Comments on: The Math of Political Hypocrisy http://themoderatevoice.com/15764/the-math-of-political-hypocrisy/ An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right Mon, 28 May 2012 07:24:44 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: domajot http://themoderatevoice.com/15764/the-math-of-political-hypocrisy/comment-page-1/#comment-103192 domajot Fri, 26 Oct 2007 15:37:12 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/domestic-programs/15764/the-math-of-political-hypocrisy/#comment-103192 Thanks for the reminder, Pete. I needed that. Thanks for the reminder, Pete.

I needed that.

]]> By: Pete Abel http://themoderatevoice.com/15764/the-math-of-political-hypocrisy/comment-page-1/#comment-103179 Pete Abel Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:50:10 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/domestic-programs/15764/the-math-of-political-hypocrisy/#comment-103179 Domajot - If it makes you feel any better, there was <a href="http://www.cagw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=reports_pigbook2007" rel="nofollow">at least one sign of progress</a> between 2006 and 2007: <blockquote>"This year’s Pig Book breaks a run of seven consecutive years of record dollar amounts of pork, culminating in $29 billion in the 2006 Congressional Pig Book. This lesser barrel of pork can be attributed to the efforts of Senators Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) and Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), who prevented the enactment of nine appropriations bills in December, 2006, and the subsequent moratorium on earmarks announced and enforced by the House and Senate Appropriations Committee Chairmen David Obey (D-Wis.) and Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) in H. J. Res. 20, the bill that funds the government for the remainder of fiscal 2007."</blockquote> Domajot – If it makes you feel any better, there was at least one sign of progress between 2006 and 2007:

“This year’s Pig Book breaks a run of seven consecutive years of record dollar amounts of pork, culminating in $29 billion in the 2006 Congressional Pig Book. This lesser barrel of pork can be attributed to the efforts of Senators Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) and Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), who prevented the enactment of nine appropriations bills in December, 2006, and the subsequent moratorium on earmarks announced and enforced by the House and Senate Appropriations Committee Chairmen David Obey (D-Wis.) and Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) in H. J. Res. 20, the bill that funds the government for the remainder of fiscal 2007.”

]]> By: domajot http://themoderatevoice.com/15764/the-math-of-political-hypocrisy/comment-page-1/#comment-103140 domajot Thu, 25 Oct 2007 23:10:29 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/domestic-programs/15764/the-math-of-political-hypocrisy/#comment-103140 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. . 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.

.

]]> By: DLS http://themoderatevoice.com/15764/the-math-of-political-hypocrisy/comment-page-1/#comment-103139 DLS Thu, 25 Oct 2007 22:55:56 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/domestic-programs/15764/the-math-of-political-hypocrisy/#comment-103139 New S-CHIP bill is <a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/house-passes-expanded-kids-insurance/story.aspx?guid=%7B9C4A0200-8F66-4453-BA0F-E02E5AFC300D%7D" rel="nofollow">also likely to be vetoed</a> New S-CHIP bill is also likely to be vetoed

]]> By: Pete Abel http://themoderatevoice.com/15764/the-math-of-political-hypocrisy/comment-page-1/#comment-103125 Pete Abel Thu, 25 Oct 2007 19:55:03 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/domestic-programs/15764/the-math-of-political-hypocrisy/#comment-103125 continuing my last comment: I believe there can be considerable waste even in such "fully vetted" appropriations. continuing my last comment: I believe there can be considerable waste even in such “fully vetted” appropriations.

]]> By: Pete Abel http://themoderatevoice.com/15764/the-math-of-political-hypocrisy/comment-page-1/#comment-103123 Pete Abel Thu, 25 Oct 2007 19:53:55 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/domestic-programs/15764/the-math-of-political-hypocrisy/#comment-103123 Sam - fully vetted means essentially the <strong><em>opposite</em></strong> 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. 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.

]]> By: Jim Satterfield http://themoderatevoice.com/15764/the-math-of-political-hypocrisy/comment-page-1/#comment-103121 Jim Satterfield Thu, 25 Oct 2007 19:41:18 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/domestic-programs/15764/the-math-of-political-hypocrisy/#comment-103121 OTOH, <em>Numb3rs</em> 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? 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?

]]> By: Sam http://themoderatevoice.com/15764/the-math-of-political-hypocrisy/comment-page-1/#comment-103119 Sam Thu, 25 Oct 2007 19:14:56 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/domestic-programs/15764/the-math-of-political-hypocrisy/#comment-103119 What classifies as fully vetted? I'm a bit fuzzy on the differences, altho I feel pretty solid on the definition of earmarked. What classifies as fully vetted? I’m a bit fuzzy on the differences, altho I feel pretty solid on the definition of earmarked.

]]> By: Pete Abel http://themoderatevoice.com/15764/the-math-of-political-hypocrisy/comment-page-1/#comment-103112 Pete Abel Thu, 25 Oct 2007 17:55:31 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/domestic-programs/15764/the-math-of-political-hypocrisy/#comment-103112 Sam - Keep in mind that $7.25 billion of waste is the estimate on <em>earmarked pork alone</em>. It doesn't even account for the waste in fully vetted appropriations. 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.

]]> By: Sam http://themoderatevoice.com/15764/the-math-of-political-hypocrisy/comment-page-1/#comment-103110 Sam Thu, 25 Oct 2007 17:42:57 +0000 http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/domestic-programs/15764/the-math-of-political-hypocrisy/#comment-103110 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. 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.

]]>