[FoxNews] Drunk with Power, Spending Out of Control

I think as has been discussed here numerous times in the past, probably the most troubling thing to conservatives (real conservatives, not neocons) has been the utter fiscal irresponsibility of the Republican party. Many fiscal conservatives who espouse smaller government and less wasteful spending are royally pissed at the record-breaking deficits and irresponsible fiscal policies of our government. I think this goes well beyond who is in office, since Congress seems to be the biggest culprit here, and the President just happily goes along with it. I think the Republican party has lost its way when it comes to fiscal responsibility, and this article highlights it pretty well.

This happens to be one of those pissed-off conservatives...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,166682,00.html


Drunk With Power, Spending Out of Control

Thursday, August 25, 2005
By Radley Balko

The Washington Post reports that in 1987, President Ronald Reagan
vetoed a transportation bill passed by Congress because it had 157
"earmarks"— money set aside for Congress members' pet projects that
would ostensibly be considered too wasteful to pass as laws on their
own merit.

Reagan made a show of his veto. It was a symbolic stroke against
government waste, against the Democrats' tradition of, for example,
diverting every federal highway through West Virginia, then naming it
after Sen. Robert Byrd.

Fast-forward to 2005. Republicans control the White House and both
houses of Congress. Early on a Saturday morning in August — the day of
the week, and the month of the year, least likely to attract media
attention — President Bush signed into law a highway bill passed by
his own party with more than 6,000 earmarked projects.

Bush signed the bill after sternly telling his party he'd veto any
highway bill that spent more than $256 billion. He promptly "adjusted"
that figure to $284 billion after complaints from party leaders. The
bill Bush ultimately signed came at a price of $286 billion, $295
billion if you count a few provisions disguised to make the bill look
cheaper than it actually is. Not exactly holding the line.

The Republican Party's wholesale abandonment of limited government
principles has been on display since President Bush took office.
Government spending under the GOP's reign has soared to historic
highs, any way you want to measure it. And in stark contrast to
President Reagan — or even the president's own father—President Bush
refuses to rein in spending. He hasn't used his veto a single time
since taking office — the longest such streak in U.S. history.

What continues to amaze, however, is the sheer arrogance and hubris
with which the Republicans have chosen to govern. As Congressman Jeff
Flake — one of the few principled Republicans in Washington — told the
Washington Post, "Republicans don't even pretend anymore."

Consider that highway bill. The bill calls for nearly half a billion
dollars to build two bridges in Alaska. One will connect the Alaskan
mainland with a tiny island called Gravina (population: 50). It will
cost U.S. taxpayers $230 million. In fact, when it comes to pork
barrel politics, Alaska is the new West Virginia. That's because
Alaska Rep.Don Young chairs the transportation committee. The
transportation bill is named after Young's wife. The second bridge the
bill appropriates money for — another $230 million — will be called
"Don Young Way."

Robert Byrd would be proud.

You'd think that a Republican like Young would at least be embarrassed
about all of this. He isn't. He's shameless. Upon hearing that only
one other lawmaker in the entire Congress had outdone him in securing
pork barrel projects, Young told the New York Times, "I'd like to be a
little oinker, myself. If he's the chief porker, I'm upset."

Consider the case of Sen. Tom Coburn, another of the few in Congress
willing to stand up to unrestrained spending. After a six-year career
fighting waste in the House, Coburn won election to the Senate, and
began putting administrative holds on his colleagues' wasteful
projects. That didn't sit well with his fellow Republicans. Coburn's
own party soon filed an ethics complaint against him.

His transgression? Coburn continues his medical practice in Oklahoma
in addition to his duties as a U.S. senator. That apparently, is a
violation of Senate ethics. Diverting millions of taxpayer dollars to
pet projects that bear one's name and help one get reelected is not an
ethical violation, but practicing medicine is. The chairman of the
Senate Ethics Committee who will hear Coburn's complaint is
Mississippi Sen. Trent Lott. Lott recently told Roll Call that after
30 years as a U.S. senator, he has learned how to work around pesky
do-gooders like Coburn. "I fold [pork projects] into bills where you
can't find them," Lott boasted. "I've been around here long enough to
know how to bury it."

But perhaps the single member of Congress most afflicted with
arrogance-of-power syndrome is Virginia Rep. Tom Davis. Davis headed
up the GOP's campaign to retain control of the House in 2004, and
today chairs the House Government Reform Committee. Earlier this
spring, it was Davis' committee that began investigating the use of
steroids in Major League Baseball. Of course, Congress has no
constitutional authority to tell a private organization what its rules
ought to be. No matter. When MLB asked Davis what jurisdiction he had
to hold hearings, Davis sent a letter in reply asserting that his
committee has jurisdiction "at any time, over any matter." Any time,
any matter. So much for limited government. And this from the chair of
the committee in charge of keeping government in check!

Davis later threatened sanctions against MLB if it allowed an
ownership group, in which billionaire leftist George Soros held a
minority stake, to purchase the Washington Nationals — a stunning,
possibly illegal threat to impose legal sanctions against a private
organization for doing business with someone Davis opposes
politically. Just last month, Davis stuck a provision into a funding
bill that would prohibit development of a housing complex in his home
district. The congressman told Washington Post columnist Marc Fisher
he feared "urban kind of people" moving into his district. This is
exactly the kind of federal government edict over local affairs
Republicans are supposed to oppose.

Local officials told Fisher that Davis has said privately he fears too
much development in his district will attract too many Democrats,
which could one day imperil his reelection.

Republicans swept into office in 1994 on a radical platform promising
to dramatically scale back the federal government, bring
accountability to Capitol Hill, and put a check on the power and
arrogance that runs rampant in Washington. Today, they embody that
power and arrogance.

If you'll remember, it was Hillary Clinton's plan for universal health
care that inspired much of the backlash that put the Republicans in
power. Today, the leader of the Republican revolution — Newt Gingrich
— has publicly aligned himself with Hillary Clinton to call for a
larger government role in health care. That's about as apt a metaphor
for what's happened to the "Republican Revolution" as any.