How Congress Spends Your Money
How Congress Spends Your Money
This week, Congress is expected to pass an $80 billion energy bill. The bill is filled with billions in pork for the energy industry.
The Washington Post provides insight into how carefully the conservative-run Congress spends your money:
As House-Senate conferees worked late into the night this week on the final paragraphs of the legislation, a proposal was made, and approved, to provide $250,000 for a study of “irradiated fuel” — although many of the conference participants acknowledged they had no idea what that was.
In case anyone in Congress cares, according to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, “irradiated fuel” is a type of high-level, radioactive waste “discharged from commercial nuclear power reactors.”
UPDATE: I’m told that, in this case, “irradiated fuel” refers not to waste from nuclear power plants (which is the standard meaning) but the use of irradiation in refining.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
mmmmmm...irradiated fuel...
July 27th, 2005 at 10:55 amWell, this isn't so bad. In the scheme of things 250K isn't that much money. They probably should have figured out what it was, though.
July 27th, 2005 at 11:10 amYou have to put $250,000 in perspective. In this administration, that is less than half the cost of one day of funding the War in Iraq. It will probably be spent on on a part time researcher who will use the internet and check the sites of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. At least it is providing employment for someone.
July 27th, 2005 at 11:18 amoverall a quarter of a million dollars in the federal governments budget is pocket change. I think the huge money to build a bus stop in Alaska was a better story.
July 27th, 2005 at 11:32 amYes, $250,000 isn't a huge amount of money in an $80,000,000,000 bill. But, this is one example, and the fact that the majority of people didn't know what they were funding is scary. Even if they only had a basic grasp of what they were funding they would be better able to make a decision.
I would have hoped that congresscritters would, at least, pass the information they have to some researchers and say "what is this about?" But I'm just not cynical enough I guess.
If they fund something they don't know about for $250,000 how many such sums can we get past them? How big does the item have to be before they question it? $800,000,000 is only 1% of that budget, yet True Majority reckon that $2,500,000,000 is all that is needed to fully fund the Headstart program. If they can get 1/3rd of the way there then shouldn't they do that? Yes they would have to cut 3,200 $250,000 programs to get that $800,000,000 but perhaps trimming some of the higher funded programs would be a good idea. After all, if you have a mere $10,000,000 budget cutting $250,000 would likely be possible without too much effort.
Z.
July 27th, 2005 at 11:41 amOver on the social security thread, one of the posters speculated that the Democratic Party was bereft of ideas and that negative attacks were all they could offer. Relevant to the energy debate, I would offer this progressive alternative plan to the madness that is Dick Cheney's giveaway to Big Energy: http://www.apolloalliance.org/
July 27th, 2005 at 11:44 amIn my personal budget, a $5 coffee at Starbucks is pocket change. But when I quit going to Starbucks, I found I had a lot more money at the end of the year. That's how budgets work. You nickle and dime yourself into prosperity or bankruptcy.
July 27th, 2005 at 12:00 pmI would not have thought this was about fuel from a Nuclear Reactor being studied.
July 27th, 2005 at 12:24 pmI would have thought they wanted to see if fuel(Oil) was still usable after having become contaminated with radiation.
Because didn't the Arabs say that they were planning on contaminating their oil with radioactive waste if they were ever attacked by another nation?
This is, probably, the biggest problem in America today - the fact that nobody wants to know any more than is spoon fed to them. Idiots will vote and have no idea who or what they are voting for. It ALWAYS comes down to education. If half of the repubs actually knew what they were doing, they might shriek in horror.
Children are the most neglected of our society. We won't fund schools so that everyone has their own book, own meal and own desk. Some schools don't even have air conditioning and kids work in boot camp-like atmospheres. I can understand why some don't like the public school system, but don't they ever wonder WHY it is like it is? Teachers and social workers are some of the least paid by our government. As they continue to grant each other raise after raise each and every year, minimum wage is stagnant (and really, no one person could possibly live on that, much less a family where one stays at home), teachers see no raises and social workers are WAY overworked. What is the common thread - children.
We have some excellent programs in this country, however, we DO NOT fund them appropriately. I am sick of hearing that we don't have the money - that is WEAK!!!
SHOW ME THE MONEY!!!
The way I see it, when we start caring more about our children than our wallets, we will start to be a cohesive group of countrymen.
July 27th, 2005 at 12:27 pmcynical ex-hippie: I get where you're coming from.
July 27th, 2005 at 12:30 pmWhen I quit smoking I was astounded by how much money I actually saved. After one year of not smoking I had an extra $5000 in my bank account. When you are buying cigarettes by the pack every day you don't realize how much it is really costing you. Not to mention what the cost is to your health.
There was a blurb in the NY Post yesterday about the son of Jeb Bush being a consultant to the Chinese in thier takeover of Uncol (or whatever) oil company - anyone surprised?
July 27th, 2005 at 12:45 pmUnocal - another amoral pile of money trying to turn itself in a bigger amoral pile of money. No not surprised at all. Interesting I found that the free-market, free-trade doodads are just singing the praises of globalization. Until that is, someone tries to takeover their amoral pile of money. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/13/AR2005071301769_pf.html this is not the only exmaple http://uk.biz.yahoo.com/050624/94/flx4m.html
Note that in each case, these corporations are defended as being a national security asset and as such should not be allowed to be subject to the free-market. OK, if they are a national asset, how about distributing all their profits equally to the nation, one person at a time? So many hypocrites, so little time.
