Monday, January 14, 2013

Apparently Guam Needs Hurricane Sandy Relief

Two major pieces of proposed legislation have taken the forefront in providing taxpayer's money for reconstruction in the wake of super-storm Sandy.

The first is H.R. 41. It is a massive, $33 Billion bill, not counting amendments.

The second is H.R. 152, a hefty $17 Billion bill, before amendments, that cuts some of the superfluous spending in H.R.41.

However, H.R. 152 contains proposed amendments that bring back much of that extraneous spending that our nation cannot afford.

H.R. 41, with the so-called Frelinghuysen Amendment has 44 co-sponsors. Among them are some well-known socialists such as Maxine Waters, Jose Serrano, and Carolyn McCarthy. This should not come as a surprise to anybody. Neither should amendments to fund items that are only tangentially related to hurricane relief.

What should come as a surprise is the boldness in some of the amended spending requests. It calls for funds to improve facilities on Guam. Looking at a map, I cannot find Guam on the Northeastern Seaboard. The only Guam I can find isn't even in the Atlantic Ocean. It is in the Pacific and would provide no early warning to the East Coast of the USA. Even if Guam were in the Atlantic, improvements would still only be a tangential expenditure. It would still not be for reconstruction and infrastructure restoration in New York or New Jersey.

The $16 Billion difference in the bills consists of many other items such as the Guam project. It contains increased funding to the Department of Homeland Security in order to boost Immigration and Customs Enforcement. While we may need more and better trained ICE agents, this is not something that should be tied to a disaster relief bill. It provides $15 Million for launchpad repairs for the NASA facilities in Florida. Florida was marginally impacted, at most, by Sandy. The amended expenditures to H.R. 41 bring the bill to a price-tag over $60 Billion.

Political correspondent Jamie Dupree enumerates more of the jaw-dropping "pork" of these bills. 

What this illustrates is a point I made in reference to veterans' bills. The IAVA rates congress members on their performance in regards to veterans' issues by the way they vote on legislation titled as bills to support veterans. The IAVA has given grossly incorrect unfavorable reviews to conservatives for their voting against these bills. They make the false claim that socialists better support veterans' issues.

Just like with the Sandy Relief legislation, these veterans' bills contained numerous earmarks, clauses, and amendments that took funding away from veterans and allocated it towards items that had nothing to do with caring for our retired, wounded, and former military service members. Basically, the IAVA gives high rankings to those who seek to steal money from the citizens of our nation under the guise of assisting veterans with every intention to use those funds elsewhere.

It's not just relief bills or veterans' bills. Socialists and entrenched RINOs do this with each and every spending bill they can amend.

This should serve as a lesson to anybody wishing to comment for or against any Senator or Representative that has voted on a spending or budget bill. Read the bill before you criticize. If one of these politicians voted  against a bill because it spends ridiculous amounts of our money on items other than the purpose stated in the title, they did the right thing. If you laud them for voting for some spending bill because it helps you or some hand-out mooching bum that you know, read the bill and see if that funding is really going where they claim.