'09-'10 Miami hockey season photos
Mason teen on MTV
Arrest made in SWAT standoff
Home > Blogs > Ohio politics > Archives > 2009 > March > 06 > Entry
UPDATED: John McCain no fan of Dayton Society of Natural History earmark
Sen. John McCain, who visited Dayton last year to introduce vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin to the campaign, is no fan of a $143,000 earmark for Dayton in the omnibus appropriations bill currently stalled in the U.S. Senate.
He’s been “twittering” - that’s short of a one-line blog, for the technological newbies reading this - about his least favorite earmarks in the $410 billion bill.
Among those he’s picked on: “$143,000 for the Dayton Society of Natural History in Dayton, Ohio.”
He’s also tagged $75,000 for the “Totally Teen Zone” in Albany, Ga.; $385,000 for the Utah World Trade Center and $2.1 million for a ferry boat in San Juan, Puerto Rico.
UPDATE: The earmark is in a section of the bill devoted to education, among other agencies, and doesn’t list which member requested the earmark, which would go toward exhibits and the purchase of equipment. On the same page is an earmark for the Aviation Heritage Foundation worth $95,000. That, too, is a Dayton earmark - but it didn’t catch McCain’s eye.
Michael Gessel of the Dayton Development Coalition said the earmark will expand educational programs at the Boonshoft Museum.
“This is a terrific project that will benefit residents of the Dayton area,” he said. “It is educational and it’s the kind of educational funding that our federal government should be doing. We should be proud that our government is funding this kind of worthwhile project.”
The project cleared the Dayton Development Coalition’s process for requesting federal funds.
Mark Meister, president and CEO of the Dayton Society of Natural History, meanwhile, says the earmark, which has been in the works since at least last year, is only one part of a $4 million project to renovate portions of the museum’s space and science gallery, zoo and planetarium. The money is part of a big pot of federal money for libraries and education. Most of the money for the project will come from corporate and private foundations as well as individual contributions. This is the second time the museum has ever sought federal funds, he said.
Meister acknowledges that “there are clearly projects in the past that have not been a legitimate use of federal money,” but said his museum is not one of them. “It’s a very small amount of the total budget,” he said, “and far too much is made of it in this situation.”
Permalink | Comments (14) | Post your comment |
Comments
By TRS
March 9, 2009 11:15 AM | Link to this
Ah, how one’s view of history differs. I wasn’t around in FDR’s time and reasonable people disagree as to whether his policies xtended the depression. The 1937 cycle was a natural result of the temporary government stimulus of the New Deal and the Republicans along with the southern Democrats blocked it realizing it was only a temporary fix. Funny, it was the Supreme Court which blocked Roosevelt’s 1937 stimulus and what was his response - he wanted to pack the court. Roosevelt was a great leader but neither he nor his policies were the panecea claimed. You left out the era of Reagan at that was the one I was referring to. With a Democratically controlled congress LBJ rolled SSN into the budget, printed money and brought about the bad economy of the 70s. Nixon (no conservative) and Carter was totally lost and it was Pres Reagan and the Fed which got things going again. Bush 1 was no failure as the cold war ended. The Clinton team demogoged the economy making it worse than it was and people bought into it, probably because of the natural cycle which occurs in politics. The recession was ending as Clinton took office and the surplus came about because the cold war ended and he was able to dramatically cut defense spending. Remember the dot.com bubble? That came under Clinton and Bush II inherited it. I acknowledge the Wall Street greed; but, at the same time I also recognize that Fannie and Freddie greatly fed this fire. I also remember governmental greed of the 70s which sent a number of politicians to jail. You seem to believe one person, President Obama, call stop greed - the “new sheriff in town”. Its never happened before and I doubt it will now. In sum, while some advocated nothing should be done, the consensus among most is that some stimulus was in order. Where we differ is on how much and where. I see your position as throwing all the money you can against the wall and hope some of it sticks. Some probably will but it will only be temporary because that is the nature of governmental stimulation. Even President Obama agrees with that. I also object to rolling all the social engineering into what is meant to be a stimulus bill. Much of the spending will have no simulative effect and it creates programs which will no doubt be billed as needing continued funding. Look Sava - this is the kind of reasoned disagreement that works. Thats my whole point.By Savanation
March 9, 2009 8:44 AM | Link to this
