2000 Pig Book.Pdf
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
2 INTRODUCTION We may be entering a new millennium, but it’s the same old story inside the Beltway. Members of Congress continue to gouge and gore, lobbyists try to coax and cajole, and rattled taxpayers struggle to cling to the few dollars left in their pockets. No matter what the year, if it’s spring in Washington, taxpayers must beware the running of the pigs. This annual rite of passage takes on special meaning in 2000. Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) spent the entire winter searching through the fine print of the fiscal year (FY) 2000 appropriations bills, and the results were not the usual assortment of unnecessary and wasteful projects. CAGW found more pork- barrel spending than ever before, and that means it’s more difficult for taxpayers to avoid being run over by their own money. The 2000 Congressional Pig Book is cluttered with 4,326 porcine projects – a 52 percent increase over FY 1999. The final tally of $17.7 billion, a 47 percent increase over FY 1999, brings total pork identified by CAGW since 1991 to $100 billion. The eclipse of the $100 billion mark proves beyond a doubt that pork-barrel spending is a perpetual raid on the Treasury. The president, Congress, and even the taxpayers share the blame for this national embarrassment. First, our elected leaders in Washington can’t keep their hands off our money. Second, the big spenders believe they have the right to waste our tax dollars because they believe it helps them get reelected. In the end, the American people have bought into an anonymous bribe-taking scheme, selling their votes for a few measly little pieces of pork. The top three increases from FY 1999 to FY 2000 were: Military Construction from $1 billion to $3.45 billion (235 percent); Foreign Operations from $27.3 million to $86.7 million (218 percent); and Commerce/Justice/State from $223.8 million to $534.3 million (139 percent). 3 INTRODUCTION (continued) Alaska led the country with $636 per capita ($394 million). The runners up were Hawaii with $264 per capita ($313 million) and Mississippi with $204 per capita ($565 million). The national per capita average was $25.92. The common thread among the top three per capita states is that they are represented by powerful senators and appropriators – Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R- Miss.), Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), and Senate appropriator Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii). The new millennium will provide new challenges and obstacles that will test the resolve of the federal government as well as the American people. In order for pork-barrel projects to be relegated to a time capsule that historians can open in the future, Congress must change its high-spending diet. If not, the pigs will keep running wild, and the deficit and debt will surely rise up again. The 365 projects, totaling $2.6 billion, in this year’s Congressional Pig Book Summary symbolize the most egregious and blatant examples of pork. As in previous years, all of the items in the Congressional Pig Book Summary meet at least one of CAGW’s seven criteria, but most satisfy at least two: • Requested by only one chamber of Congress; • Not specifically authorized; • Not competitively awarded; • Not requested by the President; • Greatly exceeds the President’s budget request or the previous year’s funding; • Not the subject of congressional hearings; or • Serves only a local or special interest. 4 I. AGRICULTURE Even though the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) frowns on the practice of funding grants that cater to only one state or commodity, appropriators still use the Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service (CSREES) special research grants program to earmark their pet research projects. From advanced spatial technologies in Mississippi to wool research in Montana, Texas, and Wyoming, members of Congress continue their unabashed earmarking in the hopes that these morsels will help them curry favor back home. The tally for special research grants for FY 2000 is $63 million, even though USDA officials only requested $5 million. Total agriculture pork in FY 2000 is $114 million, or 1 percent less than in FY 1999. $5,786,000 added for wood utilization research (Alaska, Idaho, Maine, Mich., Minn., Miss., N.C., Ore., and Tenn.). House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee Ranking Member Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio) pleaded with the House to continue funding for wood utilization research explaining, “I have a little coffee table in my house, and I cannot get that sap to stop staining up through the covering that is on it.” Since 1985, $56 million has been sapped from the taxpayers for this research. $3,354,000 for shrimp aquaculture research (Ariz., Hawaii, Mass., Miss., and S.C.). According to testimony by USDA officials, the original completion date of this research was 1987. Now, “researchers anticipate that the specific research outlined in the current proposal will be completed in fiscal year 1999.” Since 1985, $45 million has been appropriated for this research. 