Warning: This blog is political in nature.

If you are sensitive to political commentary,
please go back to my main Random Thoughts blog.

If you like political discussion, you may also like my Political Positions blog.
Showing posts with label pork. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pork. Show all posts

Thursday, July 2, 2009

VA: Rick Boucher votes to increase taxes

I live in southwest Virginia. My US Representative, Rick Boucher, voted to approve the "American Clean Energy and Security Act".

This act is 1200 pages long and includes BILLIONS in pork, including 300 pages that was added early in the morning before the vote. Worse for us, it includes the so-called "cap-and-trade" provisions.

The Wall Street Journal says that the bill will "impose crushing costs on...consumers" (Review & Outlook, June 25, 2009). Estimates are that residential electricity costs may increase 90%.

Despite what anyone says, this act will dramatically increase energy costs, and when we can least afford them.

And it will cost jobs. Much of US "green jobs" policy, which is in this act, is based on Spain's policy. Policies that has caused Spain's unemployment to go to 17.4% as of April.

To put it simply, Rep. Rick Boucher voted to increase our energy bills as much as 90%. And he voted to support a bill that will increase unemployment even worse than it already is.

If you don't live near me, check here to see how your Representative voted.

And vote against him or her the next chance you get. I will.

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Bill for a specific purpose is only 80% for that purpose, and that's fine?!?

A bill to fund military operations includes $5 billion in lending to the International Monetary Fund, money that some expect will be lent to countries like Iran and North Korea. Money that will be borrowed (by us) largely from China, since we don't have it.

But the Democrat House Majority Leader, says that it's not a problem since 80% of the bill is still going to the military.

That's part of the problem. As long as over half of the funds of a bill go to the EXPRESS PURPOSE OF A BILL go to that purpose, the bill is "close enough" on target. That's why they have no problem with "pork". They are including in a bill $5 BILLION that is for something entirely different? I'm not even getting into the wrongness (or whatever) of what that money is for. If they want the money for IMF, put a bill through for that; don't tack it onto something else.