What is it about Pennsylvania and pork?
posted at 8:15 am on October 31, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
This time, it’s not even Pennsylvania pork that gets defended. In a debate between incumbent Democrat Chris Carney and Republican challenger Chris Hackett for PA-10, Carney defends an earmark from Nancy Pelosi that cost $174 million for fisheries in her district. Carney swears that the earmark process has nothing to do with corruption:
Let’s take a look at this particular earmark that Carney defends. The fisheries in Pelosi’s district did have a bad year and struggled to survive. They lost $22 million in salmon catches last year, and the most generous analysis of the economic impact to the area was $82 million, which included losses for ancillary businesses like charter boats and ice houses.
Did Pelosi ask for $22 million? $82 million? No, she shelled out more than double what the entire economic impact might have been. And how is this money to be distributed? The fishermen and businesses eligible pick their best year over the last five — and they get a check for that amount. The government essentially writes them a check equalling their entire revenue for the best year they’ve had.
That’s not a rescue plan — it’s a payoff. Carney defends it and Pelosi because he wants the same ability to shovel taxpayer money into his district so he can pay off voters and ensure his political career. Both Carney and Pelosi learned at the feet of the Bagman Master: John Murtha.
It looks like we have a chance to stop Murtha’s Mini-Me. Toss a few dollars into Chris Hackett’s coffers if you can, or else we may have a new Prince of Pork in PA.