The Congressional Pork Map is a project of the Center for Renewing America and the American Accountability Foundation to educate the American People about the size and scope of Congressional earmarks in their community. It is also a tool to allow citizens to use their unique knowledge of their communities to exercise oversight on their Members of Congress.
Before we take a look at these spending requests, who is asking for what and discover their networks and agendas, let’s take a minute to review the United States Constitution:
ARTICLE I, SECTION 8, CLAUSE 1
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States….
As a matter of original meaning, there is reason to doubt whether the federal spending power flows from this clause. On its face, the clause grants only the power to tax, and any inference of a spending power from the clause’s language about the “general Welfare” leaves unexplained where Congress obtains the power to spend borrowed money or the proceeds from land sales. It is more plausible to locate the federal spending power in the Necessary and Proper Clause, or perhaps even the Territories and Property Clauses of Article IV. Nonetheless, modern law has settled on the Taxation Clause as the source of federal spending authority, though a more accurate description would be to entitle the clause as “The General Welfare Clause.”
Now let us begin to review why these projects are worth considering as #PorkSpending. As you critically think through, perhaps even researching information for yourself regarding taxation, ask yourself about the character of the people requesting the money. Ask if these unrealistic burdens are being placed upon taxpayers in these redistribution of wealth schemes for personal reasons, like connections, pay offs, or part of a great reset in the culture of the organizations.
Who will get the money?
How will it be distributed?
What is the person or company track record?
How will the person or company benefit from these taxpayer dollars?
What is the profit margin for the person or business?
What does the requestor benefit from or gain from supporting these requests?
How does the requestor pay off supporters with these requests or how is the requestor connected to the beneficiaries of these requests?
How do these requests fit into the boundaries of the FEDERAL SPENDING CLAUSE and the examples given whereby these types of things were not approved of in the early days of our nation?
Salt River Project
6150 W. Thunderbird Rd., Glendale, AZ 85306-4001 Member Requesting: Greg Stanton Amount: $1,125,000 Description: These funds, requested by Salt River Project, would support a feasibility study to evaluate the impact of sedimentation accumulation in the Verde River Basin and help identify new ways to restore water storage capacity. The accumulation of natural sedimentation in the Verde River Basin has significantly curtailed the water storage capacity of Horseshoe Reservoir – one of SRP’s seven federally owned reservoirs. SRP expects higher temperatures and less predictable precipitation on the Verde River
Learn more about Sediment and Suspended Sediment here. And then ask why over a million dollars for a feasibility study because this problem is nothing new and surely they can do it all for way less money.
32nd Street and Thomas Road Intersection Safety Improvements
200 West Washington Street, 12th Floor, Phoenix, AZ 85003 Member Requesting: Greg Stanton Amount: $960,000 Description: These funds, requested by the City of Phoenix, would make critical safety improvement to this high-priority intersection, including traffic signal rebuild, crosswalk enhancements, street lighting and ADA upgrades. This intersection is ranked as the 39th most dangerous intersection in the region by the Maricopa Association of Governments.
This does appear to be an emotional appeal for money that is a LOCAL problem, not worthy of a #RedistributionOfWealth request. Why doesn’t the City of Phoenix pay for their own solution? It seems highly inappropriate to ask for federal funds when the City of Phoenix should be taking care of their own problems with their own tax and spend money confiscated from local taxpayers.
Or maybe the City of Phoenix can host their own #FundMe account to raise the money locally for a local solution? Here’s a list of the TOP 10 resources to get the City of Phoenix started: #FundYourself
Pork Man Stanton’s running total: $2,085,000.00
Growing BIPOC Micromanufacturing Entrepreneurs
31 East 5th Street, Tempe, AZ 85281 Member Requesting: Greg Stanton Amount: $500,000 Description: These funds would support the City of Tempe’s efforts to lift up local entrepreneurs—with a focus on BIPOC entrepreneurs—and help them overcome the most significant obstacles to start-up manufacturing through grants to cover the cost of space, start-up raw materials and equipment necessary for micromanufacturing. The funds would also support Tempe’s effort to train and coach entrepreneurs.
