July 7, 2008 -
July 14, 2008 • Vol. 13, No. 41 Download Now! (pdf)

 

EDITORIAL
An Indecent Decision
by Matthew Continetti

SCRAPBOOK
Buckminster Fuller, Justice Anthony Kennedy

ARTICLES
Closing the Enthusiasm Gap
by Stephen F. Hayes

Very Retiring Republicans
by Fred Barnes

McCain, Obama, & the Catholic Vote
by Ryan T. Anderson

History's Fall Guys
by Dean Barnett

Shaken and Stirred Up
by Reuben F. Johnson

A Heaping Bowl of Mush
by Philip Terzian

Laughter at the Supreme Court
by Lee Ross

FEATURES
L'Affaire Enderlin
by Anne-Elisabeth Moutet

BOOKS & ARTS
Talking Politics
by Christopher Hitchens

Isn't That Special?
by Andrew Roberts

Boris the Good
by Andrew Nagorski

After the Fox
by Edward Short

Unholy Thoughts
by Stefan Beck

Speak the Speech
by Judy Bachrach

Rhymers' Dictionary
by John Simon

Keeping Score
by James M. Banner Jr.

Here's My Plan
by Matthew Continetti

Identity Theft
by Edith Alston

Cops on the Case
by Jon L. Breen

CASUAL
Lost in the Personasphere
by Andrew Ferguson

PARODY
Fred Flintstone wins McCain's eco-challenge


« Slow Talking Us into Another North Korea? | Main | "The Mainstream Press has Capitulated to the Islamists" »

How About an Independent Investigation into Port Security Congressional Pork Barrel?

"Port security has been totally neglected," said New York Sen. Chuck Schumer during a press conference with his fellow Democrats in July 2004. But as with so many other federal programs -- from the Army Corps to education, transportation and health care -- Congress, on a bipartisan basis, is also guilty of negligence. Spending is often not prioritized and is doled out according to a politicians' wishes leading to ridiculous results, such as the one described in this 60 Minutes episode in July 2005.

KROFT: The 9/11 commission recommended that homeland security money be allocated to protect the most vulnerable strategic targets from attacks that would cause the most casualties or economic damage.

But Congress, led by a group of powerful senators from smaller states, had a different plan. It decided to ignore the recommendations and distribute the money much the same way it hands out federal highway funds, with everyone getting a share.

Rep. COX (R-CA): It's pork barrel. It's the kind of distribution of funds that Washington always makes when politics comes before substance. And here we find that the monies are being doled out not necessarily according to national security risks, but rather according to political formulas.

Mr. TOM SCHATZ: Everybody wants a piece of this pie. And after September 11th, it's one of the biggest pies around.

KROFT: (Voiceover) Tom Schatz, who runs a group called Citizens Against Government Waste, estimates that pork barrel spending on homeland security this year will reach $1.7 billion.

Mr. SCHATZ: Members of Congress have figured out how to get their hands on homeland security pork.

(Footage of barges)

KROFT: (Voiceover) Why else, he asks, would the state of Oklahoma get federal funds designated for port security?

I mean, Oklahoma's a landlocked state. I didn't know that they had any ports.

Mr. SCHATZ: They have a river somewhere and that is included under this maritime security provision that was passed by Congress. And in this case, if you have a maritime facility of some kind in the United States, it may get money under this port security grant program.

Email the article How About an Independent Investigation into Port Security Congressional Pork Barrel? to a friend:

Send this article to:


Your email address:


Message (optional):


 
Contributors
Editor:
Michael Goldfarb

Contributors:
Dean Barnett
Jennifer Chou
Brian Faughnan
Ulf Gartzke
Reuben F. Johnson
Thomas Joscelyn
Stuart Koehl
John Noonan
Bill Roggio
Samantha Sault
Search
Archives
Contact
wws@weeklystandard.com
Categories
Feeds: Atom | RSS
[What is this?]
Powered by
Movable Type 3.2