THINGS DEMOCRATS HAVE FUNDED THAT COST MORE THAN THE BORDER WALL
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
After President Trump requested $5.7 billion to fund the border wall he campaigned on in 2016, Democrats have dug in, refusing to appropriate the funds that the administration says are needed to better manage the flow of immigration across the southern border.
Democrats are not traditionally known for their fiscal rectitude but are particularly parsimonious over what ultimately amounts to a very small percentage of the federal budget. (In 2018, the feds spent $4.173 trillion overall, meaning the border wall would amount to just 1/10th of 1 percent of current annual federal spending.)
Indeed, these lawmakers have happily funded various projects over the years that cost far more than the border wall — and many of which had very questionable value. Below are some examples of wasteful federal spending projects that individually cost more than the proposed border wall (data courtesy of Citizens Against Government Waste):
- “Rural Utility Service.” This program costs taxpayers $8.2 billion/year and has no actual purpose after its original intent — bringing electricity to rural communities — was long ago achieved. It’s now being used to bring broadband access to small communities (usually with populations of less than 20,000). However there’s no indication the “beneficiaries” of this expensive government agency actually appreciate the program, and the majority of its projects are not completed on time or within budget.
- Sugar Subsidies. America, as Democrats frequently intone, faces a health crisis. What they don’t tell us is that it’s largely of their own making, as Congress subsidizes the production of unhealthy foods like sugar and high-fructose corn syrup. Eliminating sugar subsidies alone would save $6 billion, enough to fund the border wall; it would also have the added benefit of helping curb the nation’s obesity epidemic.
- Community Development Grants. These grants were created in the 70s to revitalize failing American cities. The program has almost always been plagued with dysfunction, with grants going to wealthy communities and other recipients failing to produce “accountability and results.” Citizens Against Government Waste reports that even President Obama called for reining in the program. It’s elimination would save $15 billion over 5 years.
- The United Nations. As the United Nation’s largest contributor, the U.S. in 2016 donated $10 billion to the U.N. As CAGW notes, reducing these contributions just 25 percent would create a savings of $12.5 billion over 10 years. Of the money Congress appropriates for the United Nations, $5 million taxpayer dollars are itemized for abortions in foreign countries.
- Amtrak. Congress could sell Amtrak to the private sector where it would almost certainly be operated more efficiently, but instead it’s showered in billions of dollars of taxpayer subsidies. Over the next five years, these subsidies will cost $9.7 billion.
- Unused Real Estate. Congress appropriates money to maintain federal real estate that’s not actually being used. Per CAGW, an October 31, 2017, CRS report found that, “In FY2016, federal agencies owned 3,120 buildings that were vacant (unutilized), and another 7,859 that were partially empty (underutilized).” Current laws require the government to undergo a series of steps before considering a sale of these buildings. Were selling this unused property prioritized, the 5-year savings are estimated at $15 billion. Simply maintaining the unused buildings annually costs $1.7 billion.
- Foreign Aid. American taxpayers currently spend more than $50 billion a year helping develop foreign countries. Many of the recipients are not known for being America’s closest allies — such as Egypt, South Sudan, Uganda, South Africa, Russia, the Congo, Sudan, and Zambia — which raises the question of what Americans are receiving in exchange for all of this aid. Cutting these donations back just 10 percent would be enough to fund the wall.
-
Waste, Fraud, and Abuse. The Government Accountability Office estimates taxpayers are spending more than $137 billion annually on “payment errors,” which covers all manner of waste, fraud, and abuse within Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. The feds could implement the same kind of fraud protections credit card companies used to ensure against abuse, but don’t. In fact, Congress has gone in the opposite direction, winding down the program intended to police fraud within Medicare, the so-called Recovery Audit Contractor. In other words, Congress is knowingly funding tens of billions of dollars of fraud annually.
Despite many of of the above projects having arguably negative value, Congress continues to fund them. Eliminating any one of the above would create more than enough savings to fund the White House’s border wall appropriation request.
Of course, other smaller federal spending projects are even more wasteful. Examples abound, but here are a few that are at least amusing:
- The feds spend $613,634 to boost “intimacy and trust” of transgender women and their male partners (The Washington Free Beacon)
- The feds spent $5 million paying hipsters to stop smoking and then blog about it (as well as use cool anti-smoking swag — like beer koozies). (Readers Digest)
- Northeastern University has received more than $3 million in National Institutes of Health to watch hamster fights. “Some of those experiments involved injecting hamsters with steroids, then putting another hamster in the cage to see if the drugged rodents were more aggressive when protecting their territory. This program has since been halted following protests from animal rights activists,” Readers Digest reports.
