next federal budget, which was passed by his party’s majority in both the House and the Senate, a major aerospace manufacturer in the Gentleman’s home state received an unexpected appropriation for $1 billion in military transport aircraft. No other company could build those airplanes, so jobs were created, property prices were increased,and businessmen were enriched. In addition, since procurement of those same aircraft had not been requested by the U.S. Air Force in nearly a decade, there was no question about who was really responsible for both the budget line item and the contract award.
Better yet, the cost of the airplanes was not borne solely by taxpayers in the Congressman’s district. Instead, it was shared equally by 139 million taxpayers across the country. Therefore, even though only one in four voters approved of the Gentleman from Georgia outside of his home state, each and every American taxpayer was required to contribute more than seven dollars to his next campaign for reelection.
Since those aircraft will remain in service for many more years, it can be expected that the long-term cost of parts and maintenance will eclipse the original manufacturing price. This means that the American people will eventually be taxed more than two billion dollars, which is a tax assessment of more than $14 per taxpayer, to preserve the congressman’s position, which paid approximately $136,600 per annum (at the time).
Since two billion dollars is more than 14,000 times larger than $136,000, paying that much to preserve a single congressman’s job might not seem entirely sensible. But, to an up-and-coming political entrepreneur like Reginald DeNiall, the capital’s newly crowned “Duke of Pork,” it smelled of opportunity.
Maybe Reginald is on to something. If the deficit is not a concern, as so many Congressmen selflessly contend, then perhaps we should consider extending the principles of pork to the entirety of Congress. Since senators only runfor reelection every sixth year, we could subsidize their reelection campaigns to the tune of a billion dollars each at an annualized cost of only $16.7 billion or so.
There are 435 Representatives in the House and they run for reelection every two years. Therefore, the annualized cost of extending “The Reginald Plan” to them would be around $217.5 billion. The total congressional pork tab would add up to just $234.2 billion dollars per year, or about $1,685 dollars per taxpayer per year.
Of course, besides being somewhat costly when extended to the fullness of Congress, that one billion dollar reelection subsidy could provide each incumbent with an overwhelming advantage. Certainly, it would be impossible for all but a handful of very rich challengers to raise even a tenth of that in campaign contributions. Thus, the continued existence of pork barrel spending, even for an influential few, may eloquently explain why the president of the United States does not have the line item veto and, in some part, why the U.S. government carries the largest debt ever known to mankind.
CHAPTER
22
The National Debt
“Politics is the distance between what makes sense and what gets done.”
— JULIAN DATE
A s of mid-1998, the United States, which means us, had a national debt of about 5.54 trillion dollars. In real numbers that is $5,540,000,000,000. Most folks, maybe even a congressman or two, believe that to be a fairly large sum of money.
The 5.54 trillion-dollar national debt is how much money the U.S. government has had to borrow over the years because it has spent more than it has collected in taxes. The U.S. government borrows money by selling bonds—mostly treasury bonds, treasury bills, and savings bonds—to anyone who will buy them (foreign investors own about 25 percent). In return for lending Uncle Sam the money, the bondholders are entitled to receive interest on the loan.
In 1997, the interest on the national debt was about$356,000,000,000.
Better yet, the cost of the airplanes was not borne solely by taxpayers in the Congressman’s district. Instead, it was shared equally by 139 million taxpayers across the country. Therefore, even though only one in four voters approved of the Gentleman from Georgia outside of his home state, each and every American taxpayer was required to contribute more than seven dollars to his next campaign for reelection.
Since those aircraft will remain in service for many more years, it can be expected that the long-term cost of parts and maintenance will eclipse the original manufacturing price. This means that the American people will eventually be taxed more than two billion dollars, which is a tax assessment of more than $14 per taxpayer, to preserve the congressman’s position, which paid approximately $136,600 per annum (at the time).
Since two billion dollars is more than 14,000 times larger than $136,000, paying that much to preserve a single congressman’s job might not seem entirely sensible. But, to an up-and-coming political entrepreneur like Reginald DeNiall, the capital’s newly crowned “Duke of Pork,” it smelled of opportunity.
Maybe Reginald is on to something. If the deficit is not a concern, as so many Congressmen selflessly contend, then perhaps we should consider extending the principles of pork to the entirety of Congress. Since senators only runfor reelection every sixth year, we could subsidize their reelection campaigns to the tune of a billion dollars each at an annualized cost of only $16.7 billion or so.
There are 435 Representatives in the House and they run for reelection every two years. Therefore, the annualized cost of extending “The Reginald Plan” to them would be around $217.5 billion. The total congressional pork tab would add up to just $234.2 billion dollars per year, or about $1,685 dollars per taxpayer per year.
Of course, besides being somewhat costly when extended to the fullness of Congress, that one billion dollar reelection subsidy could provide each incumbent with an overwhelming advantage. Certainly, it would be impossible for all but a handful of very rich challengers to raise even a tenth of that in campaign contributions. Thus, the continued existence of pork barrel spending, even for an influential few, may eloquently explain why the president of the United States does not have the line item veto and, in some part, why the U.S. government carries the largest debt ever known to mankind.
CHAPTER
22
The National Debt
“Politics is the distance between what makes sense and what gets done.”
— JULIAN DATE
A s of mid-1998, the United States, which means us, had a national debt of about 5.54 trillion dollars. In real numbers that is $5,540,000,000,000. Most folks, maybe even a congressman or two, believe that to be a fairly large sum of money.
The 5.54 trillion-dollar national debt is how much money the U.S. government has had to borrow over the years because it has spent more than it has collected in taxes. The U.S. government borrows money by selling bonds—mostly treasury bonds, treasury bills, and savings bonds—to anyone who will buy them (foreign investors own about 25 percent). In return for lending Uncle Sam the money, the bondholders are entitled to receive interest on the loan.
In 1997, the interest on the national debt was about$356,000,000,000.
Similar Books
