Crippling Government one Bill at a time

As I write this two of our country’s senators are competing for the Presidency of the United States of America. One of them is running a campaign dedicated to “cutting pork”, “removing earmarks” the other has also said several times that we need to make government more transparent, and blamed this current financial problem on lobbyists and special interests groups. Both of these men voted for the bailout, as did several others in the House and Senate. All knew of the tax breaks written into the bill; Tax breaks that could costs the American people billions over the next few years. If both men are so dead set against pork and wasteful spending, if both have pledged to take on the special interests groups, then why not point out to the American people the number and specifics of everything tacked on to this bill?

As far back as I can remember, every politician has preached against special interests groups, complained about the lobbyists, and then when in was their turn at bat, they struck out and did nothing. For those Americans who don’t know what the big deal is, I’ll do a quick recap. Sen. A wants to pass a bill that will do something good for the country like limit the amount of money a plaintiff can receive as part of a lawsuit. I site this because I personally feel that this country is lawsuit happy, and will sue over anything if just to make a buck. This eventually hurts the rest of the population since something somewhere usually increases. But I digress. Sen. A submits his bill, and goes around trying to drum up votes to get his bill passed. Sen. B says I’ll vote for this if you add this piece to it. Sen. B comes from a state dependent on cattle, and he would like to pass a bill that would loosen FDA regulations so that his constituents could cut costs raising cattle, and possibly make a better profit. Sen. A agrees, and moves along to Sen. F, who asks for something else to be tacked on to the bill. Eventually when Sen. A has found enough support for his bill he submits it to be voted on. The process is actually more complex than this, but these are the basics. For the actual workflow chart see the following: How a Bill becomes a Law

What exactly does this have to do with the bailout? Well the bailout bill took on quite a bit of “Pork” on it’s way through the House and Senate. The following website
gives a comprehensive list, but I’ve listed some of the more ridiculous ones here.

Sec. 503. Exemption from excise tax for certain wooden arrows designed for use by children

Current law places an excise tax of 39 cents on the first sale by the manufacturer, producer, or importer of any shaft of a type used to produce certain types of arrows. This proposal would exempt from the excise tax any shaft consisting of all natural wood with no laminations or artificial means to enhance the spine of the shaft used in the manufacture of an arrow that measures 5/16 of an inch or less and is unsuited for use with a bow with a peak draw weight of 30 pounds or more. The proposal is effective for shafts first sold after the date of enactment. The estimated cost of the proposal is $2 million over ten years, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation.

The Oregon senators were the initial sponsors of the provisions. According to Bloomberg News, the provision would be worth $200,000 to Rose City Archery in Myrtle Point, Oregon.

What exactly do our financial institutions have to do with children’s arrows? Luckily this is only costing us $200K in taxes, but it does nothing to help our current situation.

Sec. 317. Seven-year cost recovery period for motorsports racing track facility

Track owners want to be able write-off the cost of their facilities on their taxes over seven years - a depreciation timetable many of them have used for decades. But the IRS has wanted to stretch it to at least 15 years and has raised questions whether the increasingly popular tracks really belong in the same tax category as amusement parks.

Auto track owners are simply trying to get out of paying more taxes - which they'd have to do if they deducted less every year. These owners have gotten plenty of tax breaks over the years from states and localities eager to get speedways. The provision would be extended 2 years till the end of 2009 and would cost $100 million. The provision encompasses all facilities including grandstands, parking lots and concession stands.

Ok forgive me if I’m wrong but isn’t NASCAR one of the biggest sports in the US today? Don’t track owners make enough money on attendance and concession stands to warrant their current taxes? I’m all for lower taxes but businesses like NASCAR, baseball and football franchises have made enough money providing entertainment to the masses, and they should be held responsible for paying their fair share of the tax burden. Don’t get me wrong here, I’m not against sports, in fact I love baseball, and have recently picked up an interest in football, but I don’t feel that anyone is worth 25 million a year, and I definitely don’t feel we should be giving tax breaks to the entertainment business when they make plenty of money on their own. Why cry over paying taxes when admission to a ball park is $50 per person in some cases?

Sec. 211. Transportation fringe benefit to bicycle commuters

Allows employers to provide a benefit to employees for costs associated with bicycle commuting, including purchase and repair of a bicycle, bicycle improvements, and bicycle storage. This provision was proposed in 2007 in the Senate by Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) and in the House by Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR). This provision is estimated to cost $10 million.

I know this is one of those “green” initiatives that are so popular these days, but really a tax write off for buying a bike? I mean really bikes are like $50 at Walmart, that’s about one week’s gas in my case. Does the government really need to step up and subsidize our bike purchases? I would personally rather see this money go to tax breaks for people who want to buy into solar power.

Sec 502. Provisions related to film and television productions
In an effort to keep film and television productions in the U.S, they would be eligible for a tax incentive program. Under this program, the cost of production of qualifying films would be permitted to be immediately expensed -- that is, fully deducted from income for tax purposes -- in the year the expenditures occur. This provision also makes permanent other favorable tax treatments for production. Historically Rep. Diane Watson (D-CA) has been a supporter (dating from its creation in the 2004 corporate tax bill). The cost is estimated at $478 million over 10 years.

How in the heck did Hollywood get a piece of this bill? Again I love movies, and I love good TV, but Hollywood makes enough money doing what they do, which in reality is worthless to the grand scheme of things. Is this part of the bill really going to entice the next Survivor to be in the Everglades? Hollywood puts out 90% garbage, 6% decent programming, and about 4% quality programming, all meant to allow us to escape the reality that our economy is in shambles and our standard of living is decreasing. Most of what’s on TV today has already been done, and we’re essentially just paying for the special effects of the current version, and yet they have the nerve to ask for tax breaks.

So there you have it ladies and gentlemen, bureaucracy at it’s finest. Once again we stand idly by as our government rewards the greed that created this mess with more greed. This is how our government crumbles, crippled by it’s own self indulgence and each State’s self interest. My question to both candidates is who will act in the interest of the “people”? Sure each one of these additions was made in the interest of some company, but the people who are truly affected are never thought of, and our government takes yet another bad idea designed to attempt to fix things and makes it worse by adding layer upon layer of greed.