig rearing in Venezuela! The aid can't be reaching the people for whome it was intended, because things are getting no better in the so-called 'Third World' according to theTV ads which seem to blossom at this time of year!

I'll let you complete the old saying "You can always tell when a politician's lying because.............!"

"Gæð a wyrd swa hio scel, ac gecnáwan þín gefá!": "Fate goes ever as she shall, but know thine enemy!".
I can teach you with a quip, if I've a mind; I can trick you into learning with a laugh; Oh, winnow all my folly and you'll find, A grain or two of truth among the chaff!
(The Yeoman of the Guard ~ Gilbert and Sullivan)

#4    AsteroidX


    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 29 December 2012 - 06:45 PM

Gotta agree with the above. My community is doing well. Sometimes its nice to be away from the politics of Washington.

#5    Hasina


    Maximillion Hotpocket Puckershuttle

  • Member
  • 3,050 posts
  • Joined:28 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Female


Posted 29 December 2012 - 06:58 PM

It's things like this that just whack optimism in the face for anything to ever be done by the government as wholey 'good'.

Posted Image


#6    lightly


    metaphysical therapist

  • Member
  • 6,991 posts
  • Joined:01 Apr 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Michigan U.S.A.

  • "The future ain't what it used to be"
    Yogi Berra

Posted 29 December 2012 - 07:14 PM

...  didn't the Smithsonian  Roofs  get damaged by Sandy's  winds ?   If so,  maybe it makes sense,,  for once?    Disaster relief??

Important:  The above may contain errors, inaccuracies, omissions, and other limitations.

#7    rashore


    Non-Corporeal Being

  • 8,245 posts
  • Joined:26 Feb 2010
  • Gender:Female

Posted 29 December 2012 - 07:30 PM

Well, it passed the Senate, but apparently it still has to pass the House. So it's not quite through yet.

A couple of the Smithsonian buildings did report damage after Sandy. The one in New York closed for a while, but to my understanding they are back open again. So maybe that particular bit is somewhat justified. But some of the other pork claims being reported seem totally unjustifiable.

Your ad hominem connotes your sciolism. Now that is some funny commentary.

#8    F3SS



  • Member
  • 9,791 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pittsburgh

  • Father of Twins

Posted 29 December 2012 - 07:55 PM

About the Smithsonians... If there was damage or even fully blown off entire roofs that particular cost should only be in the millions, low double digits at the very most. This bill is in the tens of billions, or hundreds and thousands of millions. Even if the museums aren't the best example of waste, they hardly justify any reasonable reasoning for accepting this bill and to top it off its supposed an emergency aid bill yet 85% of it isn't supposed to be spent for two years after the disaster. That doesn't sound like much of an emergency response to me.

Edited by -Mr_Fess-, 29 December 2012 - 07:56 PM.

#9    supervike


    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,208 posts
  • Joined:16 May 2007
  • Gender:Male

Posted 31 December 2012 - 01:44 AM

Not really surprised.

The title would be more surprising if it were  CONGRESS SNEAKS PORK INTO MOSQUE.

#10    Dredimus


    Big Brother

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,169 posts
  • Joined:21 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Huntsville, Al

Posted 02 January 2013 - 01:55 PM

And apparently this has been scrapped due to the new folks arriving on the floor today. Even though it passed the Senate in 2012 it has to start over again.

#11    pallidin


    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,080 posts
  • Joined:09 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Somewhere south of the North Pole

  • "When life gets you down... swim with a dolphin"

Posted 03 January 2013 - 09:54 AM

How I wish the "Line-item veto" was passed.

But I suppose that will never happen... too many congressional self-interests having nothing to do with the original Bill, but "riding" with the Bill, else they won't give a "yea" vote.

How sad.

Edit: Congressman... "I will support the Sandy Relief Bill if there is also a rider to approve a 12.5 million dollar expansion of a road in Alaska"
That's fictitious, but not at all far from the truth of how "riders" work.

Edited by pallidin, 03 January 2013 - 10:01 AM.

#12    Rafterman



  • Member
  • 7,409 posts
  • Joined:27 Sep 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Upstate

Posted 03 January 2013 - 05:50 PM

These are the games they play.  Sneak a lot of pork and/or unrelated spending into a bill and then scream when the other party votes against it.  The same thing happened with the Violence Against Women Bill and any number of others.

"For me, it is better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."
                                                                                                                                           - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World:  Science as a Candle in the Dark

#13    F3SS



  • Member
  • 9,791 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pittsburgh

  • Father of Twins

Posted 29 January 2013 - 04:34 AM

View PostDredimus, on 02 January 2013 - 01:55 PM, said:

And apparently this has been scrapped due to the new folks arriving on the floor today. Even though it passed the Senate in 2012 it has to start over again.

#14    Beckys_Mom


    Sarcastic Muppet..!

  • Member
  • 51,196 posts
  • Joined:01 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Ireland

  • "I hate pretentious people. I mean, what is the point in applying exorbitantly extensive vocabulary, it is just straightforwardly unnecessary".

Posted 29 January 2013 - 02:41 PM

As I am not fully clued into politics..  This may sound stupid to ask, but if I don't ask I wont have a clue  -  What is pork when linked to politics?   Is it like a metaphor . like - Bringing home the bacon - money?   I am not sure what that all means...?

Edited by Beckys_Mom, 29 January 2013 - 02:41 PM.

Posted ImageRAW Berris... Dare you enter?

If there's a heaven...I hope to hell I get there !

#15    Uncle Sam

Uncle Sam

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,597 posts
  • Joined:26 Jul 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

Posted 29 January 2013 - 03:24 PM

View Postpreacherman76, on 29 December 2012 - 06:10 PM, said:

Unfreakin real. Short of revolt, these people are just never going to get it.

Of course it will take a revolution to change this.

Edited by Uncle Sam, 29 January 2013 - 03:26 PM.

A man's ethical behaviour should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death. - Albert Einstein

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users