Bush, Congress fleece U.S. taxpayers : Lone Star Times

Bush, Congress fleece U.S. taxpayers

by Matt Bramanti · 08/10/2005 3:15 pm

I’m normally a big supporter of President Bush, but this really steamed me up. Today, the president signed a bloated, $286 billion highway bill. Here’s how he justified it to workers at a Caterpillar plant in Montgomery, Ill.:

"I’m here to sign the highway bill because I believe by signing this bill, when it’s fully implemented, there’s going to be more demand for the machines you make here," Bush said, adding that a piece of Caterpillar equipment is used at his ranch.

"Because there’s more demand for the machines you make here," he said, "there are going to be more jobs created around places like this facility."

AAAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!

Would somebody tell this man — and Congress — that enormous public-works projects are not the way to grow the economy? Yes, building more roads means Caterpillar will sell more bulldozers and hire more people. We could also dig a gigantic hole and dump tax money into it, increasing shovel sales and boosting America’s critical hole-digging sector. Heaven forbid that the taxpayers should keep their own money. They might spend it on foolish things like HDTVs, caffeine-laced beer, private education or charitable giving.

One of the most egregious abuses is in Alaska, where ostensibly Republican Congressman Don Young secured $223 million for a bridge. Must be one hell of a useful bridge, right?

Wrong. You see, this "bridge to nowhere" will connect Ketchikan, Alaska (population: 8,004) to Gravina Island (population: 50). There’s already a reliable ferry service between the two burgs, running every 15 minutes. Basically the only thing on Gravina Island is an airport, with only 6-7 flights a day.

$223 million to build a bridge in a tiny speck of a town that’s not even connected to the North American road grid. Thanks, Congress. Thanks, Mr. President.

UPDATE: The editors of USA Today had the right idea.

Filed Under Uncategorized ·

Comments

7 Responses to “Bush, Congress fleece U.S. taxpayers”

Rahman on August 10th, 2005 at 5:24 pm

Surprise, surprise, we all know how easy it is to spend money when it is not yours or you have not earned it.
There have never been a better time to rule than now when most citizens are disengage from workings of the government and are too busy keeping their sorry lives together. We are too occupied with the notion as to how to pay our taxes so they can be wasted at the Govt level and we don’t even receive a letter of thanks from them. Gone are the days when a decent man with a clear conscious will run for a public office with a genuine belief that he could make a difference if elected.Now he runs to make a difference in his life styles and those who give him big $$$$$$$$. How times have changed.
todd brooks on August 10th, 2005 at 6:37 pm

Oh for the love of God! Can we PLEASE pressure Congress to give the President line item veto?
Ted on August 10th, 2005 at 8:13 pm

I thought the day would never come. I actually agree with Mr. Bramanti. It must be very very cold in H…

BRAMANTI RESPONDS: For the millionth time, call me Matt. My dad is Mr. Bramanti.
sc on August 10th, 2005 at 8:59 pm

It may cost more, but if we excavated New York and moved it to alaska it may be worth the $$
Al Smith on August 10th, 2005 at 9:57 pm

Even the residents of Ketchikan don’t want the bridge to nowhere. Most of us think this is a complete waste of the taxpayers money.
John Olds on August 11th, 2005 at 1:30 pm

It has been tried and the Supreme Court struck it down as unconsitutional. Apparently it would require a constitutional amendment which may not be likely to happen. We really should convince our representatives to make this a Constitutional amendment. Here is some information from Cato on it from back in 98. Byrd was one of the two Democrat senators bringing the case before the Supreme Court.

http://www.cato.org/dailys/8-06-98.html
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/06/25/scotus.lineitem/
Jaime on August 11th, 2005 at 6:27 pm

http://blog.lewrockwell.com/lewrw/archives/008651.html#more

A slave could own no property, but from early times it was customary to give the slave a peculium, a fund that he could administer as if it belonged to him. Technically, this sum belonged to the master, but to some extent it was treated as a separate estate with which the master did not interfere except for good reason. [p.40]

(snip)