| Big Govt | Breitbart to AG Holder: Investigate ACORN or We’ll Release More Tapes Just Before 2010 Election |
0 |
| Politico | 0 | |
| Ras. Reports | 0 | |
| Patterico | L.A. Times Columnist Uncritically Quoted Star of Latest ACORN Video |
0 |
| ABC News | Major Hasan’s E-Mail: ‘I Can’t Wait to Join You’ in Afterlife |
0 |
Audacity of Truth
Sen. Coburn still fighting the good fight
… on the fiscal front, along with Senators Brownback (R-KS), DeMint (R-SC), Ensign (R-NV), Graham (R-SC), McCain (R-AZ), and Sununu (R-NH). To help offset Hurricane Katrina relief effort costs, they unveiled today a proposal to that would cut up to $115 billion of pork in the federal budget over the next two years. Click here to read more about their ideas (Adobe req.).
You may not agree with everything on that list they proposed, but at least they are trying. If you’re on board with their efforts, send your Senator an email and urge them to support this proposal.
Related Toldjah So posts:
(The above are two separate amendments, BTW)
RSS feed for comments on this post.
3 Responses to “Sen. Coburn still fighting the good fight”
Comments
Blogads
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of ST's advertisers, nor do their opinions necessarily reflect ST's. Stats
There is a fundamental problem with Senator Coburn’s proposal: it leaves intact the assumption that the federal government ought to fund intrastate projects.
The federal gasoline tax is 18.4¢ per gallon, with a guarantee of 92% of said tax revenues being spent in the individual states in which they were collected. Wouldn’t it make a heck of a lot more sense to cut the federal gasoline tax rate by 92% (that would be 16.9¢ per gallon), which would allow the states to raise their gasoline taxes by that amount, without hurting anyone? That way the state governments could decide what projects were needed; do you think the ridiculous bridge project in Alaska would have been funded if Alaskans had to pay for it?
The $384 billion federal highway bill has all sorts of projects in it that ought not to be the business of the federal government at all. Why are congressmen from Montana voting (and horse trading) on funding for a bike path in a Massachusetts town? If it’s that good a project, let the people closer to the projects decide, and fund, them.
Heck, let’s assume that the states would choose to fund every stinking project in the porcine highway bill. Simply by not sending all that money to Washington, it skips a layer of bureaucracy. That means that overhead costs are lowered, and more of the money gets used on the projects themselves.
ST
Change the mindset, get government out of the way, let indivduals do more, not saying easy.
Dana: Interesting. I had not examined it that closely. Ah well … it’s a start, anyway.
Stackja: If only we could