Last night, I wrote a post showing how the Democrats have thrown over $20 billion in unrelated spending and special handouts to the upcoming war supplemental. Today, I found some more striking information within this 172 page bill that the mainstream media is largely choosing to ignore, but needs to see the light of day.
As you may recall, last January during the Democrats "100 Hour Agenda" they passed a minimum wage increase. Since that time, they have been unable to work with the Senate to get a bill to the President, and it has stalled. So, facing the prospects that this legislation may not go anywhere the Democrats have up and decided to add it to the supplemental. This is nuts. Basically, since the Dems can't get their policy to pass on its face they have resorted to forcing it through in this must-pass legislation. Nevermind the fact that the supplemental is only supposed to be for emergency war spending.
Nancy Pelosi vowed following last fall's election to make "this the most honest, ethical, and open Congress in history." After seeing repeated examples of stuff like this, I would have to disagree. Normal expenditures or policy debates should not be arbitrarily designated as emergencies.
I was pleased to see in the papers this morning that Rob Portman, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, has expressed his opposition to the extra spending included in the war supplemental. He was quoted in Congessional Quarterly as saying "the war supplemental should be focused on combating terrorism and supporting our troops, and not held hostage to unrelated, domestic spending that can be addressed through the normal appropriations process." I hope he carries on this message to the President, and urges a veto if the bill is not clean.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member