PENTAGON PORK LARDS SPENDING BILL
Weekly Wastebasket: Volume XIII No. 21 - May 23, 2008
http://www.taxpayer.net/about/
"As they considered the massive emergency Iraq supplemental spending bill this week, Senators cut some of the worst earmarks and bloated spending. But they ignored billions of weapons pork lining the coffers of big defense companies.
Some of their cuts were responsible. The budget scalpel excised an earmark by Sens. Richard Durbin (D-IL) and Kit Bond (R-MO) that reversed the administration’s efforts to kill the $1.8 billion extension for the FutureGen clean-coal power project in Illinois. The earmark would have continued a cooperative agreement between the Energy Department and a consortium of private investors to build the plant, even though the consortium includes a Chinese company that would “ultimately be able to use the technology developed with taxpayer dollars to build plants in China,” according to Roll Call.
However, billions of dollars for new weapons were approved by the Senate, despite these programs being controversial, unwanted by the Pentagon, or having little or no relation to the Iraq war. Last year, the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee basically admitted that they were going to use the emergency spending bill to stuff in additional items that didn’t fit in the defense spending bill. And they did. Here are the top three we found in the current supplemental:
C-17 – The legislation appropriates $3.6 billion for 15 new C-17’s that the Pentagon really doesn’t want and which have little to do with military operations in Iraq. This funding has more to do with keeping Boeing’s Long Beach production line open into the summer of 2010, than Iraq. It is also a gift to Boeing and gives them time to find more international buyers for the aircraft.
C-130J – The emergency spending bill provides $1.8 billion for 18 new C-130J transport planes that, until recently, the Pentagon wanted to eliminate. While we are aware that one C-130J has been lost in Iraq, the Air Force argues they need many more because increased stress on the aircraft’s airframes has caused them to age faster than expected. Sounds like they are just shopping to fill their weapons wish list.
CV-22 – The bill provides more than $500 million for the CV-22 Osprey. The money has been added despite limited use of the aircraft in Iraq. In reality, the money will help fund the recent DoD plan to purchase 141 CV-22 aircraft for the U.S. Marine Corps, and 26 for U.S. Air Force units operating with Special Operations Command. The plan involves buying up to 33 CV-22s per year from 2008 to 2013.
For several years, the Pentagon has used the emergency spending bills as a slush fund to pad the overall Defense budget for weapons programs that don’t need to be replaced or are unrelated to the war. The Senate bill continues that trend.
Cutting funding for weapons not necessary to fight the war in Iraq seems like a great place to start in an effort to get us closer to the President's initial request. And the $6 billion for the three new weapons programs mentioned should be the first to go."
As I mentioned... there is definitely more to this story!!
Saturday, May 24, 2008
Friday, May 23, 2008
Miller Split with Bush?
If you see Congressman Miller during this upcoming vacation week, pat him on the back and reassure him, “it’ll be okay.” Last week in Congress had to be exciting!
On Wednesday, his votes were consistent with his usual Way-Too-Red political stances. He voted against HR 6049 that provides incentives for investment in renewable energy, carbon capture and sequestration demonstration projects, energy efficiency and conservation. The PAY GO for the bill required closing tax loopholes for certain employees of offshore corporations, like hedge-fund managers, and delaying the effective date of a tax benefit for multinational corporations operating overseas. Granted, the votes for and against were along party lines, with Miller voting “no” with the Republicans.
He voted against environmental protection and the Whooping Crane by voting “no” on HR 1771. Although the North American Whooping Crane is one of the most rare and endangered birds in the world, Miller voted against funding that would encourage crane conservation efforts by supporting initiatives and organizations dedicated to the protection of the birds and their ecosystems. That bill passed by a 2/3 vote of the House without Mr. Miller.
Then, he got to vote “no” on the Farm Bill. As some may know and others think, farm subsidy programs may need better governmental oversight, or an overhaul. However, this is the same funding mechanism for food stamps and other rural programs that provide greatly needed basic assistance to many low-income families. The Farm Bill had been vetoed by the President, but on its second run, it passed the House by a 2/3 veto-proof vote, without Mr. Miller.
Next up were the bi-partisan votes. Republicans generally have tried to paint the Democrats as anti-defense, anti-troop, peace loving, tree-huggers [or should that be crane huggers?]. With three votes this week, it is certain that while most of us Democrats may take claim to the last two monikers, we are not the first two. Three separate bills directly related to the care and conditions for our veterans passed by unanimous votes of the House with Miller included! The House approved the Veteran’s Emergency Care Fairness Act, the Veterans Compensation Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act, and the Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility Authorization and Lease Act. Hooray! The two parties agree on something.
