PORK JANUARY 15, 2013
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
In advance of today’s House vote on a series of bills to provide more than $50 billion in federal aid for Hurricane Sandy, the Heritage Foundation circulated this ominous video on pork-barrel spending that supposedly made it into the relief bill. Their list includes $2 million to repair roof damage to the Smithsonian’s museums, an item many have targeted as proof that the bill funds projects unrelated to the superstorm’s destruction. Commentary Magazine listed it as one of the bill’s “most outrageous requests,” and a joint release from Sen. John McCain and Sen. Tom Coburn in December described the allocation as “$2 million to repair damage to the roofs of museums in Washington, D.C., while many in Hurricane Sandy’s path still have no roof over their own heads.”
In fact, the damage which that $2 million is intended to fix does not predate the storm. “In all cases, [the funds are for] roof leaks caused by heavy winds and torrential rain,” Linda St. Thomas, a Smithsonian Institution spokeswoman, told me in an email this afternoon. “Hurricane Sandy caused the roof damage which is why we put in the request. In several cases, it exacerbated smaller leaks, in other cases, it caused new leaks.”
In other words, the request for $2 million fits pretty squarely in the definition of “emergency aid.”
“Any water damage is dangerous to the collections,” she explained. “One example, the Hazy Center of the National Air and Space Museum (near Dulles airport) houses the Discovery shuttle. That building had 27 separate roof leaks that were directly attributable to Hurricane Sandy.”
And that $2 million is being used to repair no less than the following: The Museum of Natural History, the Museum of American History, the Air and Space Museum, several buildings at the National Zoo, and the Museum Support Center in Maryland, which the organization has already “temporarily patched.”
To be fair, conservatives weren't the only ones fanning the flames. Mainstream media couldn't get their facts straight, either. ABC News reported on Dec. 13 that $2 million was for damage "that pre-dates the storm." A Jan. 2 Reuters article made the same mistake, and Fox Business and the Washington Free Beacon promptly repeated it. And this morning, an Atlantic Wire blogger claimed the $2 million was "to fix an (apparently quite expensive) roof at the Smithsonian Museum in Washington," then called the item superfluous: “$2 million, really?”
Conservative commentators could almost be forgiven for thinking that, indeed, the $2 million to repair many Smithsonian roofs was an expense that had no business being in the Sandy aid package—if they hadn’t seized on it as a reason to hold up all $51 billion in aid.
17 comments
All you need is for culture to raise its head and suddenly the GOP's aching concern for "people" is back center stage.
- ironyroad
January 15, 2013 at 6:18pm
The usual line is among those on the left (or among those who are just paying attention) is that the GOP wages a war on science. It would be more accurate to say that the GOP is engaged in a constant war on human knowledge.
- zuludown
January 15, 2013 at 6:28pm
If you want an emergency aid bill to zip through, then make sure the bill only contains provisions for those that suffered. The more questionable stuff you put in there, the more others will want to add something even more questionable, and the more others still will cry foul. And thus, all the stuff added to the aid bill, while it probably can be justified in some way (as you have tried to do), tends to hurt those that need it the most by slowing down the aid. If someone REALLY cared about those still living without a solid roof over their head, they'd step back and say "My request for fishery funds in Alaska can wait. I can't believe a mom in NJ is living in these conditions." But in the typical, selfish government-way of doing things, any opportunity to grab a stack of cash cannot be missed. Even if that grab makes makes the aid for those that need it most take longer. Ms. Redden, that is the real crime here. Some gov bean counter is willing to prolong the delivery of aid for Sandy so that he or she can grab some more graft. Now, of course we shouldn't let the Smithsonian have a leaky roof. But planning for a rainy day is what a responsible party does BEFORE the fact. I have insurance on my house so my valuable stuff doesn't get wet. If the smithsonian hasn't even secured insurance for its basic operations, then my god, they are not doing their job. And thus, your story fails on two levels: It fails to shine a light on those delaying help for people living like animals, and it fails to highlight that our gov agencies haven't even planned for a rainy day. Instead, you take these two failings and somehow blame it on republicans.