- The feds spend $1,009,762 training “social justice” math teachers (The Washington Free Beacon)
- “The government spent at least $518,000 in federal grants to study how cocaine affects the sexual behavior of Japanese quails,” Readers Digest reports.
The Federal Register is legally required to be printed daily and distributed to Congressional offices despite most never being read and all of the information being available online. Stopping this unnecessary printing would save $1 million a year.
Tags
Who is online
80 visitors
'Course, they could stop funding Pelosi's trips back home on an AF aircraft most week-ends - that would help also.
" Judicial Watch uncovered that Pelosi’s military travel cost the United States Air Force $2,100,744.59 over one two-year period — $101,429.14 of which was for in-flight expenses, including food and alcohol.
JW also uncovered internal Defense emails detailing attempts by Defense Department staff to accommodate Pelosi’s numerous requests for military escorts and military aircraft, as well as Pelosi’s last minute cancellations and changes. Pelosi’s office treated the Air Force like a taxi service ."
Read Newsmax: Congressional Travel Cover-Up Alleged at Pentagon | Newsmax.com
Got that right. Ever hear about her demand to the Air Force a few years ago that they specially outfit the back of a C-17 with VIP sleeping quarters for her personal use to fly back and forth from DC to California, and the tissy fit she threw when SECAF told her not only no but Hell no? That was priceless...
17
So much for republican realiality. Continue the lack grasping what went on.
about Grabie News. Factual Reporting: MIXED (depends on source)
Be sure to make fact checks for the source
Also much more important than commenting on the contents of the thread instead of doing "drive-byes".
If you actually HAVE something to dispute the article, please share it.
Yelling "False" isn't helpful without substantiation.
Attack the Messenger fallacy. Dismissed.
I would like to add another item to that list - fighting the border wall! When this government shutdown is over it will have cost the government more than the $5.7 billion the President is asking for. That may be the most telling indicator that this debate is not about the cost of the wall. Nope, it's simply about denying the President his key campaign promise before the 2020 election.
Yep, and about Democrats keeping their key campaign promises in the latest round of midterms. The Dems have exactly zero incentive to give fat fuck what he wants because a) they already offered him money for his dumbass wall and he rejected them, b) he has proven to be the worst negotiator/negotiating partner of all time (he couldn't negotiate his way into giving himself a handjob), and c) they just took back the house and beat the shit out of Trump and the GOP by opposing Trump's promises like the wall.
That "promise" was a wall that Mexico would pay for, which they will not, not in any form, not in any way, therefore Trump will NEVER keep that promise.
His campaign promise was a wall paid for by Mexico, it's amazing how often right wingers forget that.
Wait, you mean a lifelong con man and serial liar lied? Whaaaaaaat?
Are you saying that the eight items highlighted in the article are only supported by dems?
It takes congress to support these items that means both republican and dems.
Not according to some on the right.
I believe the point was to point how CONGRESS (both parties) has wasted money through the years.
I believe the actual cost of the wall to be a red herring to those opposed to it.
Or it could be that they think the monies are better spent on others way to protect the border.
If that were true, they would be suggesting those ideas, or even letting the experts (i.e. the people at Border Patrol) have something to say about how much money they need and how it could be spent. But none of that is happening.
If border security is so important to them, I am sure they could very easily find some way to cut $5.7 billion in some wasteful government program.
About 22% of government agencies have no real effect on the people they are supposed to serve.
Look at the items in the article.
And I am not saying Republicans are better with money. Neither party is fiscally responsible. But complaining about that relatively small amount of money when so much is just wasted is disingenuous.
The dems did want $1.3 billion for border security, which if I remember correctly was more tech and boots on the ground at the legal points of entry. Most drugs come through that channel not out in the middle of the desert.
Actually a couple of congressman from Texas requested that 1.3 go to $4 billion.
It also seems that other ''experts'' that work and live in the border areas feel that wall is a waste of money and want more personal and improved tech.
So there you have it.
As the old saying goes, ''A billion here, a billion there. Pretty soon you have real money''....
I guess that cuts both ways. If the republicans thought it was so important they would find a way to cut the $5.7 billion from other programs that are non productive.
Least we forget, this is only a down payment on the wall. The total cost is anywhere from $21 billion to infinity and there is also the upkeep of the wall. So I believe that it's best to take in the complete cost before we jump in with both feet.
I have never seen a government project come in on budget...The F-35 rings a bell.
Here. How about all this money that GOP CONGRESS refused to fund Obama's border security? 5 short years ago.
