Republicans can you copy and paste a stimulus part that is pork?

Question

It's funny and sad MOST Reepublicans depend on Rush Limbaugh to tell them what's in the stimulus Bill

Republicans please copy and paste a part of obama stimulus that is pork?

(As you can see not a single republican read the bill that has been online for a while now)

Answer 1

I don't have time to copy & paste though there is money to study Pig flatuence in Iowa, there is a bridge to nowhere in Illinois, I'm sure Democrat Klu Klux Klan Leader Robert Byrd has several pork projects because he's always well supported by the Democrat Party. There's a lot of pork.

Answer 2

I was not sure what pork meant in this context, so I did some research and came up with a webpage that I found very interesting.



On the page is listed some of the pork. This person is actually calling the companies that are getting the funding and asking them for details. Hearing it straight from them what they plan on doing with the money.



He is doing this in response to what he calls a cut and paste article written by The New York Times. I don't know if he is a Republican or not, but he sees value in the programs that are getting the money.

Answer 3

I haven't heard a word Rush has said in 15 years...but whatever.



Here's a spreadsheet that breaks down everything in the bill: http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pV-c6t5fOVmNorqMpHvnCMw



Let's see...$650,000,000 for digital-to-analog convertor box grants, line 52. Yep, that'll form tons of jobs and keep folks employed. (Funny, if they decided not to tax me out the wazoo I would be happy to just fork out the $40.) "Habitat restoration and mitigation activities, $400,000,000, line 56. I can see where that's going to help the economy soooo much. $2.5 billion in "research and related activities", line 63. I'm not saying research is a bad thing, not at all...but that will probably create a handful of jobs at some colleges, without a whole lot of payoff. "Efficient Federal Motor Vehicle Fleet", $600,000,000 to provide hybrid cars to government officials, line 89. Yes, cars are a good thing to manufacture, but good grief. At $100,000 a pop, that would provide 6,000 of them. We don't have 6,000 government officials, and unless they're hybrid Lamborghinis, they don't cost anywhere near that much. What is that money really for?



Then there's $200,000,000 for National Mall Revitalization, line 99; $100,000,000 for "Centennial Challenge", line 100; $800,000,000 for "Hazardous Substance Superfund", line 103; $650,000,000 in Capital Improvement and Maintenance", line 109; $150,000,000 in Smithsonian Facilities Capital, line 112; $2,188,000,000 for Public Health centers, only $600,000,000 of it goes toward actual training and payroll (and not until at least next fall); $4,100,000,000 for HHS research grants, unspecified, and $1.5 billion set aside so the director of HHS can issue a report (lines 126 & above). Dang, for that kind of cash I'll type the thing for him. How is any of that going to stimulate the economy? It might save or provide a handful a jobs.



I could go through the rest of it for you, but I really don't feel the need. Hopefully, you'll take a few minutes and read it yourself. I found almost $14 billion of pork in 5 minutes of looking. Perhaps you could do the same?

Answer 4

Yes I can





1) Green golf carts. Ever rode a "neighborhood electric vehicle?" Well, you might want to now. The stimulus includes a tax credit toward the purchase of NEVs, which closely resemble golf carts in appearance. They are considered green vehicles because they use an electric battery instead of gasoline. You fill it up with juice by plugging it into a home electrical outlet. Don't expect to be able to take your NEV far outside of your neighborhood, though. Federal regulations limit their top speed to between 20 and 25 miles per hour. Freeway cruising is out.



Those aren't the only green vehicles getting stimulus subsidies. There is also $300 million to buy "green" cars for federal employees.



2) Closing the ice-breaking gap. The U.S. Coast Guard is getting a shot in the arm from the stimulus, thanks to $98 million for a "polar icebreaker." That's not a new gum flavor, but a ship. The service currently has three ice-breaking ships able to sail through the frozen Arctic Ocean, but it wants a new and improved one to upgrade the aging fleet. Thad Allen, commandant of the Coast Guard, testified before a House panel last summer that icebreakers are needed for national security reasons. "Russia, Germany, China, Sweden and Canada are all investing and maintaining and expanding their national ice-breaking capacity," he said.