5 AGRICULTURE (continued) $1,300,000 added for peanut research in the state of House Agriculture Appropriations subcommittee member Jack Kingston (R-Ga.): $1,000,000 for peanut quality and $300,000 for the National Center for Peanut Competitiveness. The competitiveness center is an absurd waste of money because the federal peanut program restricts the acreage for growing peanuts, preventing any marketplace competition. $525,000 added by the House for food safety research in the district of House Agriculture Committee member Bob Riley (R- Ala.). According to USDA testimony, as of March 1999, CSREES had not received a grant proposal from Auburn University and was not able to determine whether there would be any non-federal funds to help support this project. This is the second (and hopefully last) year of this research grant. $500,000 for swine waste management research at North Carolina State University in the district of House appropriator David Price (D-N.C.). According to testimony by USDA officials, research should have been completed by March 1999. Since 1997, $1.5 million has been appropriated for this project. (There is no truth to the rumor that this research is being conducted beneath the U.S. Capitol.) $445,000 added by the House for improved fruit practices research in the district of House Agriculture Committee member Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.). According to USDA testimony, the only benefactor of this research is Michigan’s tree fruit and small fruits industry. Since 1994, $3.1 million has been appropriated for such research. 6 AGRICULTURE (continued) $250,000 added by the Senate for the National Center for Cool and Coldwater Aquaculture in the state of Senate Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.). According to USDA, this center will consist of a tank/aquarium building of approximately 20,000 square feet and a laboratory/office complex of approximately 30,000 square feet. Ground breaking for construction of the building was supposed to occur on November 9, 1999, but was delayed even though more than $16 million has been appropriated to date for this project. When completed, annual operating costs are expected to top $4 million. $246,000 added by the House for income enhancement demonstration in the district of House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee Ranking Member Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio). According to testimony by USDA officials, “the Center seeks to enhance the competitiveness for agricultural firms in Northwest Ohio and create greater economic opportunity for local residents.” The current phase of this program was expected to be completed by September 1999. Since 1991, $2.3 million has been appropriated for this project. $100,000 for Vidalia onion research in the state of House Agriculture Appropriations subcommittee member Jack Kingston (R-Ga.). In the past, money has been used for “pungency testing” and is now supposed to go toward onion disease research. Vidalia onions are only grown in Vidalia, Georgia, which happens to be in Rep. Kingston’s district, so the national application of the disease research is highly questionable. Since 1998, $284,000 has been appropriated for this program, enough to bring tears to the eyes of taxpayers everywhere. 7 AGRICULTURE (continued) $42,000 for the Food Processing Center at the University of Nebraska. Money was appropriated for this research even though at the time of the subcommittee’s hearings in March 1999, USDA had requested, but hadn’t received, a proposal in support of the FY 1999 appropriation. Since 1992, $400,000 has been appropriated for the center. The following earmarks show that leadership has its privileges: $6,583,000 added by the Senate for projects in the state of Senate Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), including: $2,000,000 for a biocontrol and insect-rearing laboratory; $1,000,000 for advanced spatial technologies; $750,000 for the National Center for Development of Natural Products; $308,000 for the National Warmwater Aquaculture Center; and $50,000 for acoustics research (the better to hear the sweet sound of tax dollars flowing into the state). $5,508,000 added for projects in the state of Senate appropriator Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), including: $5,000,000 for the U.S. Pacific Basin Agricultural Research Center; $250,000 for floriculture research; and $131,000 for agricultural diversification. $2,475,000 added for projects in the state of Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), including: $650,000 for seafood harvesting, processing and marketing research; $650,000 for alternative salmon products research; and $500,000 for new crop opportunities research. 8 AGRICULTURE (continued) The following projects were added in conference: $500,000 for agriculture telecommunications in New York.