OOOOPS!

"It [the stimulus bill] includes ....$140 million for something called 'volcano monitoring....Instead of monitoring volcanoes, what Congress should be monitoring is the eruption of spending in Washington, D.C."

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, February 24, 2009 in the Republican Response to the Presidential Address

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Alaska's Mount Redoubt volcano erupted five times overnight, sending an ash plume more than 9 miles into the air in the volcano's first emissions in nearly 20 years.

Ash from Alaska's volcanos is like a rock fragment with jagged edges and has been used as an industrial abrasive. It can injure skin, eyes and breathing passages. The young, the elderly and people with respiratory problems are especially susceptible to ash-related health problems. Ash can also cause damage engines in planes, cars and other vehicles.

Alaska Airlines on Monday canceled 19 flights in and out of the Anchorage international airport because of the ash."

AP reports, March 23, 2009



We as Americans have to understand that not ALL government spending is either wasteful or bad. What is "pork" in one man's district can save lives in another! (I wonder if Sarah Palin approves of spending tax dollars on Hurricane Monitoring?)

PORK AND THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER

There has been a lot of talk lately concerning "earmarks" and Congress. "Pork Barrel Spending" is what many Republicans refer to it as! Yet in conversation, most people really aren't very sure of the exact definition of the term "earmark".

For the record, "earmark" refers to money appropriated by a single member of Congress and directed to a specific destination by that member. Often it will benefit a contributor to that politician in some way. For years, the member of Congress did not even have to publicly acknowledge that he/she had requested the money. It was a very secretive process that was very useful in earning good will with high dollar contributors.

That secrecy is what led to our current distaste with the process. Because while the process HAS been abused (frequently by both sides of the political aisle) the truth is that many of those earmarks provide much needed help to state and local governments.

You see "pork" is often in the eye of the beholder. Let's look at a recent example raised by Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal. In his response to President Obama's recent speech, he labeled as wasteful, money "earmarked" for volcano monitoring.

"Instead of monitoring volcanoes, what Congress should be monitoring is the eruption of spending in Washington,"

Jindal said. It sounds kind of silly. VOLCANO MONITORING! Sort of a geophysical hall monitor funded by wasteful politicians.

But if you live in any of the states that currently have active volcanoes (Washington, Alaska, Hawaii, California and anyone close to Yellowstone National Park) you might think this extra $140 million dollars is money well spent....no matter how it got in the budget! Some have suggested that if the money to monitor volcanoes is cut that we should cut an equal amount from the National Weather Service's Hurricane Prediction budget.

Gov. Jindal didn't complain about one of the wasteful earmarks mentioned recently by Sen. John McCain. Sen. McCain wants to know why $6.6 million dollars has been appropriated for termite research in New Orleans! During these trying economic times, why spend that much money on studying bugs? Gov. Jindal's silence speaks volumes. You see, there are few termites in Arizona, but it is widely speculated that termites in New Orleans contributed to the failure of the levees. So Gov. Jindal for some odd reason doesn't see this as wasteful. Pork is always in the eye of the beholder.

The real problem with earmarks is not necessarily the money...it's the accountability. In the past, there was no way to track what had been added and who it had been added by. And that's all changed now. Democrats have instituted a rule that requires all appropriation earmarks to be made public. This doesn't mean that there will be no future abuse. It doesn't mean that the process does not still need more modification. But we need to remember that all earmarks are not bad. Getting rid of ALL earmarks is a little like throwing out the baby with the bathwater.