Last night, the Senate passed the omnibus spending bill, allowing the measure to move to President Obama's desk where he's expected to immediately sign it. The bill is only a budget-filler to take the government through until September, when the trillion-dollar-plus budget for 2010 is expected to come up.
I don't object to passing a budget - it's a necessary exercise. But the $8-billion in pet projects really bug me, and the fact that a number of prominent Republicans/traitors support the earmark process makes it doubly hard to swallow.
The big immediate excuse by all for those earmarks?
"It is in America's best interest to close the book on the last administration and let the new one hit the ground running," said Sen. Daniel Inouye, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee.
Please; Congress holds the purse-strings and determines what is in and out of the budget. Even if President Bush had personally requested each and every earmark (the largest requester by dollar value is Murtha, and the largest by number of earmarks is Shelby), blaming what is chosen today on something that originally came up for debate on a prior Administration (Bush refused to sign this bill until some of the earmarks were removed) is the height of childishness.
Here is a list of all the earmarks by dollar value. Strangely, one of the other reasons offered up for allowing the bill to pass as is, is that the earmark dollar value, as a percent of the total budget, is small, and that focus on that small amount is simply diversionary. Wow! $8-billion is such a small amount that you shouldn't worry your pretty little head about it. Now go back to the corner and play with your dolls. Here's a thought - I don't care if the amount is only $1-million. It's the corruption and waste that bothers me.
The long-term excuse for continuing the earmark culture is that the money would be spent anyway, and Congressional members are simply ensuring a 'fair share' for their individual states. This is an amazingly duplicitous argument. It would be reasonable to fight for a block of money to go to one's state or district, and then let the local and state governments go through their normal budgeting and allocation process. Instead, by having Congress decide which individuals projects are funded, local and state governments, and the normal bidding process are circumvented. This power can only lead to corruption in the end, and that end result is the reason McCain has been screaming about earmarks for twenty years.
Showing posts with label mccain. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mccain. Show all posts
11 March 2009
07 November 2008
Risk sensitivity and voters
While sitting in an Ecological Modeling Class the other day, I had a revelation about why normally sane, rational people were so caught up in the Obamamania. They are economic risk-takers. Risk-sensitivity theory is based on modeling the behavior of consumers based on their preferences when faced with a choice between a 50/50 chance of a high payoff (vs. no or low payoff) and a 100% chance of a moderate payoff. These models are the whole reason for the targeting of low-income and low-education consumers by lotto boards; people with lower incomes and lower educations often (note, not always - no model is perfect) choose the riskier option. They will spend money on the chance of a high payoff, knowing they're more likely to get no or a low payoff. Those who have more, tend to be more cautious and choose the 'certainty' option. They are more likely to choose the 100% option of a moderate payoff.
This sounds to me to be very close to what happened on Tuesday. Only in this case, I think we'd have to add into the 'low-income' category, those who perceive themselves (perhaps 2nd hand) as suffering. These voters were willing to take a gamble on someone who has no experience, a murky background, and offers 'pie-in-the-sky' rhetoric over a true American hero with more experience in his little finger. The Obama-lovers were "risk prone." To get themselves away from what they perceive as the source of their woes (the Republican Party), they gambled. Even with this gambling addiction sweeping our country, and the Obama campaign doing its darndest to buy the election, John McCain would still have won if it weren't for the addition of those 'we hate him so much we'll doom the entire country' Republicans who NEVER SHOWED UP TO VOTE. I'm really angriest at them. How dare they thumb their noses at all of us. Now we all have to find out what the gamble will bring us.
This sounds to me to be very close to what happened on Tuesday. Only in this case, I think we'd have to add into the 'low-income' category, those who perceive themselves (perhaps 2nd hand) as suffering. These voters were willing to take a gamble on someone who has no experience, a murky background, and offers 'pie-in-the-sky' rhetoric over a true American hero with more experience in his little finger. The Obama-lovers were "risk prone." To get themselves away from what they perceive as the source of their woes (the Republican Party), they gambled. Even with this gambling addiction sweeping our country, and the Obama campaign doing its darndest to buy the election, John McCain would still have won if it weren't for the addition of those 'we hate him so much we'll doom the entire country' Republicans who NEVER SHOWED UP TO VOTE. I'm really angriest at them. How dare they thumb their noses at all of us. Now we all have to find out what the gamble will bring us.