3) Homeland security stimulus. That pricey icebreaker is just one of several examples of homeland and national security spending contained in the stimulus not directly connected to restoration of the economy. There is also $200 million to "design and furnish" the Department of Homeland Security headquarters. De Rugy says that security spending should be considered by Congress in bills related to security, not the economy. "There was no debating these things on the merits," she says.



4) Clean Coal. While Obama has stressed the number of "green jobs" his stimulus will create, $3.4 billion of the $787 billion will be spent on old-school, non-green energy technology. That's how much goes to the Fossil Energy Research and Development program, a Department of Energy project that, among other things, seeks to reduce the amount of carbon emitted by the use of fossil fuels. Daniel Weiss, a senior fellow and director of climate strategy at the Center for American Progress, says that most of this money will go toward the development of clean-coal technology. "The goal is to develop a technology that can capture carbon dioxide from coal in a coal-fired power plant," he says. And where's the stimulus in clean coal? Weiss says that we won't see the results of this investment anytime soon, and $3.4 billion is probably only a fraction of what is needed for real clean-coal technology to ever be achieved. But, he adds, in the short term, "this would create research jobs and jobs at power plants." That isn't stopping critics from calling this fossil energy provision pork.

Answer 5

The Republicans’ objection to the plan is depending totally on the quantity of beef in it. It’s a spending plan, no longer a stimulus plan. How can Obama say Republicans are being irresponsible and dragging their feet even as even the CBO says 75 p.c. of the Democrats’ “stimulus” plan is beef and could no longer help kick-commence the economy? Many Democrats are making use of our monetary disaster to carve out massive quantities of money for his or her beef barrel courses and projects. confident we want to act without delay, yet there’s a distinction between performing without delay and performing right away. we'd like a superb bill, no longer basically “a” bill. If we settle for the Democrats’ bill and it doesn’t help the economy, can we pump in an further trillion funds next year? Our modern-day disaster become created ordinarily by technique of Democrats like Barney Frank, who pushed lenders to make sub-best loans. It become Barney and friends who pushed the lenders to make person-friendly money available to all who couldn’t pay them decrease back. They insisted that lenders provide 0-down, adverse amortization loans with low teaser expenditures. Then Barney talks about “predatory lenders!” Barney helped as an example decrease-earnings human beings into authentic sources speculators, and he did it in the course of a authentic sources bubble! Didn’t he comprehend that each and each and every one bubbles burst? Is he extremely that stupid? All those who say “definite,” bypass to the genuine of the variety. those who say “No,” search for instant help.

Answer 6

The venerable Oxford English Dictionary defines “stimulus” as “something that promotes activity, interest, or enthusiasm.” If, as appears almost certain, the federal government enacts legislation appropriating more than $800 billion in a so-called “stimulus package,” the next edition of Oxford might properly include further definitions for the already-overused term: “any massive federal spending program designed to funnel taxpayer monies into pet political projects; a term employed to disguise massive federal spending programs designed to funnel taxpayer monies into pet political projects, but labeled ‘stimulus’ in order to secure votes necessary for passage.”



Of course, as is par for the course in proposing and enacting modern federal legislation, congressional leaders have attached a high-sounding and misleading moniker to this latest and largest ever so-called “stimulus package.”



The legislation, which passed the House last week and the “senior” chamber Tuesday, is entitled “The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.”



How clever be these members of Congress. They know you can never go wrong by including the word, “American” or “America,” in the title of any legislation, since there is then always the implication that anyone who votes against the bill is, of course, un-American.



But the true evil of this spending boondoggle is not so much its title as its substance. Virtually every pet project and constituency of the Democratic Party will be at the receiving end of the billions of dollars rushing down this latest federal money sluice. The disaster that is this “recovery and reinvestment act” is made far worse by the fact that every single one of its more than $800 billion bills is borrowed.



When all is said and done according to the government’s own estimate, this spending measure will add more than a trillion dollars to our national debt which already tops $10.2 trillion.



Moreover, this appropriations vehicle comes on top of last year’s “Emergency Economic Stabilization Act” —- the so-called “bailout” —- and the now small, $152 billion 2008 “Economic Stimulus Act.” Thus does the true magnitude of the damage to the value of our currency and to the future economic health of our nation start to come into focus.



State and local government officials, including our own here in the Peach State, are already gleefully counting the billions they are slated to receive from Washington’s “reinvestment” largess.



These are the same spendthrift state and local governments that have failed for decades to keep their own spending under control.



Throwing even more federal money their way simply rewards their irresponsibility, and further disguises the necessity for state and local governments to rein in their own spending.



Some of the details of the “reinvestments” in the House’s version of the stimulus package are truly amazing. For example:



> A billion dollars will continue to subsidize the perennial money loser, Amtrak; $20 billion expands the already bloated food stamp program.



> About $2 billion is diverted from the wallets of hard-working Americans to subsidize childcare. Some $2.8 billion is slipped to global warming advocacy programs.



> $600 million will buy more and newer cars for government bureaucrats, along with $44 million to refurbish the Department of Agriculture, $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts, and $150 million to spruce up the Smithsonian buildings.



> Another $650 million is earmarked for helping consumers convert analog TVs to digital (because the government earlier decided to halt analog television broadcasting). More than $400 million promotes anti-smoking programs and programs to fight sexually transmitted diseases. Those are just the tip of the fiscal iceberg.



There are minor differences in the House and Senate versions, but overall the amount of money spent and the amount of pork in each is outrageous and harmful; and besides, the House-Senate conference may very well add back in what the Senate took out but really just shifted around, in a typical example of congressional legerdemain.



When all the dust settles, the only thing this fiscal monstrosity will “stimulate” is making American citizens, businesses and state and local government even more dependent on Uncle Sam than before; even as we and our children and grandchildren are rendered the poorer.

2 points

Answer 7

You know, you're just as bad as those who follow Rush blindly, because you follow Obama blindly. Anyone with a brain can see that there is tons of pork in that bill. We shouldn't have to point it out for you. Educate yourself.

Answer 8

Do you understand what pork means? There is no way to paste that many pages into this forum. The bill has only about $200 billion that ISN'T pork. That means over 3/4 of it is.



Two examples: street lights in Miami and research on shrimp. Can you tell me how that is going to stimulate the economy for someone who lives in OH?

Answer 9

It was in the Iowa Caucusus that Obama first beat the annointed candidate designate Hillary, and Barack is paying his boys back with a scientific study to make Iowa hogs stink less.

Answer 10

ALL of it. The Republican definition of 'pork' is 'any money spent by a Democrat." When Newt Gingrich ran Congress and his own district got more federal money than any other, Republicans were still decrying Democratic 'pork'. Ted Stevens' 'Bridge to Nowhere' wasn't pork, but repairs to a federal highway in a blue state, that's -pork-.



This is why you get answers like "I don't have to read it, it's ALL pork!"

Answer 11

it would take less time to post what is not pork....how about you post what is not pork since you are so convinced that it is such a great bill

Answer 12

No------- and neither have anyone in Congress--



Please name ONE country in the history of the world that managed to TAX & SPEND themselves into prosperity.

Answer 13

The following was taken verbatim from the pork bill and the link is provided for you just in case you have the attention span required to read it

For an additional amount for ‘‘Buildings and Facilities’’,

$176,000,000, for work on deferred maintenance at Agricultural

Research Service facilities: Provided, That priority in the use of

such funds shall be given to critical deferred maintenance, to

projects that can be completed, and to activities that can commence

promptly following enactment of this Act



The above does not create jobs or boost the economy.



Neither does the following:

DISTANCE LEARNING, TELEMEDICINE, AND BROADBAND PROGRAM

For an additional amount for the cost of broadband loans and

loan guarantees, as authorized by the Rural Electrification Act

of 1936 (7 U.S.C. 901 et seq.) and for grants (including for technical

assistance), $2,500,000,000: Provided, That the cost of direct and

guaranteed loans shall be as defined in section 502 of the Congressional

Budget Act of 1974: Provided further, That, notwithstanding

title VI of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936, this amount is

available for grants, loans and loan guarantees for broadband infrastructure

in any area of the United States: Provided further, That

at least 75 percent of the area to be served by a project receiving

funds from such grants, loans or loan guarantees shall be in a

rural area without sufficient access to high speed broadband service

to facilitate rural economic development, as determined by the

Secretary of Agriculture: Provided further, That priority for

awarding such funds shall be given to project applications for

broadband systems that will deliver end users a choice of more

than one service provider: Provided further, That priority for

awarding funds made available under this paragraph shall be given

to projects that provide service to the highest proportion of rural

residents that do not have access to broadband service: Provided

further, That priority shall be given for project applications from

borrowers or former borrowers under title II of the Rural Electrification

Act of 1936 and for project applications that include such

borrowers or former borrowers: Provided further, That priority for

awarding such funds shall be given to project applications that

demonstrate that, if the application is approved, all project elements

will be fully funded: Provided further, That priority for awarding

H. R. 1—5

such funds shall be given to project applications for activities that

can be completed if the requested funds are provided: Provided

further, That priority for awarding such funds shall be given to

activities that can commence promptly following approval: Provided

further, That no area of a project funded with amounts made

available under this paragraph may receive funding to provide

broadband service under the Broadband Technology Opportunities

Program: Provided further, That the Secretary shall submit a report

on planned spending and actual obligations describing the use

of these funds not later than 90 days after the date of enactment

of this Act, and quarterly thereafter until all funds are obligated,

to the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives

and the Senate.

FOOD AND NUTRITION SERVICE CHILD NUTRITION

PROGRAMS

For an additional amount for the Richard B. Russell National

School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1751 et. seq.), except section 21,

and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et. seq.),

except sections 17 and 21, $100,000,000, to carry out a grant program

for National School Lunch Program equipment assistance:

Provided, That such funds shall be provided to States administering

a school lunch program in a manner proportional with each States’

administrative expense allocation: Provided further, That the States

shall provide competitive grants to school food authorities based

upon the need for equipment assistance in participating schools

with priority given to school in which not less than 50 percent

of the students are eligible for free or reduced price meals under

the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act.

SPECIAL SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION PROGRAM FOR WOMEN, INFANTS,

AND CHILDREN (WIC)

For an additional amount for the special supplemental nutrition

program as authorized by section 17 of the Child Nutrition Act

of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1786), $500,000,000, of which $400,000,000 shall

be placed in reserve to be allocated as the Secretary deems necessary,

notwithstanding section 17(i) of such Act, to support participation

should cost or participation exceed budget estimates, and

of which $100,000,000 shall be for the purposes specified in section

17(h)(10)(B)(ii): Provided, That up to one percent of the funding

provided for the purposes specified in section 17(h)(10)(B)(ii) may

be reserved by the Secretary for Federal administrative activities

in support of those purpose



Converter boxes no stimulus there either

DIGITAL-TO-ANALOG CONVERTER BOX PROGRAM

For an amount for ‘‘Digital-to-Analog Converter Box Program’’,

$650,000,000, for additional coupons

Answer 14

IT IS FREAKING 1000 PAGES MAN IM NOT READING THAT GARBAGE. YOU CANNOT SPEND YOURSELF OUT OF RECESSSION IT DOESNT WORK THAT WAY. EVERY DOLLAR THAT THE FED PRINTS OFF FOR THATS NEW MAKES EVERY DOLLAR ALREADY PRINTED THAT MUCH WEAKER. AND I WOULD CALL PORK MAYBE SPENDING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON GLOBAL WARMING RESEARCH WITH THESE ECONONMIC TIMES HOWS THAT HELP. RON PAUL 2012! REVOLUTION A MANIFESTO < READ AND EDUCATE YOURSELF

Answer 15

its better to vote NO for something you have not read rather than voting YES for something you have not read

Answer 16

"It's funny and sad MOST Reepublicans depend on Rush Limbaugh to tell them what's in the stimulus Bill"...

Really? and who told you that CNN?

Answer 17

great question, tony, and you have exposed the feeble right for what they are--all mouth, no fact. Not one answerer gave you anything of substance. Sad, isn't it? Expected, true, but nonetheless, sad.

Answer 18

Check it out. Read all about it.

Answer 19

They can't . . because the pork is too lean, but they don't know that because not one of them has read it. Lol.