Uh, this is not the federal responsibility, to fund and lift up entrepreneurs in Arizona. This is not the Federal Government’s job to support or pick winners and losers. And to use taxpayer money to create and train coaches? Uh NO! This is a horrible request and an abuse of working class taxpayers resources that ought be used for things like #DefendTheBorder.
Pork Man Stanton’s running total: $2,585,000.00
Downtown Small Business Revitalization and Rehabilitation Program
20 E. Main Street, Mesa, AZ 85201 Member Requesting: Greg Stanton Amount: $300,000 Description: These funds would assist small businesses in downtown Mesa with façade improvements, including new or refurbished business signage, colonnade rehabilitation or removal, and small- to medium-sized façade design and construction projects. Downtown Mesa is a federally designated Opportunity Zone and locally designated Redevelopment Area.
Uh again, not worthy of Federal Taxpayer Dollars. This is a Mesa problem not a national problem and certainly not worthy of a redistribution of wealth request.
Pork Man Stanton’s running total: $2,885,000.00
111 South Stapley Dr., Mesa, AZ 85204 Member Requesting: Greg Stanton Amount: $600,000 Description: These funds would help renovate 5,500 square feet of existing space to build out Café (Children, Adolescents, and Families Empowered) Stapley to create a model apartment for high-risk and at-risk youth, ages 12 to 17, in Arizona communities to support teaching day-to-day skills and relationships. This model of care holds promise to reduce costs of health care related to emergency care, residential treatment and other societal costs realized in the justice system.
Notice the use of the language to make you feel emotionally attached to the Mesa Arizona problem. Ask yourself:
Is this a state funded civil religious order?
Is this state funded religious order to be more respected than the tenants taught in Judeo-Christian values?
How is this designed to replace family as the fundamental unit of society?
What does “holds promise” mean?
What will be paid back to the taxpayers if this civil religion does not meet measurements?
And more importantly, why is this not being funded out of Local Taxpayer dollars, where locals have vested interest in watching this program to hold it accountable?
By the way, how many generations of state funded programs does this program trace back through these “children”?
In other words, how many people going back in their family lines have been recipients of state welfare assistance?
Are these children of children and or parents who have received welfare assistance back how many generations?
Pork Man Stanton’s running total: #3,485,000.00
Equitable Pathways Program
1809 S. Dobson Rd., Ste. 214, Mesa, Arizona 85202 Member Requesting: Greg Stanton Amount: $300,000 Description: These funds would support the Aliento Education Fund’s efforts to boost first-generation immigrant and Latino students through social-emotional programming. These programs include paid student fellowships and internships; building the capacity of educators, counselors and school leaders through professional development on college access and post-secondary pathways; and supporting collaboration with cross-sector partnerships such as school districts, community colleges, universities, businesses,
“The slavery of the present is a more subtle thing. It grips the mind more tightly than the body. It still remembers that men enslave themselves best. It knows also that true power comes from making all complicit in its crimes so that they are also complicit in their own degradation. The system only asks that each man enslave himself and kill his own children. And once he has done that, he will only feel it right to demand that everyone else do likewise.” ~ Daniel Greenfield
Another of my favorite reads is, the late, Neal A. Maxwell. In 1974 he gave a fabulous sermon on ETERNALISM VS. SECULARISM. Says he:
Eternalism focuses on the individual and on those processes in which the individual is taught correct principles and then is given optimum opportunity to govern himself. Indeed, nowhere does the contrast appear to be more stark between the basic approaches to man’s problems than in the focus of eternalism on the individual as the basic human reality (and next the family). Where reform and desirable change are concerned, eternalism opts for conditions that facilitate true individual growth, letting the consequences of any successes ripple outward. Secularism tends to want to deal increasingly with systems, governments, labels, groups, etc.—with adjustments in the things outside man, apparently hoping that, somehow, changing the external scenery will change the things inside man. Of this latter approach, it was a wise Edmund Burke who warned:
“… society cannot exist unless a controlling power upon will and appetite be placed somewhere; and the less of it there is within, the more of it there must be without. It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters.” (Leo Rosten, A Trumpet for Reason, Garden City, N.Y., Doubleday, 1970.)
