Democratic Pork

[Raven]

I'm hearing rumbles of a ton of pork being added to the Dem's out of Iraq bill to garner the needed votes to get it passed and veto proofed. OpenCongress.org has some information on this.

What do folks here think of this?

[Richard Steele]

1. I haven't heard about any such thing, so I can offer no opinion. nm

[Avalux]

2. Unfortunately, they have to play the game.

It's one of those situations where you hold your nose and do what needs to be done. If it is indeed true (please post a link if you have one) I won't like it, but that bill must get through.

[rusty charly]

3. more on this:

Democrats seeking votes for their Iraq-withdrawal plan have stuffed the bill it's in with billions of dollars for farms, flu preparedness, New Orleans levees, home heating and other causes.

http://www.salon.com/wire/ap/archive.html?wire=D8NOU5CG1.html

Some critics say the Democrats are simply being opportunistic -- using a must-pass measure for funding U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan to carry items that can't advance as easily on their own.

At the same time, Democratic leaders are trying to increase support for setting deadlines for ending U.S. military combat in Iraq, which they've made part of the larger legislation.

It's plain that Democrats are unwilling to approve the bill's $100 billion for Iraq and Afghanistan without devoting considerable sums of money to the home front.

[Skinner]

4. This is the first I've heard of this.

But if it's true, it seems to me that a little pork is a small price to pay if it would help get us out of Iraq.

[Raven]

5. I can't argue with you on that, but

I guess I'm wondering what happened to "voting your conscience" especially when lives are in the balance.

[Skinner]

6. I guess I just don't understand why it would matter.

If getting out of Iraq is the goal, why do we care if the votes were cast on principle or in the hopes of getting a new bridge in your district? What matters is that they are cast. Is it moral to let this war go on for another two years, four years, or ten years just so we can have a vote that is not somehow tainted by politics?

[Raven]

7. I agree,

but it just makes me sad.

[HuskiesHowls]

8. Well, I guess, in a way, its pork......

If funding the programs that have been underfunded for years is considered bad. Just because some neo-conservatives think its terrible to add other spending to a bill that has to be passed (not that THEY would ever do it), then it is a bad thing. But, its one way to make sure that the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, State Children's Health Insurance Program, Army Corp of Engineers get money to do what needs to be done to make life a little better here.

I guess, if you're going to bulk up Halliburton's bottom line, you may as well spend a little here to make life easier for the people that need help here, too.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

9. I Think It Shows Strategy To Do What It Takes To Get Things Done.

I've no problem with it.

[Toots]

10. Congress attaching Pork to must pass bill... Oh No ...say it ain't so.....

I bet this is the first time in history such a thing has been attempted..:shrug:

[Raven]

11. I could do without the

:sarcasm: