Secrets in the Senate

[Tigermike 3,066]

September 13, 2006

Secrets in the Senate

By John Stossel

Their arrogance is stunning.

Sens. Ted Stevens (R-Alas.) and Robert Byrd (D-W.V.) are the acknowledged kings of pork-barrel spending. They bring billons of taxpayer dollars to their states to ensure their hold on power. But apparently, that's not enough. They also want to make certain that you and I don't see what they get away with. So secretly they tried to keep us in the dark.

Fiscal hawks in the Senate, led by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), are sponsoring a bill to create a database that would keep track of government spending. You could search that database from your home and find out who got all that special-interest taxpayer largess.

That seems like useful information for citizens who would like to keep their eyes on their spend-happy representatives.

But what's good for the taxpayers is not necessarily good for the politicians who ladle out our money, or the feeders at the government trough who get all those contracts and grants. The power brokers would rather the people not look over their shoulders.

The bill to create the database has sponsors from both parties, including Majority Leader Bill Frist and Minority Leader Harry Reid. It has support from 100 conservative and liberal government-watchdog organizations. It was approved unanimously by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

The measure was headed for a vote in the full Senate when suddenly it was derailed by unidentified senators. The Senate, it turns out, has a rule that lets any member delay a bill -- without revealing his identity. It's called the "secret hold."

This mystery led to several days of speculation, but finally, Sen. Stevens came forward. The next day Sen. Byrd did, too.

Byrd has since lifted his hold, but Stevens hasn't. Byrd said he wanted time to read the bill and try to improve it. Stevens, who is a member of the committee that held hearings but didn't speak up at the time, now says he wants a cost-benefit analysis done before he makes up his mind.

Sounds fishy to me. I think these guys just don't want us to see how they spend our money.

When the Democrats held power, I confronted Sen. Byrd about his "Honorable" Robert Byrd Highway-type projects in West Virginia. His answer was as arrogant as he was: "I would think that the national media could rise above the temptation of being clever, decrepitarian critics who twaddlize, just as what you're doing right here."

"Twaddlize?" I asked.

"Trivializing serious matters," he explained.

I persisted, "Is there no limit? Are you not at all embarrassed about how much you got?"

Byrd glared at me, "Are you embarrassed when you think you're working for the good of the country?!"

As for Sen. Stevens, last year, the congressional transportation bill included $450 million to build two bridges to little-populated parts of his state, Alaska. One of these "bridges to nowhere" would connect Ketchikan to a nearly uninhabited island.

When Sen. Coburn proposed that the money instead be spent to repair a bridge over Louisiana's Lake Pontchartrain that had been damaged by Hurricane Katrina, Sen. Stevens had a little tantrum. He stood on the Senate floor and said if his state's loot was cut, he'd resign and "be taken out of here on a stretcher!"

Good! Sen. Stevens, please go. I'll help carry the stretcher.

The Senate shot down Coburn's proposal 82-15. Big spenders stick together.

I'm skeptical of Sen. Stevens's demand for a cost-benefit study. Congress estimates it would cost $4 million to build the database and $2 million a year to run it -- small potatoes next to the hundreds of billions Sens. Stevens and Byrd spend on pork.

And the benefit? Can you put a dollar figure on the good that would result if the big spenders were inhibited because the people were watching them?

Maybe we wouldn't need a user-friendly database if the government weren't so big. But it is that big. So at least let's make it visible. Let's get rid of secret holds and secret spending.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/...the_senate.html

[channonc 466]

Funny... both Frist and Reid are listed as cosponsors. By the way, there are 44 cosponsors.

LINK

[Tigermike 3,066]

Funny... both Frist and Reid are listed as cosponsors. By the way, there are 44 cosponsors.

LINK

channonc, I started hearing of the hold on this bill sometime back (a month or so). What is the status of the bill? Will it pass? Is it considered a good measure or just another cover up?

BTW - Your link is not working.

[channonc 466]

There is still a hold on the bill. Most of the time you don't know who puts a hold on any bill, unless you do some digging.

Here's how the process works. First, a Unanimous Consent request is run by the Majority Leader to all the Republican Senators. If any Senator has an objection, he/she can call the desk and have a hold put on, if this happens then the UC request isn't even put through to the Democratic Senators, if, the Republicans are fine with the bill, then the same UC request is run on the Democratic side, and if a Senator there has an objection, he/she could call down to the desk and put on a hold.

It is also possible that multiple Senators have holds on the bill, but it only takes one to hold it up (however, most of the time it is multiple Senators with a hold).

As far as whether this is a good measure or not, on the surface it appears to be, however it could be an extremely costly measure to put through.

Any person who is interested in what pork his/her Senator is putting through could easily look it up, the grand majority is in the Appropriations bills and reports.

Also, while I would agree most pork is bad... often times incumbants are judged by how much money they bring home, and those that don't bring home the bacon, don't get re-elected.