MORE ‘PORK’ IN THE HURRICANE SANDY RELIEF BILL

 

The Wall Street Journal

  • January 4, 2013

The Outrageous Sandy Outrage

EXCERPT FROM THIS ARTICLE:  Look at some of what was in the $60 billion bill: $150 million for Alaskan fisheries; $2 million for roof repair at the Smithsonian in Washington; and about $17 billion for liberal activists under the guise of “community development” funds and so-called social service grants. Far from being must-pass legislation, this is a disgrace to the memory of the victims and could taint legitimate efforts to deal with future disasters.

California Republican Darrell Issa had it right when he told Fox News that “They had the opportunity to have a $27- to $30-billion legit relief package, packed it with pork, then dared us not to vote on it.”

House Speaker John Boehner is getting all sorts of grief these days, but there’s one decision for which taxpayers should thank him: putting the brakes on a $60 billion relief bill for the victims of Hurricane Sandy that has become cover for Congress to revive earmarks and the pork machine.

Instead of being pressured to vote on the whole unsavory bill, Members will now be asked as early as Friday to vote on $9 billion in additional federal flood insurance funds. On January 15 or so they’ll get to decide if the rest of the package is worth the price.

This legislative maneuvering took courage on the Speaker’s part. There was the predictable outrage from New York and New Jersey Democrats. But the sniping from inside the GOP has been unhinged.

New York Representative Peter King‘s first reaction was to call the delay “a knife in the back of New Yorkers and New Jerseyans” and to urge donors to stop contributing to his own party. But the prize for unmoored political bluster goes to New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, who declared that “there’s only one group to blame for the continued suffering of these innocent victims—the House majority and their Speaker, John Boehner.”

Really? We’ve appreciated Mr. Christie’s outspoken style, and he has to advocate for his battered state. But he’s also supposed to care about the public fisc. His advocacy would have been more accurate, and more effective for New Jersey in the long run, if he had also pointed out that Democrats from the rest of the country have jeopardized the aid by cynically using the bill for their own parochial interests. Mr. Christie is running for re-election in a Democratic state, but that doesn’t mean he has to compete to be the next Charlie Crist.

Look at some of what was in the $60 billion bill: $150 million for Alaskan fisheries; $2 million for roof repair at the Smithsonian in Washington; and about $17 billion for liberal activists under the guise of “community development” funds and so-called social service grants. Far from being must-pass legislation, this is a disgrace to the memory of the victims and could taint legitimate efforts to deal with future disasters.

California Republican Darrell Issa had it right when he told Fox News that “They had the opportunity to have a $27- to $30-billion legit relief package, packed it with pork, then dared us not to vote on it.”

Beyond the recriminations is the larger problem that every disaster has become a Washington political opportunity. The Federal Emergency Management Agency is fully funded but does an incompetent job. Federal flood insurance encourages overbuilding in storm zones, so taxpayers pay first to subsidize the insurance and then to save the homeowners who overbuilt. And politicians use the public sympathy after any disaster as an excuse to throw even more money not merely at victims but for pent-up priorities they should be funding out of regular state and local tax dollars.

Mr. Boehner’s sin was ensuring that the House had time to sort the pork from the parochial. Mr. Christie should thank him on behalf of New Jersey taxpayers.

 

 

Share

Leave a Reply

Search All Posts
Categories