For those of us who see the human condition as one in which there is more stupidity than cupidity, more apathy than conspiracy, there is no real place to begin but with ourselves!
How simply profound. “…men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters.
Russ Vought, the former Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the Trump Administration, is a long time acquaintance since his days at Heritage Action. Russ ran the OMB with the utmost integrity. He is an amazing individual and he is the reason for my post today.
Now aligned with the work Russ is doing at The Center for American Restoration and the activity arm, American Restoration Action (ARA), you are invited to learn more about ARA. Especially, I invite you to join in on the Thursday Calls to be enlightened on important issues that should drive the Constitutional agenda to Restore America.
About eight to ten years ago Conservatives reigned the Twitterverse. That was until the Marxists came along with their little bots and haters and Twitter’s ability to censor Conservative thought. And it very much appears #BigTech is in lockstep. (link corrected)
So basically, it appears, the only the way the Leftists can win is to spew hate and employ censorship to shut down thoughts that counter their skewed thinking.
To the many trolls, no matter which social media platform they slime into, please watch and apply Dr. Jordan Peterson’s words of wisdom to yourself, not as a victim:
Additional Reading and Video:
Rachel Bovard’s testimony in the House Antitrust Subcommittee on the growing power of Big Tech:
Apparently Josh Hawley started a conversation. Then Marco Rubio had a spin with #CommonGoodCapitalism, and then there have been several back and forth discussions from numerous others defending this, that, and the other from a variety of perspectives as they pull out a note or two from each others commentaries.(Note additional reading/viewing suggestions at the end of the posts in the links above.)
Having read numerous articles and tending to side with the concerns of the Libertarian critics of Rubio and Hawley it sounds like the under-50 crowd Republicans are ready to make their move to clean out the over 50-squatters in the GOP and set the tone for a Republican platform that will appeal to the most voters in the coming years, post-Trump.
As someone who has had to endure the lies of the 60’s generation, I feel like I am about to get run over by potentially Misplace Loyalty Millennials now. So go ahead and call me a Boomer, tell me to move over, but do not think for a moment that I won’t fight against all of the up and coming know-it-alls any less than I have been fighting against progressive know-it-alls in both parties with their same old rehashed tales of woe, struggle, and government solutions.
I have spoken with a few politicians who claim they are Fiscally Conservative but…. (yeah, wait for it…)….. they are Socially Moderate.
I wrote in an earlier post about not calling the Capitalist System anything but what it is: Capitalism. It is an amoral system wholly dependent upon those who use it to be filled with integrity. (Sort of like guns don’t kill people. People kill people.)
Cronyism is cronyism and cronyism abuses the Capitalist System. It happens in business and by government intervention.
Miscreants who lie, cheat, steal, and abuse the Capitalist System are not Capitalists. They are what they are, liars, cheaters, thieves and system abusers or basically, anti-capitalists.
So that leads me to Rachel Bovard’s piece, and full disclosure, I am a big fan of hers because she is always willing to #FrameTheDebate and #HaveTheDiscussion.
“But, either intentionally, or through a severe lack of capacity for nuance, [George Will] misses Hawley’s point, which also happens to be a political as well as an economic reality: that even despite broad indicators of wealth, huge swathsof this country still feel economically insecure and displaced, and that a majority of Americans believe a strong economy primarily benefits the rich.”
