Shocking News, Stimulus Dollars Being Wasted!

Like Captain Renault, I'm shocked at the LA Times article on wasteful spending in the stimulus package. From the Times article:

A report due to be released today by a Republican senator contends the Obama administration's stimulus program is fraught with waste and incompetence -- evidenced by a turtle crossing in northern Florida that will cost more than $3 million and a snafu in which thousands of Social Security checks went out to people who had died.

I feel like this guy:



But what do you expect? The federal government shells out money to spend on projects that private businesses and individuals, not to mention state and local governments wouldn't fund. That makes it ALL waste, if you ask me.

BTW, Dean has more news on the porkulus front, with swindlers and con men taking center stage.

Obama backs pet projects and signs spending bill

Yep, that's the headline from the AP story on the stimulus porkage. So Obama breaks another promise, this time to end earmarks, yawn. But he has the chutzpah to actually defend the whole thing. And, in his never ending quest to be seen as Bush III, Obama also issued a "signing statement." From the same AP article:

On another potentially controversial matter, the president also issued a "signing statement" with the bill, saying several of its provisions raised constitutional concerns and would be taken merely as suggestions. He has criticized President George W. Bush for often using such statements to claim the right to ignore portions of new laws, and on Monday he said his administration wouldn't follow those issued by Bush unless authorized by the new attorney general.

I need to take a quick break to see how this is playing over at Daily Kos, where vituperative criticisms of signing statements were logged during the Bush years.

OK, I'm back and admit to being somewhat shocked. First, most of the Daily Kooks have chosen to ignore the whole "signing statement" imbroglio. However, I found two interesting articles. The first, pretty much lambastes Obama for a heap of constitutional violations including the signing statement. Pretty amazing, but of course that post is not popular with the readers. The second article, states that Obama's position on signing statements is different from Bush's. This article asserts that unlike Bush, Obama's signing statements only indicate the potential for a constitutional concern. However, no evidence is supplied that Bush issued statements for any different reason.

A little historical context on the whole thing is available at Wikipedia, of course. Key facts: Signing statements have been around since James Monroe. Their use has accelerated over the last generation. George Bush was not a pioneer in their use, but certainly engendered more controversy by the way he used them.

In B-Daddy's opinion, the practice undermines the constitution. If the President thinks a provision of a law is unconstitutional, he needs to veto the whole thing.

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Will that slow down the pace of legislation? You betcha. Is that a bad thing? No way!

And of course the left is generally hypocritical in their hysterical criticism of Bush over this and their silence or acquiesence when Obama does it.

Stimulus Passes

I am sure that you read or heard that the stimulus monstrosity passed both Houses and is headed to the President for signature. I am just horrified because:

1. The stimulus will not actually help the economy recover. It's impact is too delayed. The wheels of bureaucracy grind slowly and by the time any of the spending hits the street the economy will already be growing.

2. That said, the increased debt will slow or choke off the recovery. As the recovery gains steam, government borrowing will crowd out private investment and lead to inflation. (Gold prices were up close to 4% this week.)

3. Who knows what evil lurks in the heart of this package. Bloggers and talk radio put the spotlight on the "Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research" which was a first step to rationing health care and limiting treatments based on cost. That provision was watered down to $1.1 billion to study comparative treatment cost effectiveness. But since no one seems to have read the whole thing, what else is buried that threatens our liberty?

4. Republicans did not even attempt a filibuster. Opposing this bill required dramatic action, but the GOP was unable to get their act together in opposition.

5. The Buy American provisions in the bill will only invite trade retaliation, which historically, have been very harmful to economic recovery.

I am upset and very down about what this means for our future. Sorry.

Creating a Climate of Fear

Dean has some great insight on the stimulus porkage over at BwD. One of his many great points is that the Democrats are doing exactly what they always accuse Republicans of, namely, creating a climate of fear. Meanwhile, Professor Perry, at Carpe Diem, has posted a number of articles showing how the recession is a) not as bad as portrayed in the media and b) will be over before stimulus can make it worse. (By the way, reading Carpe Diem every day is like taking a class in applied economics, I highly recommend it, especially in these uncertain times.)

Meanwhile, Democrat spokesperson below has a tough time defending the pork in this package.