July 27th, 2005 at 12:53 pmcynical,
When you're a spoiled legacy of a long line of old money, and have the freedom to bankrupt 3 companies without significant personal penalty - you never have to learn practial budgeting. This lack of personal monetary experience or fiscal responsibility is why Shrub is so incompetent and irresponsible with OUR money! He's never had to learn how to be an adult - no one forced him to...
July 27th, 2005 at 12:56 pmProgressive,
I think you are making stereotypically comments about Republicans in general. I live in a school district where they are rated the fifth best in the state. How did they get that way? They are funded with property tax levies. We continue to vote for increases so that our school can maintain its excellence. In poorer districts, generally inner cities, which are mainly controlled by the democratic party, the tax base may not be there or they vote down any attempt to raise taxes to improve the schools. So don't tell me that I don't know what I'm voting for and I don't want a handout!
July 27th, 2005 at 1:32 pmThe exception proves the rule.
July 27th, 2005 at 1:38 pmsteve, if you were democrat, the republicans would say, "You never met a tax you didn't like." That's their talking point. Republicans would never admit to raising taxes for any reason.
July 27th, 2005 at 2:02 pmProgressive, you should know - Republicans always cite the 'exception' to prove the rule. For instance the 'exception' cited here is one where schools are fully funded and the students thrive, yet republicans cite the 'exceptions' of inner city schools that don't have full funding as the 'rule' the public funding doesn't work. Frankly your side is always rank with manipulation and self delusion - get a clue!
July 27th, 2005 at 2:09 pmHow about the fact that the aides who were involved in the TraitorGate got huge raises! Talk about using the american people's money to reward incompetence and traitorous actions!
These guys are scum!
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Rove_gets_r_0727.html
July 27th, 2005 at 2:31 pmBrief Break in The Heatwave
Here are the online blogs for today's WB 42 5:30 Report with Doug Krile, plus a couple of extras.
July 27th, 2005 at 3:37 pmIrradiating fossil fuels would only make sense if one were concerned about some type of organic contamination by bacteria or fungus or something similar. Why would anyone want to make any of the constituent carbon, oxygen or hydrogen atoms radioactive, unless one were trying to trace sources of fuels? Irradiating petroleum and even coal runs the risk of making the heavy metals in the fuels radioactive, which further exacerbates the problems associated with thinks like mercury and lead. This must be one prime, first class, research boondoggle. Whoever wrote the grant request deserves the Medal of Freedom before they're executed.
July 27th, 2005 at 3:47 pmBush names one of Cheney's task force members and Enron buddy to head Federal Energy Commission
http://www.jasonleopold.blogspot.com
Energy Adviser Who Solicited Enron to Help Write Nat’l Energy Policy to Be Named Chair of FERC
By Jason Leopold
© 2005 Jason Leopold
The audacity inside the Bush administration never ceases to amaze.
The latest example of chutzpah from Bush and co. is the announcement that Joseph Kelliher, a former policy adviser with the Department of Energy who currently serves as a commissioner on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the agency that controls the country's natural gas industry, hydroelectric projects, electric utilities, and oil pipelines and has played a critical role in the deregulation of those industries, will be named by the White House Thursday to chair FERC.
President Bush had previously picked Rebecca Klein, the former Republican head of the Texas Public Utilities Commission and a close friend of the president, to chair FERC but red flags were raised recently during a routine FBI background check on Klein which forced the president to choose a new chairman at the last minute. The White House would not comment on the FBI’s probe on Klein. Klein did not return numerous calls for comment.
Still, news of Kelliher’s appointment to chair FERC came late Wednesday as a welcome surprise to many industry lobbyists and energy executives who view him as a staunch supporter of the free-market principles of deregulation and an advocate for eliminating regulatory restrictions that interferes with the free-market, despite the fact those rules are in place to protect consumers from energy price gouging and market manipulation that took place prior to the Enron scandal four years ago and, to some extent, is still somewhat routine in various parts of the country.
However, what’s most troubling about Kelliher’s appointment to head FERC, a role in which his main priority will now be to protect consumers from the manipulative tactics of the very industry he enjoys a cozy relationship with, is the relentless lobbying of bigwigs in the energy industry in early 2001, as a member of Vice President Dick Cheney’s energy task force, to help write President Bush’s National Energy Policy in such a way that would be financially beneficial to energy corporationsâ€â€at the expense of consumers.
The extent to which Kelliher’s went to solicit key players in the energy industry to help write the National Energy Policy became apparent in 2003 when Judicial Watch, a bipartisan watchdog group that sued Vice President Dick Cheney to gain access to Cheney’s list of industry insiders who participated in secret meetings with Cheney’s energy task force, won a legal battle that forced the White House to release several hundred pages of task force related documents.
One such document, a March 10, 2001 email to energy lobbyist Dana Contratto, was damning in that Kelliher asked Contratto if he was “King� or “Il Duce� “what would you include in a national energy policy, especially with respect to natural gas issues?"
MORE...www.jasonleopold.blogspot.com
July 29th, 2005 at 6:39 pm1439
Please visit some helpful info on 1514
November 5th, 2005 at 3:48 pmchase
You may find it interesting to take a look at the pages about auto loans capital one auto insurance
November 10th, 2005 at 1:15 amback gammon game play
amphibology mysteriousness darting,asylum proletariat?discerning doing knave concatenates backgemon on line http://www.postagepaid.net/backgemon-on-line.html
December 28th, 2005 at 8:11 pmfree employment background check
I'm with the earlier poster, this seems like a good idea.
March 25th, 2008 at 11:06 amCash Advance Loans
Awesome loan program providing online cash advance for US residents.
March 29th, 2008 at 9:40 amGet Money
Debt Consolidate
April 11th, 2008 at 9:09 pm