Welcome

****

****

Too much pork, not enough infrastructure
By Rinaldo Del Gallo III
Posted: 03/01/2009

The North Adams Transcript

Sunday, March 1, 2009

Theodore Roosevelt once said, "Rhetoric is a poor substitute for action ... If we are really to be a great nation, we must not merely talk; we must act big."

History teaches this lesson. Carter and Clinton's plans for energy-efficient high-speed rail and development of renewable energy sources never materialized; they disappeared into that vast expanse of unfulfilled campaign promises and forgotten state of the union speeches.

Statements regarding the necessity of funding higher education in such speeches are an annual rhetorical exercise of presidents and governors alike -- yet college has become insanely unaffordable because rhetoric does not pay university professors' salaries.

During his recent quasi State of the Union address, Obama stated his plan to recovery includes "rebuilding our roads and bridges, constructing wind turbines and solar panels, laying broadband and expanding mass transit." He also correctly stated, "The only way to fully restore America's economic strength is to make the long-term investments that will lead to new jobs, new industries and a renewed ability to compete with the rest of the world."

Perhaps this is the "New, New Deal" and the rebirth of Keynesian economics everyone is talking about. We spend today so that jobs are created, but when we hand the bill to future generations in times of plenty (hopefully) to come, we will also hand them an infrastructure that has not sufferedfrom decades of deferred maintenance, an educated work force and a plenitude of renewable energy.

But let's compare action with rhetoric. The recently passed "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act," more commonly called the "stimulus package," is $787 billion. How much is $787 billion? If you took every physical dollar in every bank, in every wallet and under every mattress in early 2008, as well as every dollar the banks themselves have in the Fed -- which would be literally every dollar in circulation-- you could not pay off the principal, let alone the interest of the stimulus package. This is not just about "another news story;" it is an epic event in American history.

But much of this stimulus money will not be going to infrastructure, renewable energy or higher education. It will be going to what New York Sen. Chuck Schumer recently called "little, tiny, porky amendments."

Even more shockingly, Schumer claimed, "American's don't care." Do you care?

I originally became concerned with the so-called "stimulus package" when I learned monies that were supposed to be invested in infrastructure, schools and renewable energy were being blown on the Violence Against Women Act.

There is much wrong with this act, not the least of which is its gender bias and its failure to protect men like Arthur Martin, who recently was allegedly stabbed to death by his wife in Pittsfield.

But this is not a column about what the Violence Against Women Act is, as compared to what it is not. This "little, tiny, porky amendment" will cost taxpayers $225 million.

How did I learn about this expenditure? It was completely not mentioned in the news. So I went to "recovery.gov." The stated purpose of recovery.gov is to see to it that the "American Recovery and Reinvestment Act will be carried out with full transparency and accountability." A complete search of the Web site reveals no mention of the Violence Against Women Act -- I was running into sheer opacity. The only way I could find out if stimulus package money was being spent on this act was by contacting Congressman John Olver's office.

I also could not find at recovery.gov any mention of polar ice cap breakers for the Coast Guard, at just shy of $1 billion -- which was also part of the stimulus package, according to U.S. News and World Report. Not exactly the "sense of honesty and accountability to our budget" Obama spoke of in his State of the Union.

The Republicans were right: In order to avoid the "perils of inaction," this stimulus package was hastily drafted and signed into law at the speed of light -- never a good way to handle a crisis. Most congressman had only a most cursory understanding of what was in the stimulus package (it was physically impossible to have actually read it in the time allotted).

During the State of the Union, Obama said we "will have to sacrifice some worthy priorities for which there are no dollars." That means axing programs like the Violence Against Women Act so that we may have true investments for our future.

But of the $787 billion, a full $580 billion (74 percent of the total) is being spent on non-investment projects, such as tax breaks, "protecting the vulnerable," "state and local relief" and "other." Only $111 billion (14 percent) is for infrastructure and science and only $53 billion (7 percent) is for education and training.

Obama said the right thing but did the wrong thing. These are desperate times with an economy on the brink of collapse. The stimulus package ought to have been spent only on projects that will lead to "new jobs, new industries and a renewed ability to compete," not "little porky amendments."

Rinaldo Del Gallo III of Pittsfield is an attorney, a spokesman for the Berkshire Fatherhood Coalition and a freelance columnist.