Stimulus Package's Pork Spending: A Delicious Feast or Rotting Left Overs?

Chapter 27-

There is an excess amount of earmarks hidden in the Stimulus Package, to the point where citizens are begining to question the legitimacy of this bill, just as they did in 1997 when President Clinton proposed a similar requests containing an over abundance of "pork." In the modern stimulus bill there is "about $900 billion in the Senate," and the bill has just about "morphed into a Christmas list." Many of these bills don't benefit the majority of the US citizens directly. There is currently $200,000 set aside for "the task of tattoo removal." [1] But how many US citizens have tattoos? And out of those people, how many will actually seek to have a tattoo removed? It's earmarks like these that serve as nothing more than a waste of the federal budget. Another such bill is for the compensation of Filipino World War II veterans in return for their service totaling $198 million. This seems like a just cause, right? However, most of these veterans are not even current residents of the United States. [1] Aren't there better places we could be sending our precious tax dollars?

Chapter 28-

It is important to realize, as Chapter 28 points out, that not all of the earmarks have merit on their own. This is why they have been attached to a bill, frequently “after hearings end because [senators] know that nobody is going to vote against a multibillion-dollar bill just because it has a few million dollars of pork tucked in.” [2] However, in this chapter of The Enduring Debate, it also suggests that some of the projects we have deemed as "pork barrel spending" may actually have some merit. “There is a respectable argument that sometimes parochial needs are in fact a legitimate federal interest...” [2] The ultimate goal of the modern stimulus bill, and the goals of all the ones before it have been to stimulate the economy. As annoying as the pork barrel spending can seem to the tax payers, it does in turn create jobs in its respective state or district, in turn contributing to the national economy. For instance, Democratic Rep. Bruce Braley has secured $500 million for biofuel makers in order to bring jobs to Iowa. [1] To those who live outside of Iowa, there will be no direct benefit from this earmark. However, once the economy of Iowa becomes more stabilized as a result of an increase in available employment, the national economy will benefit as well. This can also be seen in some of programs that the Democratic party dropped from the package after the Republicans “had singled out for derision,” [3] This included a project to restore the Jefferson Memorial, which reflects some of the public works projects originating from the New Deal, in which the government created and funded projects whose single purpose was to create jobs. This is taking advantage of the Constitution’s goal to “harness mankind’s corrupt tendencies and channel them into constructive directions.” [2] Sometimes it is necessary to allow earmarks so that the interest of the national power doesn’t get too out of hand and completely dominate over the local interest. As the saying goes, “you need to give a little to get a little.”

Sources

[1] http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29025047/

[2] The Enduring Debate" Fourth Edition Canon, David T. Coleman, John J. Mayer, Kenneth R.
Norton & Company Inc. 2006

[3] http://www.8000credit.org/150/