” anyone with a few years on them have seen this song/dance before.” Can you still sing the tune,TRS? Were you singing it in 1929-1932, when a Republican President refused to do anything, to spend anything, to stop America’s slide (caused by Republican greed and avarice and arrogance on Wall Street. Sounds familiar?). What song were you singing when A Democratic President gave the nation hope and works projects so they could eat? Were you whistling when people like you thwarted the continued restrenghening of the nation by blocking President Roosevelt in 1937? What song were you humming when President Roosevelt “stimulated” the economy with Lend Lease and material buildup and retooling America for war and for the prosperity which followed? Were you whistling in the dark when President Truman used your money to rebuild Europe and Japan against the wishes of the Republican Party? Were you singing loudly, No Way, when President Eisenhower used public money for building the basis fo our current interstate highway system, instead of private companies charging tolls, which was the Republican dream? Were you choking back a song when President Kennedy and President Johnson thought that America could do better than the Soviet Union and race them to the moon. I bet you were singing loudly to drown out the millions of jobs created by that stimulus package. Were you still singing and dancing when President Clinton mopped up another failed Bush presidency and turned chaos into a buget surplus, plus engendering the biggest economic growth in over a century? I bet you were humming with glee as President G.W. Bush took that surplus and turned it into a new 1929. You are quite right. We have seen and heard this song and dance before. Luckily the vast majority of Americans have found a new Roosevelt to clean up your mess. You might try helping him by putting away your arrogance. As you say, it is only an opinion. Republicans seem to have an awful lot of bad opinions. Read your history. I think you will change yours.By TRS
March 9, 2009 8:01 AM | Link to this
Arrogance - an attitude of superiority manifested in an overbearing manner or in presumptuous claims or assumptions. Quoting you Savanation - “someone who is exactly stating the facts as they are. everything being said is perfectly correct.” Whether you see it or not, your words fit the definition. What you see as truth is only opinion. Only one person has walked the face of this earth who was stated the words exactly and was perfectly correct and He was here long before you. While some may agree with some of your basic premises, few agree with the radical extremes you take them to. As for savage its verb form means to attack or treat brutally. We aren’t talking about political discourse here which is often misleading as presented by both sides of the aisle (ie, how can you cut the income taxes of someone who doesn’t pay any); rather, we are talking about your personal attacks on others, meant only to belittle, demean and insult. To the tax issue, in whole with the extending SSN income limit and increase capital gains coupled with the indirect taxes such as the increase in energy cost cap/trade will bring, coupled with the programs began that will require further funding and as yet this funding has not been allocated, anyone with a few years on them have seen this song/dance before. It is playing out now in Democratically controlled states such as California, New York, New Jersey, etc where the highest taxes in the land are skyrocketing even further. If you want to confine the argument to income tax only, you have apoint but when added together, the claim is valid.By Savanation
March 8, 2009 2:04 PM | Link to this
“condescending words, arrogant attitude and what often comes across as immature temper tantrums”(TRS) Seems to me that beauty (and condescention, arrogance and tantrums) are in the eye of the beholder. Some, well to be technically correct, most Americans agree with what I have to say. And where you see arrogance, condescention, and tantrums, they would see someone who is exactly stating the facts as they are. There are those who when confronted with a fact, immediately start shouting “Basher” Arrogant elitist, Socialist, or whatever the current term approved by Republican Central may be. I have seem people terribly upset about “Bush Bashing” when everything being said is perfectly correct. That’s not “bashing”, that’s stating the simple truth. “bashing” is when someone lies about a politician, like saying “Obama is going to raise your taxes” when they know that Obama is going to bring the taxes of the top 5% of all American taxpayer back to where they should have been kept eight years ago. Not “your” taxes, but the taxes of those few. That is bashing. That is savagery. That is the basis of the policies of the current Rush lead Republican party - a lie. Saw an interesting and quite correct comment made in an editorial by Leonard Pitts today: ” They (the Republicans) fear losing the votes they have. They are unable to disenthrall themselves from that culturally intolerant, intellectually incoherent, perpetually outraged and willfully ignorant cohort of the American demographic they call their base, i.e., extreme social conservatives.”(Leonard Pitts) Seems the man is describing several folks who post a lot on this thread, when they really shouldn’t.By Ethel
March 8, 2009 3:36 AM | Link to this
Sen. McCain has spent his whole career putting America first and performing public service. The so called stimulus package mixed up with the general spending bill is greased down with so much pork, it is disgusting. Just last week. President Obama said the bill had no earmarks. And here is that bad news, very soon, we will be getting the bill to pay for all this spending including all those projects that do not have a thing to do with Ohio. Is that the change we can count on?By TRS
March 7, 2009 11:32 PM | Link to this