Finally, though, on Thursday, came the fun battle that had whooping bi-partisan support of our troops and the defense of this nation. On May 19, Miller put out a newsletter lauding that the House Armed Services Committee, on which he serves, reported out the annual National Defense Authorization Act, H.R. 5658. He stated “This bill reaffirms our commitment to the men and women who serve proudly in the United States uniform by providing them with the necessary resources to protect Americans and our national interests. With our country engaged in a long war against violent extremists, it is critical that Republicans and Democrats come together in support of those who voluntarily fight to protect us and spread democracy throughout the world.” I wish he had sent out a news blast though, after the almost 8-hour debate, with a final vote recorded at 9:59 p.m., 58 amendments, and a 384-23 vote of the House, despite Bush’s grumblings about a veto that had actually started with amendments being made in the Armed Services Committee.
The White House had objected to about 10 provisions in the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act, including a $719 million cut in the amount of missile defense funding requested by the Pentagon and a provision to review the role of foreign subsidies in the $35 billion Northup Grumman deal. Republican Duncan Hunter (CA) argued that lawmakers needed flexibility to add weapons to the budget that had been forgotten by the Pentagon. He argued on the House floor, "We've put in systems that save lives that the Pentagon did not think about," and cited additional funding for armor for Army trucks, greater use of unmanned airplanes, and equipment to defuse roadside bombs.
Granted, there is a lot more to this story than we all know. However, is it possible that Mr. Miller will join his fellow Republicans as they continue the split from the Bush Administration? Americans have had enough and every member of Congress should know that by now.
On Wednesday, his votes were consistent with his usual Way-Too-Red political stances. He voted against HR 6049 that provides incentives for investment in renewable energy, carbon capture and sequestration demonstration projects, energy efficiency and conservation. The PAY GO for the bill required closing tax loopholes for certain employees of offshore corporations, like hedge-fund managers, and delaying the effective date of a tax benefit for multinational corporations operating overseas. Granted, the votes for and against were along party lines, with Miller voting “no” with the Republicans.
He voted against environmental protection and the Whooping Crane by voting “no” on HR 1771. Although the North American Whooping Crane is one of the most rare and endangered birds in the world, Miller voted against funding that would encourage crane conservation efforts by supporting initiatives and organizations dedicated to the protection of the birds and their ecosystems. That bill passed by a 2/3 vote of the House without Mr. Miller.
Then, he got to vote “no” on the Farm Bill. As some may know and others think, farm subsidy programs may need better governmental oversight, or an overhaul. However, this is the same funding mechanism for food stamps and other rural programs that provide greatly needed basic assistance to many low-income families. The Farm Bill had been vetoed by the President, but on its second run, it passed the House by a 2/3 veto-proof vote, without Mr. Miller.
Next up were the bi-partisan votes. Republicans generally have tried to paint the Democrats as anti-defense, anti-troop, peace loving, tree-huggers [or should that be crane huggers?]. With three votes this week, it is certain that while most of us Democrats may take claim to the last two monikers, we are not the first two. Three separate bills directly related to the care and conditions for our veterans passed by unanimous votes of the House with Miller included! The House approved the Veteran’s Emergency Care Fairness Act, the Veterans Compensation Cost-of-Living Adjustment Act, and the Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Facility Authorization and Lease Act. Hooray! The two parties agree on something.
Finally, though, on Thursday, came the fun battle that had whooping bi-partisan support of our troops and the defense of this nation. On May 19, Miller put out a newsletter lauding that the House Armed Services Committee, on which he serves, reported out the annual National Defense Authorization Act, H.R. 5658. He stated “This bill reaffirms our commitment to the men and women who serve proudly in the United States uniform by providing them with the necessary resources to protect Americans and our national interests. With our country engaged in a long war against violent extremists, it is critical that Republicans and Democrats come together in support of those who voluntarily fight to protect us and spread democracy throughout the world.” I wish he had sent out a news blast though, after the almost 8-hour debate, with a final vote recorded at 9:59 p.m., 58 amendments, and a 384-23 vote of the House, despite Bush’s grumblings about a veto that had actually started with amendments being made in the Armed Services Committee.
The White House had objected to about 10 provisions in the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act, including a $719 million cut in the amount of missile defense funding requested by the Pentagon and a provision to review the role of foreign subsidies in the $35 billion Northup Grumman deal. Republican Duncan Hunter (CA) argued that lawmakers needed flexibility to add weapons to the budget that had been forgotten by the Pentagon. He argued on the House floor, "We've put in systems that save lives that the Pentagon did not think about," and cited additional funding for armor for Army trucks, greater use of unmanned airplanes, and equipment to defuse roadside bombs.