Huge swaths feel and a majority of Americans believe a strong economy primarily benefits the rich. Well that sounds like they have been raised on the socialist rhetoric of the last 40 years because that is the language of class warfare.
“And so visceral is the economic cynicism among millennials (who, by the way, will be the first generation to createless wealththan their parents) that they are turning, in droves, to socialism.”
Are these the same visceral millennial cynics who have been indoctrinated with socialist information for the last 40 years? Are they really turning to socialism or is it merely a core belief system they have embraced under the guise of having been tutored to become Fiscally Conservative but Socially Moderate/Liberals?
And seriously, they are 30 year olds who still have another 20-30 years to create wealth. They are not done yet. How many people have had to work at two or three jobs and go to school to pay their bills into their 40’s in my lifetime? (Boom-boomers.)
Sheesh, I was in my mid-40’s when I could afford my first home, 1245 sq feet and it was a 35 year old home we pretty much gutted and repaired to resell while we lived in it for four years. And we lived on one middle-class income.
Rachel defends Hawley, and I somewhat agree, as:
“doing his best to remind the GOP of what they once prioritized: community bonds, strong families, and an economy that encourages true individual autonomy—not one that just means a bevy of market choices—to flourish.”
But that does not mean I want government to step in and fix things before undoing all they have done to manipulate, regulate, and subjugate people and businesses through various degrees of government control. I do not believe the U.S. Government should establish itself as the new Civil Religion, the top down dispensers of nannyism for life.
So lets flashback to 1998 and see what the problems were then compared to now:
“These three simple questions asked in that order–do you care? are you responsible? and shouldn’t the rich pay their fair share?–have determined political careers for 62 years. These three politically loaded questions have been turning the liberal vision into liberal results for six decades.”
And there you have it. The same questions, now for eight decades. We still have a mess with Medicare/Medicaid, Social Security, and significantly increased tax burdens and those same questions have led us into a socialist/communist movement to control the American People as we have never before seen in my lifetime.
So as the upcoming GOP Millennials hammer out leadership for the coming years, and then within the #CommonGood debates to define issues, I hope discussions will be focused on principles and values that restore family as the fundamental unit of society and end the social programs that keep individuals and businesses from becoming independent while sustaining Government Bureaucrats as middle managers to control the people.
Like Matt Kibbe says:
“When you get past all the acrimony and all the name-calling, the question we are all debating is really quite simple: Do you believe in the freedom of individuals to determine their own futures and solve problems cooperatively working together, or do you believe that a powerful but benevolent government can and should rearrange outcomes and make things better?”― Don’t Hurt People and Don’t Take Their Stuff: A Libertarian Manifesto
In conversing with my Sentinel2Sentinel friends, many of us, Late End Baby Boomers, feel like we have been shafted by the 60’s generation only to now be shafted by the upstart Millennials. They are our bumper generations of #TrophyChildren, the ones who deserve it all at the expense of those around them while they complain about the generations before them, the Fat Cats, for “leaving them behind.”
And they will have their way, after all, they all whine a lot and have a lifetime of experience in demanding they get their wants met.
Look at the who’s who of the generations in Congress. And then really look at the few who truly speak out against the things that run contrary to the 9-12 Principles & Values. Who are the men and women fast tracking themselves up the ranks of the Grand Old Party? Who is behind them? Who is whispering in their ears? What is the philosophy they are peddling?
All this talk about Common Good Capitalism is nothing if it is not founded upon the 9 Principles and 12 Values as defined in the tenants of the 9-12 Project.
So let me suggest you get the book CONSCIOUS CAPITALISM by John Mackey and Raj Sisodia. And let’s start adding to the discussion how the Free Market System, the Capitalist System has equally been abused by Politicians beholden to lobbyists and others who whisper in the Politician’s ear in the guise of “common good.”