One more thing. If republicans and Trump were so concerned with border security, why didn't they provide for it for the 2 years they've held total power? Why didn't they provide it before the dems took over JUST LAST WEEK!? I'll tell you why. They didn't want to do it. Three fricken Trump/GOP shutdowns in 2018, and this one is also theirs. Dems are giving them everything they already passed when gop had total control. PAY FOR THE DAMN WALL YOURSELVES.
If gop really cared they would have funded Obama back in 2014 when he requested extra money. Also if gop really cared, they would have done it before dems took over just last week. Nope, this is all Trump/republican created and sustained. And all the lies and bullshit won't change that.
IOW, "Squirrel!"
They should have!
Obama wanted the extra money to handle the influx of unaccompanied minors crossing the border illegally.
A wall or fence would certainly have curtailed that influx greatly.
Liberal deflection. That's all they have.
Yes it is. many are suggesting alternatives to Trumps idiotic wall.
(finally figured out your Tacos! I've been wearing them on my 4x4s for many years)
They did try but senate democrats blocked the bill by stopping it from getting the 60 votes needed to oass
FYI, bipartisan legislation is easier to do when you consult and include the opposition. 2 full years where many things were rammed through, and they could have put that out at any time for a vote. They could not get enough republicans to vote for it either. This is all republican. Only 2 people holding gov't hostage - Trump and McConnell.
So they should just intentionally waste money instead? Like spend money on shit they know for a fact will be completely pointless?
Lol it will end up being far more than anyone projects. There will be delays, there will be legal challenges lasting years, then there is the ongoing costs of maintenance and repairs.
I believe it is established fact that no matter who controls the purse strings, govt. will waste money.
I believe you have described virtually every government program ever. Does that mean we should simply do nothing ever?
It is established that at even the most basic levels people will waste money.
Nope, but if we are going to spend money on it, it should at least be on things that the data shows will work.
God damn, we agree.
Cutting spending is not what Democrats are about- unless a Republican is President and it is for the military.
I am sure there is a Democrat that would defend every last one of the programs listed.
Gop refused to fund for Obama, so that is just bullshit. Gop didn't fund this stupid idea for 2 years when they had total control BECAUSE THEY KNOW IT IS A STUPID IDEA AND A WASTE OF TAX DOLLARS! So Trump and the gop can pound rocks if they think dems or Americans will pay for it or put a better deal on the table than republicans were willing to do.
Lol kinda how the GOP only gives a shit about cutting spending until a republican is in office? Wasn't it just a couple years ago our deficits were out of control, but all of a sudden the attitude became "who gives a shit about trillion $ deficits".
Yes. Deficits actually declined shortly into the Obama administration, and that was even with the wars and the recession. Of course that was a combination of multiple factors, but when the GOP took control any and all concerns about the deficit went right out the window. Even a cynic like myself was pretty surprised with how quickly they showed themselves to be completely full of shit with their talk of fiscal responsibility. I mean I knew they were, I just didn't expect them to be so blatant about it. Democrats at least seem to be kinda aware of the problem, I mean they do look for ways to actually pay for things to a degree through taxes, but the GOP just says fuck it, borrow away!
So you agree deficits decreased under Obama.
And pays out more than that. But Americans never want to cut any spending, so clearly we have to increase our income.
I don't fucking know and am way too lazy to look it up.
Fucking hell, it is a combination of both. Taxes need to increase and programs/spending needs to be modified. It isn't one or the other.
Then FFS stop pushing this stupid wall if you really don't like gov't spending and waste. Because your words ring hollow, you are trying to force US taxpayers to pay for something they don't want. And they were promised they wouldn't pay for. And that is not the best and most cost effective to protect that border. You know, THE ONE THE GOP DIDN'T FUND FOR THE 2 YEARS THEY HAD TOTAL CONTROL!
Like the PPACA?
Like the $2500 we were supposed to save?
Using that rather dubious "logic", Democrats didn't want comprehensive immigration reform because they didn't pass it when in the majority.
In the formative days of our republic, "millions for defense, but not one penny for tribute" was a popular slogan supposedly uttered by an American diplomat in response to a bribe request by Tallyrand during the XYZ affair.
Today, the democrats' slogan appears to be "billions for foreign countries, but not one penny to protect our borders."
Sure could have used all of that cocaine money back in the 70's when my libido involved much more than Japanese quails.
Why'd you skip the big ticket items? Readers Digest reports:
LOL. That uniform mistake had to be a winner for some kind of stupidity award.
Almost as bad as swat wearing camo in cities. It should be a brick pattern or some such...