Granted, there is a lot more to this story than we all know. However, is it possible that Mr. Miller will join his fellow Republicans as they continue the split from the Bush Administration? Americans have had enough and every member of Congress should know that by now.
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
Miller's Middle-Class Grades
2008 Final grade to be released 03.2009
2007 -F
2005 -F
2004 -F
2003 -F
2007 -F
2005 -F
2004 -F
2003 -F
H.R. 5715, Ensuring Continued Access to Student Loans Act of 2008
TOPICS: College tuition, Community college, Debt & Bankruptcy, Education, Saving for college, Student loans; NAY
H.R. 5613, Protecting the Medicaid Safety Net Act of 2008; TOPICS: Health Care, Hospitals, Medicaid, Public health; NAY
H.R. 5351, Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation Tax Act of 2008; TOPICS: Consumers, Corporate taxes, Efficient technology, Energy & Environment, Energy conservation, Global warming, Green buildings, Green jobs, Oil, Renewable fuels, Utilities; NAY
H.R. 5140, Recovery Rebates and Economic Stimulus for the American People Act of 2008; TOPICS: Consumers, Corporate taxes, Economic stimulus, Mortgage lending, Tax cuts, Tax Fairness, Workplace & Job Creation; YEA
H.R. 4137, College Opportunity and Affordability Act of 2008; TOPICS: College tuition, Education, Energy conservation, Pell Grants, Student loans; NAY
H.R. 3963, Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007 [Revised bill]; TOPICS: Health Care, Medicaid, Sales taxes, SCHIP; NAY
H.R. 3548, Plain Language in Government Communications Act of 2008; TOPICS: Drug safety, Government Accountability, Prescription drugs; YEA
H.R. 1424, Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act of 2008; TOPICS: Employment discrimination, Health Care, Medical research; NAY
2007
H.R. 4040, Consumer Product Safety Modernization Act of 2007; TOPICS: Capping damages, Consumers, Product liability; YEA
2007
H.R. 4040, Consumer Product Safety Modernization Act of 2007; TOPICS: Capping damages, Consumers, Product liability; YEA
H.R. 3996, Temporary Tax Relief Act of 2007; TOPICS: Alternative minimum tax, Child tax credit, College tuition, Corporate taxes, Income taxes, Mortgage lending, Pay-go, Tax cuts, Tax Fairness; NAY
H.R. 3688, United States-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement Implementation Act of 2007
TOPICS: Consumers, Food safety, Outsourcing, Trade agreement, Workplace & Job Creation
No Vote
TOPICS: Consumers, Food safety, Outsourcing, Trade agreement, Workplace & Job Creation
No Vote
H.R. 3580, FDA Amendments Act of 2007; TOPICS: Consumers, Corporate Accountability, Deceptive advertising and marketing, Drug safety, Food safety, Health Care, Prescription drugs;
YEA
YEA
H.R. 2895, Affordable Housing Trust Fund Act of 2007; TOPICS: Affordable Housing Trust Fund, Downpayment assistance, Housing, Mortgage lending; NAY
H.R. 2831, Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2007; TOPICS: Civil Justice, Employment discrimination, Workplace & Job Creation; NAY
H.R. 2669, College Cost Reduction Act of 2007; TOPICS: College tuition, Education, Pell Grants, Saving for college, Student loans; NAY
H.R. 1362, Accountability in Contracting Act of 2007; TOPICS: Contracting, Government Accountability; NAY
H.R. 1257, Shareholder Vote on Executive Compensation Act of 2007; TOPICS: Corporate Accountability, Executive compensation, Shareholder rights; NAY
H.R. 976, Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007; TOPICS: Health Care, Medicaid, Sales taxes, SCHIP; NAY
H.R. 800, Employee Free Choice Act of 2007; TOPICS: Right to organize, Unions, Workplace & Job Creation; NAY
H.R. 6, Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007; TOPICS: Coal, Consumers, Corporate taxes, Efficient technology, Energy & Environment, Energy conservation, Global warming, Green buildings, Green jobs, Heating fuel, Job training, Oil, Pollution, Renewable fuels, Tax cuts, Utilities; NAY
H.R. 6, CLEAN Energy Act of 2007; TOPICS: Corporate taxes, Efficient technology, Energy & Environment, Global warming, Green buildings, Oil, Renewable fuels; NAY
H.R. 4, Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act of 2007; TOPICS: Health Care, HMOs and insurance companies, Medicare, Prescription drugs; YEA
WHO DOES THIS MAN REPRESENT?