- seattleeng
January 15, 2013 at 8:27pm
Excuse me but "those who have suffered" includes generations who would be deprived of our own history should the Smithsonian's collections be damaged or destroyed. One of the biggest problems we have as a nation, seattle, is a widespread lack of respect for knowledge, history, science, art and culture in general - in short - the things that make France France we're still struggling with. For heaven's sake I must add, Hurricane Sandy wasn't a "rainy day," you should know better.
- Sophia
January 15, 2013 at 8:31pm
Oh by the way, you're darn right this is on the Republicans. All of it - the attacks on people, science, art, culture, climate, environment, then you guys turn around and accuse the rest of us of being irresponsible. Please give us a break.
- Sophia
January 15, 2013 at 8:32pm
zuludown writes: "that the GOP wages a war on science. " Kind of funny, considering my liberal friends are all scared to death of GMO foods. And yet the science on GMO is rock solid. Much more rock solid than global warming for sure. Sure, there are a few religious nuts that think the earth is 6000 years old. But I've actually never found one in the wild. And yet, I could drive to 10 liberal friends houses right now that fear GMO and fracking. In spite of the science. They truly believe that fracking causes fire to come out of faucets. And they truly believe that GMO foods are unprecedented. And that organic milk doesn't have any hormones in it. The list goes on and on and on.
- seattleeng
January 15, 2013 at 8:34pm
Another ps: enough touting of the insurance industry please. This is one of the elephants in the room. How much money are we supposed to give, every year, to for-profit corporations so powerful we can't enact the most elementary and necessary changes to health care without running into their walls, just to cite one example? Sheese.
- Sophia
January 15, 2013 at 8:34pm
seattle there are good reasons to be concerned about foods. What about impact on environment including animals? Is the science on this all "rock solid?" Also why should we trust the for-profit corporations on anything except their desire to make money? Once again I cite two major examples: environment and health care. Another of course involves the sale of poisons for profit (tobacco, insecticides that kill everything in sight, bad medicines.)
- Sophia
January 15, 2013 at 8:38pm
Oh - forgot - war and guns. Big bucks. Nada for the arts, for culture, for education, just contempt for people who aren't rich - this culture needs a serious realignment.
- Sophia
January 15, 2013 at 8:40pm
seattle: "Now, of course we shouldn't let the Smithsonian have a leaky roof. But planning for a rainy day is what a responsible party does BEFORE the fact. I have insurance on my house so my valuable stuff doesn't get wet. If the smithsonian hasn't even secured insurance for its basic operations, then my god, they are not doing their job." I could be wrong but I suspect that basic insurance for the Smithsonian and its contents is administered by the federal government, with commercial policies for extra cover (there was a scandal a few years ago regarding the company -- Chubb -- that the SI used for liability insurance, burglary, and the like, which are considered extra protection). That that extent, as regards roof repairs, the Smithsonian might in a certain way simply be filing its claim with the feds.
- ironyroad
January 15, 2013 at 9:13pm
Why on earth would the Federal government buy casualty insurance rather than self-insure? It is the ultimate deep pocket with the ultimate ability to spread losses and risk. Indeed, as we have seen, it is the Federal government that has to bail out insurers, such as AIG, when their pockets are inadequate to the risks they have assumed. Clearly, what the Smithsonian should have done is build a spare roof and keep it in a warehouse -- for a rainy day.