Gee 1st, how did the Dems get the GOP committee chairs to report out all of that spending and how did they get McConnell and Ryan to bring those spending bills to the floor for a vote? Oh and let's not forget getting Trump to SIGN the bills. They sure as hell could use some of that magic right now...
Since none of the above occurred during Trump's watch - guess he didn't need to sign them, eh?
The Dems and the Repubs, I hope, followed the Constitutional process of getting the funding/spending up and out.
So all the stuff on the list was eliminated since Trump took over. Link?
Secondly, Paul and Mitch were STILL in charge in 2016.
Yet of course the Dems are the only ones y'all blame...
Well no, but that isn't important! What matters is conservatives SAY they don't like these things. Come on man, words matter more than actions.
Again see above.
You forgot the sarcasm tag.
Trump is the most glaringly obvious unqualified person in the history of this country to hold his office, and day after day here we see these monotonous attempts to normalize that scum. He is quite literally attempting to starve a wide swath of his constituents, and conservatives continue to take the zero empathy position that as long as it isn’t impacting them directly, he’s doing a swell job. Hillary was dead on with her deplorables label.
Ahhh………...I love the smell of hyperbole in the morning!
Oh really? I guess you haven’t bothered to watch a real news show over the last few days.
This article is self defeating. It says that while the Republicans were in charge of every branch of government, they let sugar subsidies take precedence over “the border crisis”.
Perhaps you don't know what hyperbole is.
Is it hyperbolic to say that the Trump shutdown is causing 800,000 American families to not receive a paycheck? Not the mention those hordes of contractors whose salaries rely on government contracts. People are now having to choose between rent/mortgage payment and food for their family. Not even his sycophants are going to stand for that failure. I could see you cheering him on though.
I'm telling mine not to fund the wall, its why she was elected, to be a check and balance on TrumpRussicans. If republicans didn't care to fund the damn wall for 2 full years, they don't care at all, this is just trying to put blame on the dems for something they didn't have the balls to do themselves.
They have, they have offered him money for border security (again), he has rejected them. Compromise is not giving one side everything they want and giving the other side nothing.
And they will do that, and we will all be worse off for it. Give it another month and these employees will say fuck it, quit their jobs and find another one. Then when these departments do open back up, they will have no one to actually conduct their operations.
Exactly. Why is wall funding such a big deal now? Apparently the GOP and Trump didn't give enough of a shit to do it for the last 2 years (if they passed that tax legislation they could definitely have found money for Trump's [Deleted] wall), so why is it all of a sudden a priority? The answer is clear, and Trump is playing the GOP base for suckers, as usual. Funny thing is his base is gonna feel the hurt from this shutdown as much or more than the Dems.
How is a wall gay, and why did you choose to use that term?
Isn't that a little homophobic of you?
Not at all because [Deleted.] South Park has pretty thoroughly covered this.
Lol! Face it Tex, the wall's gay!
It is always amusing to watch progressive liberals when they spout total nonsense and then try to walk it back, Had a conservative said anything remotely like it, someone would have been jumping on it.
No need to get mad because you chose to use a homophobic slur, and got called on it.
It displays your lack of understanding of gay issues.
I am sure South Park and other cartoons have informed you just brilliantly through the years.
Do you get your news from Weekend Update on Saturday Night Live, too?
Ah! There's that famous tolerance we have heard so much about!
I notice you chastize everyone for calling the wall gay, but you don't actually defend the wall. You know it's gay!!
And yet more tolerance and celebration of diversity!
I didn't walk anything back. I stand by exactly what I said.
Someone, but not me because I am not a dumbass.
I am not mad at all. I use the words, gay, faggot, queer etc all the time. Especially in the car, but I am never talking about a person's sexuality, I don't give a shit about that. Again, South Park covered this well. You can go ahead and call me a homophobe or some shit all you like, I really don't care.
Oh well.
Someone doesn't understand or can't comprehend satire it seems. Believe it or not there is actually a deeper layer to many of their episodes.
Nah, from what I can tell that is Donald Trump. I actually haven't watched SNL in years.
I only chastised the people uneducated enough to use the term in that manner. I didn't criticize everyone because some people don't do that shit.
Whatever. Bottom line is that you and Trump ain't gettin' your gay (or straight!) wall!
Don't you have some trolling to do elsewhere?
Well, I can't think of a more deserving member to troll...
You may be on to something there.
Wait wait wait, there is actually a waste fraud and abuse program? Like a program dedicated specifically to those goals?
This is not about the past. It is about NOW. Get over it.