Savanation - you get the respect that you give. Some of our little spats have been fun but the “Savagenation” tag isn’t about name calling - its about how you have present yourself. The goal of making one’s point is to do so in a convincing and reasoned fashion. How many people do you think you convince with your condescending words, arrogant attitude and what often comes across as immature temper tantrums which truly do “savage” others simply because they disagree with you. You obviously have great admiration of President Obama - ever heard him do that? Perhaps people could respect what you say if they could respect the way in which you say it. To your point, even Senate Democrats are becoming very uncomfortable with the spending spree. Even Sen Feingold, the most liberal of all liberals, challenged the President to veto the bill so this goes beyond Sen McCain. In his campaign, Pres Obama did not say he would do away with earmarks next year - he said he would do away with earmarks.By G-Dog
March 7, 2009 10:34 PM | Link to this
Savanation….. I did not distinguish between Democrats or Republicans when I made my comments. As far as I’m concerned, ALL politicians engage in the insane behavior of pushing their own pet projects at the expense of the taxpayer. It makes me laugh, though, when Democrats hide behind the guise of “helping the children” when they are really helping themselves. And the housing (mortgage) mess has enough blame to go around (on both sides of the aisle)…. BUT—-It was a Democratic president who and a Democratic controlled Congress who forced lenders to give mortgages to people who could not afford them…. Savanation, quit acting as if either party has the moral high ground—both parties do nothing but suck off the taxpayer for their own benefit.By Dave
March 7, 2009 7:09 PM | Link to this
I was always told that, while earmarks can be bad, the REAL money is in the “transition rules”. Anyone have any insight on this?By Savanation
March 7, 2009 5:35 PM | Link to this
Once again it should be noted that Sen. McCain lost. It should also be noted that one of the few things Sen. McCain ever said which made sense is that the earmark procedure should be curtailed. Which as it happens is exactly what President Obama has told everyone will happen in every budget from now on. It makes no difference what Sen. McCain likes or doesn’t like. We need all the spending we can get at this time of national crisis, and trying to make political points about 2% of the budget is just an irritant and a sop to people like you who have to have something to complain about, correctly or not. ” Transparency and having such plans thoroughly vetted prior to spending seems reasonable”(TRS) Exactly the Obama Administration Policy. Glad to have you on board, TRS. By the way, I guess you didn’t get the point a few threads ago when I told you that my name is Savanation, nothing else. Not your if you extremely childish or too dumb to copy a name correctly. I haven’t taken to calling you TRaSh…Yet.By TRS
March 7, 2009 4:16 PM | Link to this
Sorry Savagenation - but your wrong about Fox. They reported this fact on numerous occasions. Matter of fact Thad Cocharan (R-Miss) requested the most. The states which got the most are #1 - California, and #2 NY - both highly taxed, deeply in debt Democratically controlled states. Worth noting - the Democrats did the same thing when under the Bush administration - it was the policy or tradition of Congress to offer the minority party a % of earmarks as well. There are no innocent parties here. Skeptic - isn’t it about time we cease using the “for the children” and cold hearted Republican line? It serves no useful purpose. McCain has said he doesn’t oppose appropriate programs and projects - it is the earmark process he faults. Transparency and having such plans thoroughly vetted prior to spending seems reasonable, especially in today’s economic world. Isn’t that what should be done with expenditures, both public and personal?By Savanation
March 7, 2009 1:54 PM | Link to this
It should be pointed out that 40 Republican Senators requested more earmarks and for about the same amount of money as 57 Democratic Senators. And also that 6 of the top 10 earmark requesters are Republican and that Republican Minority leader Sen McConnell put in exactly twice as many earmarks as the Democratic majority leader, Harry Reid. See, this is the kind of information they never tell you folks on FOX. Surprising what the truth is, isn’t it? Sort of amazing that “this sort of spending” was rampant during the Bush years. When did Mr. Bush ever veto a spending bill? “punishing those who actually work and invest in this country also must stop”(G-Dog) You are absolutely correct. I am sure President Obama will stop the giveaways to the rich and see that decent middle-class workers, union and non, will do much better than the crap Bush did to them. Right, G-Dog?By G-Dog
March 7, 2009 10:49 AM | Link to this
Skeptic—What John McCain understands and you don’t is the fact that the earmarks in these so-called stimulous bills are nothing more than politicians paying back their political supports… And they have NOTHING to do with helping the economic recover. These paybacks are the exact reason we’re in this situation to begin with. THIS SPENDING MUST STOP!! In addition, punishing those who actually work and invest in this country also must stop. If it doesn’t, soon there will be more people sucking off the government than supporting these parasites….By Publicus
March 6, 2009 4:58 PM | Link to this
I would wager that McCain doesn’t Twitter. Some junior staffer Twitters for him.By Skeptic
March 6, 2009 4:42 PM | Link to this
I’ll bet McCain has no idea what this is for, much less that it is connected to a Children’s Museum. Let’s ask - Why is John McCain opposed to education for children? Republicans are just swinging blindly at anything that might appeal to their base. People say earmarks are bad, but they often fund worthwhile projects. Federal funding is sorely lacking and earmarks are the fastest way to get money where it is needed. The problem is more likely the lack of transparency and accountability - not the earmark itself.