War Supplemental Fact of the Day #2
Something is “Fishy” in the War Supplemental

WASHINGTON, D.C. –The tax increase may have been removed, but taxpayers are still getting soaked when it comes to the war supplemental bill. Rather than passing a “clean” bill, the U.S. Senate sent H.R. 2642, the vehicle for the emergency war supplemental, back to the House leaving it filled with unrelated non-defense, non-emergency spending items.

Not only the Farm Bill contained a “fishy” earmark providing for some $170 million in federal aid to fishermen and businesses affected by a “salmon crisis” on the West Coast, the war supplemental, too, has a similar earmark:

$75 million would go towards “operations, research, and facilities for necessary expenses related to economic impacts associated with commercial fishery failures, fishery resource disasters, and regulations on commercial fishing industries.”

 If you’re wondering where the connection to conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan is, look no further: There is none!

Supplemental spending outside the normal budget process has ballooned in recent years.  What began as a limited effort to address unexpected reconstruction costs in the wake of the attacks of September 11th and the War in Afghanistan, the supplemental appropriations have grown in size and scope.  Having clearly outgrown their initial purpose, they impose an ever increasing burden on American taxpayers. 

Smoke and mirrors and budget gimmicks should have no room in an emergency war supplemental bill.  It is time for Congress to learn that lesson, and to strip non-emergency, non-defense spending items from that bill.