Let’s not change the Capitalist System. For it is that system that allows the micro-entrepreneur, who relies on the Free Market Capitalist System to rise up out of poverty, to do so without the heavy hand of bureaucratic opposition. Whether married or single, or divorced, man, woman, or child, it is the Capitalist System that has led many people to pull themselves out of poverty or uplift themselves to a higher earning platform, very often bringing others with them to new levels of personal success.
Let us begin with not calling the Capitalist System anything but what it is: Capitalism.
Cronyism is cronyism and cronyism abuses the Capitalist System.
Common Good is only Common Good if and when it does not abuse the Capitalist System.
Conscious Capitalism, if it is free of government interventions, bailouts, special regulations, and truly operates on the principles of free will without compulsion, and that includes being free of the Cass Sunstein Nudge philosophy, will not abuse the Capitalist System.
When discussing Capitalism, the conversation should be focused on the Principles and Values that define the need for the Capitalist System. After all, the Capitalist System is an amoral system wholly dependant upon those who use it to be filled with integrity. (Sort of like guns don’t kill people. People kill people.)
If Rubio and Hawley really care about the Common Good, then they need to define the problem in terms of those who abuse of the Capitalist System. By exposing the liars, deceivers, and sophists who abuse the Capitalist System they could defy the miscreants by better supporting We, The People in keeping the markets free. Otherwise they are not working at the speed of trust and instead handing out trophies to the who’s who in abusing the Capitalist System.
Some supporters of Rubio claim his speech as “remarkable.” Well, I guess they can claim that depending upon what their definition of is is in “remarkable.” And yet I find it highly irritating to hear claims of praise for it being remarkable when No. No. No. It was not remarkable.
It was meh. It sounded like someone reaching out to people who need emotional support through words of flowery feel goods, shared feelings of the pain, the suffering, all in the voice of a whiner so as to prove feelings matter and how Marco, a potential leader for the universe, is with us all in seeking governmental solutions for Common Good Capitalism.
Marco’s quote from Robert F. Kennedy was interesting:
Senator Robert F. Kennedy noted that “if… we, as Americans, are bound together by a common concern for each other, then an urgent national priority is upon us.”
Because, he said, “even if we act to erase material poverty, there is another greater task; it is to confront the poverty of satisfaction – purpose and dignity – that afflicts us all.”
My goal for this speech, but also in what I have tried to do in the Senate, is above all else about doing whatever it takes to keep our country from coming apart – whatever it takes so that this exceptional nation continues and endures instead of ending with us.
Then Marco and his crew need toseriously engage in a discussion to address valid criticisms of Marco’s seemingly self-serving speech. Otherwise, all of the remarkable Rubio talking points are merely an outreach to moderate leaning socialists while alienating his conservative base.
Rubio delivered a well-received 30-minute speech, hitting key campaign issues including jobs, the “crushing national debt,” national security and immigration, even taking a dig at Republicans now serving in Washington. He said temporary tax cuts should become permanent, but spending cuts, including a ban on earmarks, also would be necessary to achieve a balanced budget.The economy continues to suffer, in part, because business owners who could add employees and expand are “afraid to because of uncertainty about the future,” Rubio said. “Small businesses are taking the brunt of it and we’re all paying the price.”
While on Twitter I saw several live Tweets about Marco Rubio speaking to “a business class at Catholic University.” Here are the news stories I read about his speech from links referenced in the tweets:
Reading the Daily Signal article did make me feel a little better, not much. Reading Marco’s speech, well, if nails on a chalkboard bothered me, yeah, that is the kind of feeling I would describe from this particular speech writing of Rubio.
Feel free to download Rubio’s speech and read along as you watch him give the speech below. You might jot down thoughts and questions in the margin of the Rubio script as you listen to him.
I have a lot more to say on this. My problem is that watching the video of the speech still make blood shoot out of my eyes. I have to cool my jets and go through it all again so I can write without screaming on the page. I have to check my emotional response to go through what really irritated me, and still irritates me about that which I am hearing come out of Marco’s Mouth.