3 minute read
US Congress
EMEL AKAN is a senior reporter for The Epoch Times in Washington. Previously, she worked in the financial sector as an investment banker at JPMorgan. Emel Akan
The ‘Worst’ Spending Bill Ever
A huge funding measure isn’t in the public’s best interest, critics argue
IN yet aNother last-minute attempt to avoid a government shutdown, both the Senate and the House approved a massive $1.7 trillion spending bill, which has frustrated many, including commentators, policy experts, and the general public.
“This bill is further proof that Republicans and Democrats can come together to deliver for the American people,” President Joe Biden said in a statement on Dec. 23, 2022, before signing the bill into law.
However, some argue that the 4,155page spending package might not be in the people’s best interest, especially when most of the legislators don’t know what they’re voting on.
One of the sharpest criticisms came from The Wall Street Journal editorial board, which wrote an op-ed, “The Ugliest Omnibus Bill Ever,” on Dec. 20, 2022, after congressional leaders unveiled the $1.7 trillion spending package.
“This is no way to govern in a democracy, but here we are,” the editorial board wrote, calling the spending bill the “worst in history.”
Every year, lawmakers come under fire for using the omnibus to fund the entire government rather than passing regular spending bills on time. They’re also criticized for rushing through policy changes via omnibus, many of which require separate votes or couldn’t pass on their own.
Billionaire Elon Musk, who has recently spoken out on numerous political issues, also commented on the $1.7 trillion omnibus package.
“Railroading through a giant spending bill that almost no one has read is unlikely to be in the best interests of the people,” Musk wrote on Twitter on Dec. 20, 2022.
Musk also created a Twitter poll asking people if the spending bill should be approved. More than 3.1 million Twitter users voted, with 71.2 percent voting “no” and 28.8 percent voting “yes.”
A bipartisan group began meeting behind closed doors weeks ago to draft the huge spending bill that ultimately surpassed last year’s omnibus package by 1,500 pages, totaling 4,155. However, that doesn’t include everything.
As Heritage Foundation policy expert David Ditch noted on Twitter, the legislative text is accompanied by an additional 2,670 pages of “explanatory documents,” which contain more than 3,200 earmarks, also known as pork projects.
Ditch cautioned that members were given only a few days to review the material, which is impossible to do, even with staff aid.
Romina Boccia, director of budget and entitlement policy at the Cato Institute, agreed, noting that even the most diligent members of Congress and their staff wouldn’t be able to read through the large spending package.
“And that’s intentional,” she wrote in a blog. “The more time legislators would have to ponder the details of the bill, the more opposition to it would likely arise.”
Some examples of earmarks included $1 million for the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Museum in Cleveland, $4 million for the Covina High School pool, and $5 million for the Upper Columbia United Tribes Salmon Reintroduction Project.
Some Republicans and conservative media outlets have also voiced their disapproval of the spending package, claiming that the government is using tax dollars for “woke” initiatives. Among the projects criticized were $3 million for The American LGBTQ+ Museum in New York, $3.6 million for a Michelle Obama Trail in Georgia, $477,000 for the Equity Institute in Rhode Island, and $1.2 million for LGBT pride centers.
The spending package also included $47 billion in additional funding to Ukraine, which had broad bipartisan support. However, several House Republicans have criticized the aid, arguing that the funds would be better spent on domestic issues.
The word “Ukraine” appeared 96 times in the spending bill. Another popular word was “salmon,” which appeared 48 times in the bill. The spending package made available $65 million “for necessary expenses associated with the restoration of Pacific salmon populations.”
The bill also included $410 million for border security in Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, Tunisia, and Oman, which has sparked criticism.
“What utter insanity that tens of billions are being spent for border security of other countries, but none for ours!!” Musk wrote on Twitter.