- roidubouloi
January 15, 2013 at 11:46pm
Sophia writes: "Excuse me but "those who have suffered" includes generations who would be deprived of our own history should the Smithsonian's collections be damaged or destroyed." By your definition anything we wish can then be added to the bill. What about the Alaska fisheries that are getting some of the pie here? My point remains: If you want a relief bill to quickly speed through congress, then make sure the relief is going to those that were promised it. And make sure they can use it right away. The CBO reports that 90% of the money in the bill won't be spent this year. That is not emergency relief. Sophia writes: "seattle there are good reasons to be concerned about foods. What about impact on environment including animals? Is the science on this all "rock solid?"" The science on the safety is running 500:1 that GMO is safe. If you respect science, then you should readily accept that GMO is safe. if you don't respect science, then fine. Just don't selectively embrace it. To me, a GMO wacko is just as much of a wacko as someone that believes the earth is 6000 years old, because both reject that which is settled science. Sophia writes: "Once again I cite two major examples: environment and health care. Another of course involves the sale of poisons for profit (tobacco, insecticides that kill everything in sight, bad medicines.)" You should add pot to the list. The most detailed studies on pot indeed show it has a serious impact on the IQ of long term users. And you can bet its not good for their lungs either. Anything that makes you cough like that on your first few uses cannot be. Your body is telling you something. And yet, we are encouraging its use. Especially among the poor and youthful. Let's take a look at the steps in the tobacco epidemic: 1) Growers found an enjoyable weed that was widely known to be noxious to breathe and to your health. 2) Growers packaged it in a readily consumable fashion 3) Growers attempted to tout the health benefits of the product, and relied on half-baked studies to back their assertions 4) Growers convinced governments the pleasurable weed would be a great revenue stream 5) long term effects of the weed showed a horrible cost to society, and especially the poor The same playbook is being used for pot. And in 50 years we'll again wonder how this all happened. Roid writes: "Why on earth would the Federal government buy casualty insurance rather than self-insure?" If you are self insured and a disaster hits, you write a check from the rainy day fund. That is the definition of self-insured. If you claim you are self insured but you don't have a rainy day fund, then you are just BSing: You are self insured. They don't have money to fix the roof. Thus, by definition they are not insured. This is flat out irresponsible when you consider the treasures they hold.
- seattleeng
January 16, 2013 at 2:23am
Sophia writes: "Nada for the arts, for culture, for education, just contempt for people who aren't rich - this culture needs a serious realignment." Education? We spend more per child than any country in the world. Look it up. If an artist is good and if the culture is worthy, they will find a buyer. If not, well...Let's just say I'd prefer the government NOT pay someone to pee in a bottle and drop a cross inside and call that art and get a handout from the NEA at the same time. Art used to mean it required much skill and time to accomplish. Anymore, it's conflated with the ability to shock.
- seattleeng
January 16, 2013 at 2:31am
We're not talking about pee in a bottle here, seattle, we're talking about Lindbergh's aircraft 'Spirit of St Louis' which hangs from the ceiling in the NASM and needs a non-leaking roof over its head. As nobody here seems to know for certain how the insurance for public buildings is managed -- I appear to be only one who looked up anything about it -- perhaps people could stop making assertions based on ignorance? That would be nice.
- ironyroad
January 16, 2013 at 11:48am
"perhaps people could stop making assertions based on ignorance? " Irony, whenever Seattleeng (God help us if he/she is an engineer) writes anything here, you know it'll be all bullshit, obfuscation, lies and pube talking points.
- tmmats
January 16, 2013 at 11:55am
Irony writes: "As nobody here seems to know for certain how the insurance for public buildings is managed -- I appear to be only one who looked up anything about it -- perhaps people could stop making assertions based on ignorance? That would be nice." As Bill Clinton used to say, if you see a turtle sitting on top of a fence post, you can be sure someone put him there. Ditto in this case. The fact that there isn't money to fix the roof says all you need to know about the state of the insurance on the Smithsonian.
- seattleeng
January 16, 2013 at 12:19pm
It might have been a tornado -- they cause unexpected things to happen. As indeed unexpected things happened with Hurricane Sandy. As also happened with Katrina, when the walls built to withstand the storm surge didn't withstand the storm surge. Which is all somewhat adjacent to my point that nobody here appears to know what's going on but that doesn't stop some folks from posting as if they did. Which in turn pretty much describes the Orwellian attitudes of the conservative movement today -- Ignorance is Knowledge.
- ironyroad
January 16, 2013 at 2:02pm