|
Responsibility #79
To the People of the United States of America:
6th postscript, April 1994. In this 7th paper devoted to the subjects of Taxes/Appropriations/Organization Reforms, we begin by covering the perks portion of Pork and Perks, Oink! Oink!. The medium is news articles concerning these topics as advocated, proposed, and/or enacted, by individuals, legislative or administrative bodies, up to the President. The time period is the terms to date of the Clinton Presidency, and the 103rd Congress.
7. (continued) "D.C.'s tough on crime, parkingwise" was the headline for a December 1, 1993, editorial. The article was devoted to the premise: "Local [particularly Washington, D.C.] police prosecute meter violators more ruthlessly and efficiently than they punish first-degree murderers." Pertinent to our discussion of Perks, Oink! Oink!, is the statement: "... city officials do not enforce the law on bigwigs--members of Congress, congressional staffers ... ."
Let us return to a news article we previously cited, dated April 15, 1994, entitled "Hold on, Washington thinks you're rich". Relevant to perks was the statement: "The IRS office in Washington offers tax preparation service to members of Congress without charge. Staffers even go up to Capitol Hill to provide that convenience." "... only 10 percent of the members of the committee that writes the tax laws fill out their own tax returns."
As reported in an editorial published on April 22, 1994, under the highlight "FREE PARKING--Congress' beloved perk", a Senator attempted to get the Congress to reduce the slops it is fed. 53 Senators turned him down. Among the languorous excuses given in debate was: "... eliminating the free parking--which costs airport authorities more than $1.6 million in lost revenues yearly--would cost the taxpayers more in the long run because Senators would take taxis or demand to be reimbursed for parking costs." "How about paying your own way Senator?"
To rid our nation of the pig sty on Capitol Hill, we must do three things as recommended in earlier RESPONSIBILITY papers:
A. Reform the election process.
B. Cause the States to determine, provide and control salaries and benefits of members of Congress.
C. Adopt inviolable principals for taxes and appropriations.
8. During the terms to date of President Clinton, and the 103rd Congress, the nation has experienced a number of large scale "natural disasters", including mid-west floods, southern California earthquakes, and an extreme and debilitating spell of winter weather on the east coast.
Each time there is a "major" calamity, the federal government is put under a lot of pressure (by media, members of Congress from the effected areas, State and local governments), to take extraordinary measures, involving emergency supplementary appropriations. The impression each time is that the degree of action taken by the Congress, and the President, is proportional to the amount of media and political pressure. In contrast, throughout each year individuals, families, neighborhoods, towns, etc., suffer localized "natural" or "manmade" calamities, for which little or no (certainly no extraordinary) federal aid is given.
The inequities of federal legislation, for disaster relief, is evident in that for flood "emergencies". Consider a few extracts from a news article published July 20, 1993, under the heading "Living in flood plain isn't an entitlement".
"As Congress proceeds with legislation to provide disaster assistance [for flood-ravaged Midwestern states], it should move just as swiftly to reform the National Flood Insurance Program, NFIP. NFIP was created in 1968 to provide unobtainable flood insurance to flood-prone properties." "NFIP can no longer be considered a nationwide program. Instead, it has turned into a huge cross-subsidy--a program that gives the largest benefits and smallest costs to policyholders with structures in high-risk coastal areas or in areas subjected to frequent storms and heavy rains."
"... the program allows policyholders ... to use their flood insurance policy to rebuild and refurnish their repetitive-loss buildings." "Two states, Louisiana and Texas, account for 44.5 percent of all repetitive losses. Ten states account for 83.1 percent." "... the federal government ...is literally giving away major insurance benefits to beach-front property owners."
"... NFIP ... $18 million in deficit ... ." "... cannot avoid major borrowing this year ... a taxpayer bailout will follow." As if this scandalous performance were not enough, each disaster relief bill is an occasion, to pile on extraneous appropriations. Look at an extract from an editorial in an August 3, 1993, newspaper labeled "DISASTER RELIEF--Opening the deficit floodgates". "But flood relief wasn't the only thing contained in the bill. Conveniently attached to the measure was a $50 million program to provide weekly stipends to people enrolled in a federal job-training program."
Whether its flood, or earthquake, or other emergency legislation, the routine is the same. "EARTHQUAKE RELIEF--Congress' disaster" reads the topic of a February 12, 1994, editorial, from which the following quotes are taken: "... Congress has included in its 'emergency' aid bill for earthquake repairs in southern California some $10 million to help relocate the central Amtrak station in New York ..." "... the federal funds for the Amtrak station and Pell education grants and for peace-keeping expenses in Somalia, Haiti, Iraq and Bosnia and much more were included in the nearly $11 billion disaster aid bill."
"Since federal disaster aid qualifies as emergency spending and, therefore, under budgetary rules doesn't really count, members of Congress perceive it as 'free money'. They can lard up disaster aid bills with funding for all kinds of unrelated programs and projects and the bill for them is simply added to the federal deficit." "...the bill [also] contains funds for highway repairs stemming from the San Francisco trembler of four years ago, for cleanup operations from last summer's Midwest floods, for low-income heating assistance, for the government's little-known war on potato blight and even for lawyers hired to defend members of Congress accused by their staff members of civil rights and other workplace violations. The list goes on and on, totaling more than $1 billion."
This fraud on the intent of democratic governance, and particularly on the goals of our Constitution, and the restraint of "property rights", must be ended. The means to do so have been developed in previous RESPONSIBILITY papers.
First, adopt inviolable principles for taxes and appropriations.
Second, require each President and Congress to establish a current "Domestic Policy". A permanent feature should be disaster relief criteria. Differentiation of roles and RESPONSIBILITIES among individuals/families, local/State governments, and the national government, should be established before the fact.
In such a policy, noone should have to bear the costs of someone else not adequately insuring, or preparing for disasters, beyond immediate compassionate relief, and the safety net for the truly poor or near poor. The corollary is that the federal government should not be obligated, to have all taxpayers bear the costs of indifference that local, State, or regional residents, and their governments, extend to dangers inherent in their choices of abode and business (e.g., in flood plains, on seismic faults, too close to wash-away coastlines, amidst dry and fire prone trees and foliage, on unstable hill or mountain sides). You pays your money and you takes your choice!
Third. When (and only when) the President, and the Congress, have been required to present and enact deficitless budgets, that include gradual amortization of the national debt, this third good management option could be adopted. Budget and accumulate for disasters before the fact.
More on Taxes/Appropriations/Organization Reforms coming.
Publius IV
|