Open Letter to Congressman Miller
6 May 2008
Representative Jeff Miller
US Congress
Via Facsimile: (202) 225-3414
(850) 664-0851
Re: Your Position on H.R. 333 & H.R. 508
To My Congressman:
Please share your opinion on the following:
1. Your website shows a poll regarding governmental regulation of gas prices. Today, it shows that 49% say yes, government should regulate gas prices and 51% say no. Can you tell us what is your opinion and what you are doing about the exorbitant gas prices?
2. Why did you vote against HR 895 that established an independent ethics investigation board?
3. Why did you vote against HR 5819 that would amend the Small Business Act to improve the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program and the Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) program?
4. What is your position, and why is that your position, on H.R. 333, an act related to tax-exempt payments to retired members of the Armed Forces who have a service connected disability?
5. What is the date the Veteran’s Committee will consider H.R. 333 and will you be there?
6. What is your position, and why is that your position, on H.R. 508, an act requiring United States military disengagement from Iraq, to provide United States assistance for reconstruction and reconciliation, among other purposes?
Thank you.
Respectfully,
Your Constituent
Representative Jeff Miller
US Congress
Via Facsimile: (202) 225-3414
(850) 664-0851
Re: Your Position on H.R. 333 & H.R. 508
To My Congressman:
Please share your opinion on the following:
1. Your website shows a poll regarding governmental regulation of gas prices. Today, it shows that 49% say yes, government should regulate gas prices and 51% say no. Can you tell us what is your opinion and what you are doing about the exorbitant gas prices?
2. Why did you vote against HR 895 that established an independent ethics investigation board?
3. Why did you vote against HR 5819 that would amend the Small Business Act to improve the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program and the Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) program?
4. What is your position, and why is that your position, on H.R. 333, an act related to tax-exempt payments to retired members of the Armed Forces who have a service connected disability?
5. What is the date the Veteran’s Committee will consider H.R. 333 and will you be there?
6. What is your position, and why is that your position, on H.R. 508, an act requiring United States military disengagement from Iraq, to provide United States assistance for reconstruction and reconciliation, among other purposes?
Thank you.
Respectfully,
Your Constituent
Thursday, May 1, 2008
Miller vs. Small Businesses
Government should support small business development, not the growth of the federal administration. This week, the US Congress passed H.R. 5819 to reauthorize the “Small Business Innovation Research and Small Business Technology Transfer Research” programs. The bill passed with a vote of 368-43, with 75% of House Republicans voting for it. However, Representative Jeff Miller, chose to vote against small business development.
The programs are a 25-year-old government-wide initiative that have funded 85,000 projects for $18 billion, about $2.3 billion annually, and are the largest source of federal support for private-sector technological innovation. Funding for the programs comes from federal agencies with research and development budgets. The 11 largest agencies, such as the Department of Defense, National Institutes of Health, and NASA, must reserve 2.5% of their budgets for the SBIR/SBTTR programs. Small businesses can receive grants to assist in developing technologies that will serve the research and development needs of those federal agencies. Priority is given to applications from companies in rural areas and depressed areas, from veterans, and from energy-efficient organizations.
The Bush administration opposed the resolution saying, basically, that it reduced funding for priority federal agency research activities, provided subsidies for business development, and that it could lead to inappropriate set asides for venture-capital businesses. Why would Representative Jeff Miller vote against 85% of his colleagues in Congress, against privatization for research and development, and on the side of an administration headed by a President with a 71% disapproval rating?
The programs are a 25-year-old government-wide initiative that have funded 85,000 projects for $18 billion, about $2.3 billion annually, and are the largest source of federal support for private-sector technological innovation. Funding for the programs comes from federal agencies with research and development budgets. The 11 largest agencies, such as the Department of Defense, National Institutes of Health, and NASA, must reserve 2.5% of their budgets for the SBIR/SBTTR programs. Small businesses can receive grants to assist in developing technologies that will serve the research and development needs of those federal agencies. Priority is given to applications from companies in rural areas and depressed areas, from veterans, and from energy-efficient organizations.
The Bush administration opposed the resolution saying, basically, that it reduced funding for priority federal agency research activities, provided subsidies for business development, and that it could lead to inappropriate set asides for venture-capital businesses. Why would Representative Jeff Miller vote against 85% of his colleagues in Congress, against privatization for research and development, and on the side of an administration headed by a President with a 71% disapproval rating?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
