Earmarks: One of the frays that I have entered in Congress this year is the fight against inappropriate or abusive earmarks. Most of the Members of Congress that are in jail or are under investigation have that status in whole or in part because of allegedly accepting bribes or some other personal benefit from directing large amounts of taxpayer’s money to someone specific. Now, I am not opposed to all earmarks. I have submitted two such requests for appropriation myself, both of which are publicly disclosed on my government website at www.house.gov/campbell .  But there are certain standards earmarks should meet, including full disclosure, to be considered legitimate.  That being said, I would prefer to eliminate them all over the current system which is ripe with conflict, secrecy and abuse.

In my investigations in this area, I uncovered one earmark that I think is emblematic of the problem here and that is wholly inappropriate. This is $231,000 requested by Jesse Jackson, Jr. (D-Illinois) for an organization called The Abraham Lincoln National Airport Commission. That may not sound so bad on the face of it. The problem is that no such airport exists. Neither is such an airport approved in any way at this time. The request states that the money is for "minority and small business development opportunities."  Interesting.  How do you have job opportunities for an airport that isn’t there?

Anyway, here are the facts:

* The organization was created by Congressman Jackson and its executive director is on his district staff (the equivalent of Lou Penrose in my office). So, he has funded an organization he created and runs with taxpayer funds.

*There is no airport there now and none has been approved by local authorities. A press release in April, 2006 from Congressman Jackson touts that the commission would "launch an advertising campaign urging Gov. Rod Blagojevich to lease it the land the state is acquiring for the airfield.”  The release goes on to detail a TV, radio, direct mail and billboard ad campaign. So, is this money really going to be used to do advertising or otherwise lobby for this airport?

*The proposed airport is not in Congressman Jackson’s district.

*Congressman Jackson stated in a press release dated November 16th, 2006 "So, even with the change of leadership in Congress, I won’t pursue federal funds for the Abraham Lincoln National Airport." But yet this request does that, or at least funds the lobbying effort to create the airport.

*The "impoverished" area that the earmark apparently seeks to assist with jobs is 40 miles from the proposed airport. There is actually a closer airport currently existing to this area.

Now, I understand that $231,000 is not going to balance a $3 trillion budget. But we have to seek out waste wherever we find it and in whatever amount. This is just an example of lots of similar things that are out there.

France: It has become nearly a sport for conservatives to bash France over the last 20 years. Ever since the French government at the time would not allow US planes to fly over their airspace to deal with Libya during the Reagan Presidency, conservatives have been rightfully upset with our longest ally. This is unfortunate. Arguably, the United States owes its existence to France’s assistance during our revolutionary war and France owes its existence to our involvement in their liberation from Nazi occupation during World War II. 

But things may soon change in this strained relationship. First of all, the French recently elected Nicolas Sarkozy as their president. He is decidedly pro-American and is moving France in a much more conservative direction on many fronts, including lowering taxes! But it will take two to improve this relationship. 

In diplomacy, you must consider the perspective from which the other side comes. No country shares our culture or experiences. And we do not share those of France. We, by and large, have prevailed in our military conflicts and America (and the world) has been a safer place as a result. Wars for the French during most of the last 200 years have, by the same token, left France weakened and with a huge loss of life. If the United States today were to experience the same losses as a percentage of the population that France suffered in World War I, for example, we would lose 13 million people. Can you even imagine! Therefore in the French experience, war should be avoided at all costs because it is hard to imagine a worse consequence than what their conflicts have brought. 

Now I may be over-simplifying here, but they will never be like us. We need to recognize that and try to help them support, or at least not oppose, our efforts to defeat Islamic terrorism without asking them to go against their own deeply held beliefs and culture. We have a great opportunity ahead of us to do just that.

Oh…….and they really do make some great wine!

This entry was posted on Wednesday, July 11th, 2007 at 12:00 am and is filed under Blog Posts.