An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right
The Math of Political Hypocrisy
Our family regularly enjoys the CBS crime-drama Numb3rs. No, it’s not the greatest TV ever made, but it’s just quirky enough to hold our attention. That, plus it feeds a certain wishful thought of mine, that life would be so much easier if everything could be boiled down to mathematics. Of course, it can’t be, but a little math here and there can shed remarkably clear light on a wide range of topics, including political hypocrisy.
[Note: The linked post was prompted by a story in today's WaPo and certain comments on my TMV post yesterday re: the S-CHIP program.]
10 Responses to “The Math of Political Hypocrisy”
Anyone else shocked that the amount of “Pure waste” as they call it is only $7.25 billion? Out of a 2.2 Trillion budget, or whatever it is these days, that doesn’t seem so bad to me.
Sam – Keep in mind that $7.25 billion of waste is the estimate on earmarked pork alone. It doesn’t even account for the waste in fully vetted appropriations.
What classifies as fully vetted? I’m a bit fuzzy on the differences, altho I feel pretty solid on the definition of earmarked.
OTOH, Numb3rs uses real mathematicians to look at their work. They pay attention to what experts say. Is that something else different from what’s been happening in the political sphere lately?
Sam – fully vetted means essentially the opposite of several of the CAGW criteria, i.e., fully vetted would mean …
* requested by both chambers of Congress
* competitively awarded
* subject to Congressional hearings
* serves a national, broad-based interest
Etc.
continuing my last comment: I believe there can be considerable waste even in such “fully vetted” appropriations.
New S-CHIP bill is also likely to be vetoed
Maybe I’m just overwhelmed by the numbers. I can’t really grasp what it ‘s like to spend a billion dollars, much less a trillion.
I just feel there is something surreal about money debates.
I’ve been apalled about the waste in earmarks and portk. Though escalating obscenely, this has been an on-again, off-again hot topic since forever. Still, the practice always seems to outstrip any attempts at reform or transparency. The most vigorous reaction seems to be finger pointing at the ‘other’ party.
Any ray of sunshine on waste, hypocrisy, corruption, etc. is more than welcome. I just get the feeling we’re nibbling around the edges of a giant blob in the room, called ‘mismanagement’.
We argue about the cost effectiveness of bills and about waste, as we rightly should. But all is in the shadow of an article I read last year that the DOD has no bookkeeping system capable of tracking exactly how it spends its money in any detail.
How can anyone track the massive waste possible if that’s true?.
Sorry. Disillusionment set in today.
.
Domajot – If it makes you feel any better, there was at least one sign of progress between 2006 and 2007:
Thanks for the reminder, Pete.
I needed that.