Whiff! - or... Washington Pork Breaks Wind in Iowa!

Monday's Rush Morning Update:

"Let's face it, folks. In a spending bill that has about 9,000 earmarks, a single $2 million request isn't going to raise many eyebrows. Why should it? To Democrats, spending trillions of dollars is becoming a monthly ritual in this era of "responsible governance."

Senator Tom Harkin -- Democrat, Iowa -- is surprised over the stink that his $2 million earmark to study pig odor has caused. Pig odor is a problem in Iowa. The state is home to 3 million people and 20 million pigs. As is common in nature, after pigs eat, they have to emit -- and those emissions are difficult to digest for some Iowans.

Those who live near the pigs report they remain indoors for a week at a time because the emissions burn their eyes. Retired farmer Carroll Harless says that after pigs emit, "you hold your breath and when it's really bad you get the taste in your mouth."

So, Iowans don't understand why anyone would object to spending $2 million for pig odor research -- especially with other earmarks in the Democrat's latest porkulus bill, like tattoo removal for LA gang members, canoe rides for Hawaiians, or grape genetics studies for New Yorkers. Senator Harkin says those who make light of pig odor should come to Iowa and take a whiff. (Who needs to go? Just go to his office in Washington.)

Anyway... Senator Harkin, the porky smell emitting from all of your offices in Washington is worse than anything in Iowa. We don't need a $2 million study to get a whiff; we get it every day for free.

Rush's Reference:

AP: Iowans say pig-odor study passes the smell test

As funny as this is, it definitely points out something that always gets overlooked when it comes to government spending. The invariable statement "why anyone would object to spending on..." Umm... why? Did it ever occur to those folks that when trifles add up, they eventually turn into real money. Which by the way isn't even the point. If Iowans want to research pig odor, they can pay for it themselves. If Democrats in LA want to tattoo removal programs, they can raise their own taxes to pay for it. If Hawaiians want canoe rides, they can charge for them like every other attraction does.

I'm not a lawyer and I don't play one on television, but I have read the Constitution and researched some of the follow-ups from the Supreme Court. No doubt to truly understand the winding labyrinth weaved by SCOTUS, Congress, and everything in between can certainly be a life-long career. Which for some has just been that very case. However, on the face of it, there really is NOTHING in the Constitution that allows for ANY of this. The Commerce Clause talks about interstate commerce, and the 10th Amendment blatantly states that what rights not specified herein are reserved for the states. So in short... you want to de-tattoo gang-bangers or hang air fresheners in pig sties GET YOUR OWN MONEY! There is NO reason why folks in Georgia, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, or even East of the Mississippi should be required to pay for any of this.

If they want to keep up the earmarks, I will gladly take $2 million for building kickin' blogs for Conservatives! ;-)