05 November 2008
John McCain's Concession Speech and National Results
The National Results are as follows (pasted from Real Clear Politics). MO and NC were too close to call for the Presidential race as of last posting.
Thanks to Bitten and Bound for the video posting, since I couldn't grab it directly from MSNBC for some reason. This has got to be the most generous, and truly loving, concession speech I've ever heard, and is an eloquent demonstration of why I voted for Sen. McCain. Fortunately, he returns to the Senate, so we'll still have his leadership. Now we all have to work hard to keep government accountable and work for a unified country.
· President ·
Obama/Biden 52% (349) McCain/Palin 46% (163)
| 7:00 ET | Obama | McCain | Obama | McCain | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Georgia (15) | 46% | 53% | (99%) | South Carolina (8) | 45% | 54% | (94%) |
 Indiana (11) | 50% | 49% | (99%) | Vermont (3) | 67% | 31% | (89%) |
| Kentucky (8) | 41% | 58% | (100%) | Virginia (13) | 52% | 47% | (99%) |
| 7:30 ET | Obama | McCain | Obama | McCain | |||
 North Carolina (15) | 50% | 49% | (100%) | Ohio (20) | 51% | 47% | (96%) |
| West Virginia (5) | 43% | 56% | (99%) | ||||
| 8:00 ET | Obama | McCain | Obama | McCain | |||
| Alabama (9) | 39% | 61% | (99%) | Massachusetts (12) | 62% | 36% | (96%) |
| Connecticut (7) | 60% | 39% | (96%) | Mississippi (6) | 43% | 57% | (99%) |
| Delaware (3) | 62% | 37% | (100%) | Missouri (11) | 49% | 50% | (100%) |
| DC (3) | 93% | 7% | (100%) | New Hampshire (4) | 55% | 44% | (85%) |
| Florida (27) | 51% | 49% | (99%) | New Jersey (15) | 57% | 42% | (98%) |
| Illinois (21) | 61% | 38% | (95%) | Oklahoma (7) | 34% | 66% | (99%) |
| Maine (4) | 58% | 40% | (78%) | Pennsylvania (21) | 55% | 44% | (99%) |
| Maryland (10) | 61% | 38% | (97%) | Tennessee (11) | 42% | 57% | (98%) |
| 8:30 ET | Obama | McCain | Obama | McCain | |||
| Arkansas (6) | 39% | 59% | (96%) | ||||
| 9:00 ET | Obama | McCain | Obama | McCain | |||
| Arizona (10) | 45% | 54% | (99%) | New York (31) | 62% | 37% | (99%) |
| Colorado (9) | 53% | 46% | (80%) | North Dakota (3) | 45% | 53% | (97%) |
| Kansas (6) | 42% | 57% | (97%) | Rhode Island (4) | 63% | 35% | (98%) |
| Louisiana (9) | 40% | 59% | (100%) | South Dakota (3) | 45% | 53% | (100%) |
| Michigan (17) | 57% | 41% | (99%) | Texas (34) | 44% | 55% | (99%) |
| Minnesota (10) | 54% | 44% | (99%) | Wisconsin (10) | 56% | 43% | (99%) |
| Nebraska (5) | 41% | 57% | (99%) | Wyoming (3) | 33% | 65% | (100%) |
| New Mexico (5) | 57% | 42% | (99%) | ||||
| 10:00 ET | Obama | McCain | Obama | McCain | |||
| Iowa (7) | 54% | 45% | (99%) | Nevada (5) | 55% | 43% | (100%) |
| Montana (3) | 47% | 50% | (99%) | Utah (5) | 34% | 63% | (99%) |
| 11:00 ET | Obama | McCain | Obama | McCain | |||
| California (55) | 61% | 37% | (91%) | Oregon (7) | 55% | 43% | (62%) |
