Originally posted on March 20, 2007.

^.^

Alright, I usually don't bother covering such things as the impending doom that results from legislation that is being contemplated by Congress...because one chamber of the Congress or the other usually doesn't like it...or the President may very well veto the measure...either way, the proposed bill will probably die.

So, what is different in this case, the case of the proposed emergency funding bill for the soldiers in Iraq? As I heard first from NPR, then from one of my friends, and finally from Glenn Beck on his show today, the problem is that all sorts of offers are being made to Congressmen if they will not vote for the emergency funding...

Here are some of the goodies being offered, if only the Congressmen being approached will simply forget their consciences, and vote against the troops... (items taken from the Washington Times (3-20-07))...

- $3.7 billion in farm subsidies for drought relief in Colorado.
- $25 million for California spinach growers.
- $75 million for peanut storage.
- $500 million for wildfire suppression in the US West.
- $120 million to assist Atlantic coast fishermen.
- $2.9 billion in additional Gulf Coast hurricane relief.
- $2.4 billion spread amongst programs such as social problems, money for rural schools in the US Northwest, health insurance for poor children, energy assistance for poor families, and other programs...

And as if this were not enough, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi also threw in the goodie of a minimum wage increase...once again, you have to vote against funding the troops. Troops in one hand...all the goodies in the other...you can't have both.

What has happened is that the Liberalista Democrats have appended an amendment to the emergency spending bill which calls for the troops in Iraq to be withdrawn by September of next year. Once again, you either vote for the amendment, or you don't get the goodies.

In response to this, President Bush has asked that Congress send him a "clean" bill, one without strings attached. His statement was as follows:

"They have a responsibility to pass a clean bill that does not use funding for our troops as leverage to get special-interest spending for their districts," said Mr. Bush, whose initial request funded the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as about $3.4 billion in hurricane relief. "They have a responsibility to get this bill to my desk without strings and without delay."

As I told my friend, these issues, the funding of these projects, and the funding of our troops, should not be a part of the same discussion. People who support the troops in the field should not have to choose between that support, and funding for things to help with affairs in their districts.

Now, as it stands, the Liberalista Democrats are going to be stymied because there is no support for a timetable for withdrawing our troops from Iraq. All of this haggling over the bill means nothing because there is no support for the bill in the Senate, and if it manages to pass the Senate, President Bush will veto the thing.

Democrats should stop playing politics with the emergency spending bill and get it passed cleanly so that our troops have the money they need to function in the field, where they face life-threatening situations on a daily basis. It would be the right thing to do.

The problem is that politicians on both sides of the aisle don't always do the right thing.

I might very well start writing Congressional representatives in the states targetted by this latest deluge of pork.

---
John B.
Blogger Guy

PS: Over the next few days, I will be contacting the following Congressional members:

Wayne T. Gilchrest R-MD
Roscoe G. Bartlett R-MD
Sam Farr D-CA
Sanford D. Bishop Jr. D-GA
Henry C. Johnson Jr. D-GA
Jim Marshall D-GA
John Barrow D-GA
David Scott D-GA
Charles Boustany Jr. R-LA
Marilyn N. Musgrave R-CO
Thomas G. Tancredo R-COM
Barbara Cubin R-WY

and I will be commenting to them on this issue. If I get any response other than a standard "thank you for contacting us" note, I will post it here.

Oh, and I just saw this from The Hill, the DC newspaper that writes about Congressional matters:

"Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is holding the implied threat of lost committee seats over the heads of Democratic Caucus members who may vote against her $124 billion Iraq war supplemental bill."

---
John B.
Blog Guy

BACK