December 23, 2020

Monday, Congress finally came to agreement on a $2.3 trillion spending bill that includes long-overdue coronavirus relief. It’s one of the costliest spending bills ever proposed. However, critics are thrashing the bill as a pork-stuffed Christmas tofurkey, light on virus relief and heavy on disgusting things that shouldn’t be in it at all.

For instance, Americans making $75,000 a year or less will get a one-time $600 stimulus payment (half of the first bill’s relief) and a $300 addition to unemployment benefits.

Meanwhile, the bill also includes $130 million for “invasive species assessment, mitigation and reduction;” $1 million a year through 2025 for “water resources on the Tibetan plateau” plus $675,000 for Tibetan scholarship programs; $30 million a year for a US-India Development Foundation; $8 million a year for the next four years for Tibetan refugees plus $4 million a year for Tibet’s government; $10 million for “gender programs” in Pakistan; $130 million for HIV/AIDS workers stationed abroad to buy cars; and the creation of a committee to regulate performance-enhancing drugs in race horses. Plus, of course, a lot of spending to fight “climate change” and promote “diversity,” both of which are vital to controlling the coronavirus, I’m sure.

Here are even more spending items in the bill that benefit people everywhere but in America.

It isn’t often that I find myself in agreement with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, but she was right when she fumed that Congress members were handed a 5,500+ page bill and told they’d have to vote on it in two hours, with no time to read it. The problem is, as Republican Rep. Thomas Massie pointed out, that the Democrats all voted to waive the 72-hour waiting period that was created to give members the time to read a bill before voting on it.

However, the real problem is that massive omnibus spending bills like this exist at all. If the coronavirus is an emergency, then a bill should’ve been passed that focuses solely on that. If these other things are worthy of robbing the taxpayers to pay for, then let their sponsors justify the spending in open debate, not hide them behind the camouflage of emergency virus aid.

Here’s more on the bill and a call for President Trump to veto it and force Congress to pass a clean relief bill.

Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!

More Stories

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis deserves credit

Encouraging Signs Of A Return To Sanity

Comments 1-5 of 5

  • James Weaver

    12/28/2020 08:35 PM

    Found this article but not sure I saw Huckabee TV show on subject. Don't believe we missed it. We don't miss any unless we are unavoidable redirected by other functions. I hate missing your show. It is ALWAYS dead on the money for facts with NO FAKE NEWS!

  • Elizabeth Ann Thienes

    12/25/2020 11:36 AM

    I could never have imagined the amount of pork that was in the bill. None of it of major importance! Pelosi must have scraped the bottom of the barrel to find the pork!

  • William Jakovac

    12/24/2020 12:12 PM

    We agree that bills that couldn’t be passed on their own merits should never be attached to bills that have to be passed. Now, I don’t know how fast a politician can speed-read, but 6000 pages in less than a day seems greatly far fetched. Passing a bill first to find what’s in it has happened before and it stinks to high heaven.

  • Fran Cooley

    12/23/2020 03:13 PM

    I'm an 80 year old woman on SS and my daughter claims me on her income tax, so, therefore, I'm not eligible for a stimulus check. Why can't our country take care of our senior citizens instead of sending billion to foreign countries for absurd studies! It sure would help.

  • Louise Mott

    12/23/2020 10:28 AM

    Why are we wasting money by giving to anything other than virus relief? We don't have money to give to other stuff. If my money is tight I don't proceed to gift my neighbors!! What kind of physical responsibility is this????!!