• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

New Budget=Stimulus.. Part 2

Mike

Well-known member
Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009: "Stimulus, Part II"
February 24, 2009
EagleForum.org
If you thought that the passage of the "stimulus" bill a week ago signaled a coming hiatus in wasteful spending projects and left-wing goodies being slipped into legislation, well, you were wrong!

The liberal House Majority just announced today that they plan to begin debate on the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009 (H.R. 1105), which is a consolidated version of the nine unfinished appropriations bills from the previous congress, tomorrow-Wednesday, February 25, 2009!

The bill does not even fund the government for a full year; the terms of this proposed budget run only from March 2009 through September 2009. As we have seen in the five short weeks that this Congress has been in session, very little time is allotted to debate any bill and final votes are forced well before adequate analysis of the issues has taken place.
H.R. 1105 is simply the Obama-Pelosi-Reid stimulus bill's little brother. It contains many of the same wasteful spending provisions and earmarks for left wing organizations and pet-projects, and it amounts to certain government agencies and programs being funded twice.

The following spending levels are above and beyond those provided for in the stimulus, which has now been officially signed into law:

Total spending proposed in the 2009 Omnibus. $410 billion. This is a $32 billion increase over 2008 levels and represents the largest annual spending increase since the Carter Administration.

International Family Planning. $545 million, which will now flow to abortion providers since President Obama has overturned the Mexico City Policy.
Health Care Rationing. $50 million, in addition to the $1.1 billion included in the "stimulus" to conduct "comparative effectiveness research" to evaluate the effectiveness of different preventative health interventions.
Fairness Doctrine. Removes a provision that prohibits funds from being used to implement the so-called "fairness doctrine," which aims to censor "conservative" media content.
Census. $3.13 billion, in addition to the $1 billion provided in the "stimulus" for the 2010 Census, which the Obama Administration is attempting to monitor and control from the Executive Branch.
ACORN. $181 million, for the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation for housing counseling-the program that greatly contributed to the current mortgage meltdown.
Obama Inauguration. $20 million. To reimburse State and local governments for inauguration expenses.
Obama Inauguration, part 2. $39 million, for the District of Columbia to pay for the increased security.
New West Wing/White House computers. $76 million.
Migrant Housing. $5.4 million. In other words, government benefits for non-U.S. citizens.
• UN/international Peacekeeping. $1.5 billion, while also raising the cap on annual U.S. contributions to UN peacekeeping.

And now, here is a quick sampling of the earmarks included in the Omnibus:
$950,000 for a National Council of La Raza loan fund for "community development activities."
$5.8 million for the Edward M. Kennedy Institute for the Senate at the University of Massachusetts.
$7.1 million for the recovery of Hawaiian sea turtle populations.
$713,000 for "intelligent facades for high performance green buildings" in New York.
$475,000 for hybrid buses in Guam.
• $950,000 for a bike path in Wisconsin.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Don't forget that 40-45% of the "pork" put into the bill for the folks back home was put in by folks that have an (R) by their name.....
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Don't forget that 40-45% of the "pork" put into the bill for the folks back home was put in by folks that have an (R) by their name.....

"Fiddling while Rome burns"

Yes OT, the Republicans are guilty too, so we should just shut up and let it pass?
 

Mike

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Don't forget that 40-45% of the "pork" put into the bill for the folks back home was put in by folks that have an (R) by their name.....

Doesn't matter. These plugs were inserted back last year when the deficit was at sustainable levels.

Your "Boy" has lifted our debt to heights unknown in just the last few weeks.

Plus, I thought he was going to go in and remove them, as he said, "Line By Line"? :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
Mike said:
Oldtimer said:
Don't forget that 40-45% of the "pork" put into the bill for the folks back home was put in by folks that have an (R) by their name.....

Doesn't matter. These plugs were inserted back last year when the deficit was at sustainable levels.

Your "Boy" has lifted our debt to heights unknown in just the last few weeks.

Plus, I thought he was going to go in and remove them, as he said, "Line By Line"? :lol: :lol: :lol:

No he said "lieing by lieing".
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
So then you think the Repubs would introduce/support a line item veto bill right now :???:

A better one then a Repub- Gagliano- got ruled unconstitutional :???: ....

Did you guys see my Rehberg post-- about how he was bragging to all the home folks about all the pork he was getting them (there are several more on his website)- but then after all the bragging and backslapping himself- voted against the bill.... :wink: :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

Mike

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
So then you think the Repubs would introduce/support a line item veto bill right now :???:

A better one then a Repub- Gagliano- got ruled unconstitutional :???: ....

Did you guys see my Rehberg post-- about how he was bragging to all the home folks about all the pork he was getting them (there are several more on his website)- but then after all the bragging and backslapping himself- voted against the bill.... :wink: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Quit changing the subject. Zer0 said he was going to eliminate the pork"Line by Line".

Why is he not?

Yes, the Repubs would support a line item veto now. They are the ones who got the last one through as law.
 
Top