| Hawaii (4) | 72% | 27% | (99%) | Washington (11) | 58% | 41% | (56%) |
| Idaho (4) | 36% | 61% | (98%) | ||||
| 1:00 ET | Obama | McCain | Obama | McCain | |||
| Alaska (3) | 36% | 62% | (99%) | ||||
· Senate ·
Democrats 56* (+5) Republicans 41 (-5)
| Democrat | Republican | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alaska | Begich 47% | Stevens 48% | (99%) | - |
| Colorado | Udall 52% | Schaffer 43% | (87%) | Dem Pickup |
| Georgia | Martin 46% | Chambliss 50% | (99%) | - |
| Kentucky | Lunsford 47% | McConnell 53% | (100%) | GOP Hold |
| Maine | Allen 39% | Collins 61% | (99%) | GOP Hold |
| Louisiana | Landrieu 52% | Kennedy 46% | (99%) | Dem Hold |
| Minnesota | Franken 42% | Coleman 42% | (99%) | GOP Hold |
| Mississippi | Musgrove 45% | Wicker 55% | (99%) | GOP Hold |
| Nebraska | Kleeb 40% | Johanns 58% | (99%) | GOP Hold |
| New Hampshire | Shaheen 52% | Sununu 45% | (85%) | Dem Pickup |
| New Jersey | Lautenberg 56% | Zimmer 43% | (99%) | Dem Hold |
| New Mexico | Udall 61% | Pearce 39% | (99%) | Dem Pickup |
| North Carolina | Hagan 53% | Dole 44% | (100%) | Dem Pickup |
| Oregon | Merkley 47% | Smith 48% | (75%) | - |
| Texas | Noriega 43% | Cornyn 55% | (99%) | GOP Hold |
| Virginia | Warner 64% | Gilmore 34% | (98%) | Dem Pickup |
| * Joe Lieberman (CT-ID) and Bernie Sanders (VT-I/S) caucus with Senate Democrats | ||||
· House ·
Democrats 252 (+20) Republicans 173 (-20)
| Democrat | Republican | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maryland (1) | Kratovil 49% | Harris 49% | (100%) | - |
| Idaho (1) | Minnick 51% | Sali 49% | (96%) | - |
| Virginia (5) | Perriello 50% | Goode 50% | (100%) | - |
| California (4) | Brown 50% | McClintock 50% | (100%) | - |
| New Jersey (3) | Adler 50% | Myers 50% | (93%) | - |
Democrats
| Holds | ||
|---|---|---|
| GA-8 | NH-1 | AL-5 |
| KY-3 | MS-1 | PA-10 |
| PA-11 | WI-8 | IN-2 |
| PA-12 | ||
| Pickups | ||
|---|---|---|
| VA-2 | VA-11 | OH-1 |
| OH-16 | AL-2 | AZ-1 |
| CO-4 | CT-4 | FL-24 |
| FL-8 | IL-11 | MI-7 |
| MI-9 | NV-3 | NM-1 |
| NM-2 | NY-13 | NY-25 |
| NY-29 | NC-8 | PA-3 |
Republicans
| Holds | ||
|---|---|---|
| FL-25 | MN-6 | IN-3 |
| OH-15 | SC-1 | AZ-3 |
| FL-13 | FL-21 | IL-10 |
| KY-2 | MN-3 | MO-6 |
| MO-9 | NJ-7 | OH-2 |
| VA-6 | WY-AL | |
| Pickups | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FL-16 | KS-2 | LA-6 | ||
| TX-22 | ||||
Thanks to Bitten and Bound for the video posting, since I couldn't grab it directly from MSNBC for some reason. This has got to be the most generous, and truly loving, concession speech I've ever heard, and is an eloquent demonstration of why I voted for Sen. McCain. Fortunately, he returns to the Senate, so we'll still have his leadership. Now we all have to work hard to keep government accountable and work for a unified country.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)