Difference between revisions of "Pork-barrel legislation"
m (grammar in intro) |
DavidB4-bot (Talk | contribs) m (→top: HTTP --> HTTPS [#1], replaced: http://www.cnsnews.com → https://www.cnsnews.com (2)) |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | '''Pork-barrel legislation''' is [[legislation]] that brings [[federal]] money to a particular [[Congress | + | '''Pork-barrel legislation''' is [[legislation]] that brings [[federal]] money to a particular [[Congress]]man's [[Congressional district|district]] for the primary purpose of enriching the members of that district. Pork projects can take the form of spending not requested by any federal agency, or locating spending requested by a federal agency within the district. Pork barrel legislation, also known as just "pork" often in the form of an[[earmark]]. Conservatives consider pork to be wasteful of [[taxpayer]]'s dollars. |
| − | Pork is often added at the closing minutes to larger bills such as Labor/Heath & Human Services Bill or to Emergency War Funds. Since pork barrel is not a traditional government expense presented for approval by congressional committee, billions of taxpayer's dollars can be spent.<ref> | + | Pork continues, in spite of being wasteful, due to the principles of public choice economics. Each pork project has concentrated benefits, so the supporters of that pork project eagerly pursue it; however a pork project has distributed costs, so detractors have reduced incentive to follow through. A developer might stand to make tens of millions of dollars off of a pork project, the project will waste that money, but the individual tax payer liability is just a few pennies to a few dollars each. However, with thousands of pork projects every year that tiny liability multiplies and becomes a tremendous tax burden. |
| + | |||
| + | [[Keynesian economics]] look at pork as a positive thing, because they think about the economic effect of the extra spending. They ignore the spending that will not happen because individuals will no longer have the money due to high taxes. The spending that no longer happens due to pork expropriations would have been to purchase things that people want, rather than to purchase things that people do not. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Pork is often added at the closing minutes to larger bills such as Labor/Heath & Human Services Bill or to Emergency War Funds. Since pork barrel is not a traditional government expense presented for approval by congressional committee, billions of taxpayer's dollars can be spent.<ref>https://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200807/POL20080707a.html , CNSNews Congress Loads Bill With $277 Million in 'Pork, July 7, 2008</ref> Some bills exceed $20 Billion in Pork. | ||
Examples of pork: | Examples of pork: | ||
| Line 8: | Line 12: | ||
* $74 million for peanut storage <ref>http://www.examiner.com/a-619204~Congress_loads_up__20_billion_in_pork.html , The Examiner, Congress loads up $20 billion in pork, March 14, 2007</ref> | * $74 million for peanut storage <ref>http://www.examiner.com/a-619204~Congress_loads_up__20_billion_in_pork.html , The Examiner, Congress loads up $20 billion in pork, March 14, 2007</ref> | ||
* $320 million for a bridge in Alaska dubbed "The Bridge To Nowhere" | * $320 million for a bridge in Alaska dubbed "The Bridge To Nowhere" | ||
| + | * Sugar tariffs cost Americans billions of dollars a year, and concentrate that money in a few congressional districts in Southern Florida | ||
| + | * The F-35 project is a plane that does not work, and costs billions to make, but the factories are spread around the country (increasing the cost, and reducing the quality) in key congressional districts | ||
| − | The politicians claim that there is scrutiny and "it can be cut out at any time.". <ref> | + | The politicians claim that there is scrutiny and "it can be cut out at any time.".<ref>https://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200807/POL20080707a.html , CNSNews Congress Loads Bill With $277 Million in 'Pork, July 7, 2008</ref> The fact remains, it is nearly impossible to derail lawmakers from these bad spending practices. |
==References== | ==References== | ||
| Line 15: | Line 21: | ||
[[Category:Government]] | [[Category:Government]] | ||
| + | [[Category:Corruption]] | ||
Revision as of 19:14, September 26, 2018
Pork-barrel legislation is legislation that brings federal money to a particular Congressman's district for the primary purpose of enriching the members of that district. Pork projects can take the form of spending not requested by any federal agency, or locating spending requested by a federal agency within the district. Pork barrel legislation, also known as just "pork" often in the form of anearmark. Conservatives consider pork to be wasteful of taxpayer's dollars.
Pork continues, in spite of being wasteful, due to the principles of public choice economics. Each pork project has concentrated benefits, so the supporters of that pork project eagerly pursue it; however a pork project has distributed costs, so detractors have reduced incentive to follow through. A developer might stand to make tens of millions of dollars off of a pork project, the project will waste that money, but the individual tax payer liability is just a few pennies to a few dollars each. However, with thousands of pork projects every year that tiny liability multiplies and becomes a tremendous tax burden.
Keynesian economics look at pork as a positive thing, because they think about the economic effect of the extra spending. They ignore the spending that will not happen because individuals will no longer have the money due to high taxes. The spending that no longer happens due to pork expropriations would have been to purchase things that people want, rather than to purchase things that people do not.
Pork is often added at the closing minutes to larger bills such as Labor/Heath & Human Services Bill or to Emergency War Funds. Since pork barrel is not a traditional government expense presented for approval by congressional committee, billions of taxpayer's dollars can be spent.[1] Some bills exceed $20 Billion in Pork.
Examples of pork:
- $25 million by 30 House members for the National Writing Project
- $150,000 for the American Ballet Theatre in New York.
- $74 million for peanut storage [2]
- $320 million for a bridge in Alaska dubbed "The Bridge To Nowhere"
- Sugar tariffs cost Americans billions of dollars a year, and concentrate that money in a few congressional districts in Southern Florida
- The F-35 project is a plane that does not work, and costs billions to make, but the factories are spread around the country (increasing the cost, and reducing the quality) in key congressional districts
The politicians claim that there is scrutiny and "it can be cut out at any time.".[3] The fact remains, it is nearly impossible to derail lawmakers from these bad spending practices.
References
- ↑ https://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200807/POL20080707a.html , CNSNews Congress Loads Bill With $277 Million in 'Pork, July 7, 2008
- ↑ http://www.examiner.com/a-619204~Congress_loads_up__20_billion_in_pork.html , The Examiner, Congress loads up $20 billion in pork, March 14, 2007
- ↑ https://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200807/POL20080707a.html , CNSNews Congress Loads Bill With $277 Million in 'Pork, July 7, 2008
