Porkbarrel Spending and the Economic Bailout

In an attempt to make the $700B economic bailout more palatable, lawmakers have apparently stuffed it with $110B of earmark (porkbarrel) spending. While some of these earmarks are arguable useful, like an tax credit for research and development and an increase in FDIC insurance, others are much less attractive (at least to me).

Here’s a sampling:

  • Creation of a seven-year cost recovery period for construction of a racetrack
  • A refund of excise taxes to Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands for rum
  • Income averaging for money received from the Exxon Valdez litigation
  • Provisions related to film and television productions
  • Extension/modification of duty suspension on wool products, and duty refunds
  • Exemption of a specific arrow for child archers from an excise tax

So tell me… Exactly how do these projects relate to saving our economy?

Source: CNN.com

19 Responses to “Porkbarrel Spending and the Economic Bailout”

  1. Anonymous

    Not only does crongress not have to tell eneyone what they sponsored but they can change the wording in the “official record” of anything they say while standing at the podium at the capital !!!!!!!!!!!!

    ALL politians and lawers ARE SCUM !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  2. Anonymous

    Frankly? I don’t think we ever had a free market to begin with. There is always going to be some kind of government intervention, because companies are only as good as the people that run them, and far too many people are skunks in hairless apes’ clothing. Someone’s got to play referee. But even without that there isn’t a “free market” when you can’t participate in your own little corner of the market without some big guy coming along and running over you. Whether it’s huge corporations running everything or a huge government running everything, we’ll get the same mess in the end. I don’t want ANY big behemoth running my life in complete disregard of my best interests. Period.

  3. Anonymous

    So tell me… Exactly how do these projects relate to saving our economy?

    They don’t.
    This always happens when a bill like this of huge importance is going through. They through a couple off beat items in as well to sweeten the deal.
    Sometimes you have to wander do they have are best interest in mind?

  4. Anonymous

    Why can’t I find the names of the congressmen (and women) that are responsible for the pork belly monies added on to the Economic Bail-out bill our government passed last week? It’s unbelievable that I can’t access it immediately. Where can I find this information?

  5. Anonymous

    It’s this kind of stuff being done by our government that is feeding the movement for Liberty and the increasing popularity of the Libertarian party.

    I think everyone knows that this is only going to end one way.

  6. Anonymous

    I’m very upset that the rescue package had to have over $100b in pork. what a shame and goes to show that individual politicians have their secured careers in mind over the security of americans. With that though, people are focusing on some of the outrageous pork; however, I am glad about the AMT, although it too shouldn’t have been included.

  7. Anonymous

    Niether party in Congress cares about free-market economics or even what is best for the nation long-term–they only care about appearing to do the right thing by maintaining the status quo while government slowly takes over more and more.

    Kudos to Jim DeMint and his ilk for taking a real stand against the Bill, unlike the fake stand against it a week ago which collapsed today.

  8. Anonymous

    This is purely speculation, but the VI one is probably because the sales for alcohol (you can bring 5 liters back home duty-free) have gone down ever since the airlines had to forbid bringing liquids on as carry-ons. It makes it more difficult to get it home, since you have to check it, and now that there are extra fees on checking bags with most airlines, it’ll get even worse. Never mind that tourism is down compared to last year and so they’re losing money from that. Helping their local economy helps the US citizens that live there.

    Of course, Captain Morgan (who just built a plant on St. Croix) could have just lobbied for it to increase their sales. I’m not really sure there’s a way to tell.

  9. Anonymous

    First off let me tell you that I am positively outraged that these elected officials of our government would be so brash, and or stupid as to add the “pork barrel spending” listed at the bottom of my comment. This kind of irresponsible, Lobyist driven Legislation helped to get the economy in this mess in the first place, now our inept politicians have the gall to add this garbage to a bill that is suposed to “save our economy” I think every politician that had anything to do with adding these things to this bill should imediatly be removed from office, and if possible,prosicuted for being at the very least irresponsible, possibly corrupt, and stupid for thinking the tax paying American public would accept such an atrocity in the first place.
    I would like to remind said Politicians that the Government is suposed to be “Of the people, by the people, and for the people” something that seems to have been forgotten, or at least swept under the rug.

    “Pork Barrel” added to the bail out bill, or whatever their calling it today.
    Creation of a seven-year cost recovery period for construction of a racetrack
    A refund of excise taxes to Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands for rum
    Income averaging for money received from the Exxon Valdez litigation
    Provisions related to film and television productions
    Extension/modification of duty suspension on wool products, and duty refunds
    Exemption of a specific arrow for child archers from an excise tax

Leave a Reply