Legislative Sausage Making | Eastern North Carolina Now

    Publisher's Note: This article originally appeared in the Beaufort Observer.

    It's interesting. The Reps reportedly have decided that it might be a good idea to separate the Food Stamp Program from the Farm Subsidies contained in the so called Farm Bill. That will surely give the anti-voter ID folks two things to grumble about. Not only will we be taking food out of the mouths of hungry kids, we will also surely be limiting their parents' right to vote. Hmmm... (Yeah, I know...)

    Everything that I read says that in the beginning the Food Stamp program was added to agricultural supports to get the city folks' support for the "farmers" and the agricultural support was added to the Food Stamp Program to get the "farm bloc" to support the city folks and their food stamp program. (Yes, I know they aren't mutually exclusive cohorts.) I rather doubt that the farm bloc supported food stamps in anticipation of increased demand for farm products. It seems much more likely they supported it in order to get a handout of taxpayer money for not planting a crop or to guarantee a profitable operation when they did plant.

    That would probably be described as "log rolling" by those participating. There is no doubt that it has been going on for a long time. After all, that's what "negotiation" is all about. I'll give a little of what I have and you give a little of what you have and we can strike a deal. In a "private marketplace" that is certainly an acceptable way to do business. It works when buying; it works when selling; and it works when trading in a private marketplace.

    In the "public marketplace", however, the virtue of log rolling becomes a bit more questionable. Is it really right and proper when I am offering you something that really belongs to someone else and what you are offering to me, likewise, belongs to someone else?? The someone else in this case being the long suffering taxpayers. I'll give you some taxpayer money for food stamps and you give me some taxpayer money for agricultural supports and we can live happily (and continue to get reelected) for a long time to come.. Hmmm... It would be distasteful if the amounts were small, but the amounts involved here are enormous. It isn't distasteful; its outrageous.

    I have heard "log rolling" being likened to another old saw, "one hand washing the other". There really is a difference though when politicians do it in a public marketplace. The difference is that when politicians do it, neither hand seems to get clean. Log rolling, when it is someone else's resources being traded away, is a travesty. Log rolling in the public marketplace is no less than bribery.

    Lest there be any doubt, the following definitions are from Dictionary.com.

    "Bribe, noun

1. money or any other valuable consideration given or promised with a view to corrupting the behavior of a person, especially in that person's performance as an athlete, public official, etc.: The motorist offered the arresting officer a bribe to let him go.


2. anything given or serving to persuade or induce

    Bribery

    noun, plural briberies. the act or practice of giving or accepting a bribe: Bribery of a public official is a felony."

    Based on the foregoing definitions of "bribe" and "bribery", so called log rolling in the "Public Marketplace" is clearly not log rolling. Rather it is bribery pure and simple. What the politicians call "log rolling" is really two separate (but closely intertwined) acts of bribery. Think about the Cornhusker Kickback. The following excerpt is from Wikipedia's explanation of the "log rolling" that resulted in getting the votes required to pass ObamaCare in the Senate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nebraska_compromise#Senate ):

    "After a final 13‑hour negotiation, Nelson's support for the bill was won after two concessions: a compromise on abortion, modifying the language of the bill "to give states the right to prohibit coverage of abortion within their own insurance exchanges" (requiring consumers to pay for the procedure out‑of‑pocket, if the state decided it); and an amendment to offer a higher rate of Medicaid reimbursement for Nebraska."

    And that was the price Mr. Reid paid for Ben Nelson's vote in favor of the abomination called Obamacare..

    And what about the Louisiana Purchase?? When Thomas Jefferson made the original Louisiana Purchase, he paid some $15M dollars (about $230M in 2012 dollars). When Harry Reid made his Louisiana Purchase he was believed to have purchased Mary Landrieu's vote in support of ObamaCare for a mere $200M of Federal Funds (i.e. money confiscated from the long suffering taxpayers). Reportedly, due to a "drafting error" the law ended up giving Louisiana $4.3B in extra medicaid funds instead of the paltry $200M she held out for. Now that is what you call fortuitous. (Guess who gets stuck with that bill..)

    It's not always that blatant, but it is certainly always there. If you don't believe me, just ask yourself how the Senate Immigration Bill has reportedly grown to over a thousand pages. (Yes!! A thousand pages!!). In a thousand pages we should be able to name every one of the "illegals" who are here by name, provide detailed specifications for the fence and all the electronic state-of-the art gadgetry that is going to ensure the border is impenetrable, and still have a lot of pages left over.

    So why doesn't anyone do anything about it?? Simple - because "everybody does it". It matters not whether they are Reps. or Dems.; they all do it. It's the group norm. About all we can do is dream about throwing them all out, instituting term limits and requiring every candidate for national public office to convince us somehow that they not only know what is in the constitution but that they believe in it..

    One more thing that needs to change. And it has to do with us not them. We need to pay attention how our representatives vote and hold them responsible when they are a party to Public Marketplace Log Rolling - or accepting bribes - whether the bribes are included in legislation or come from elsewhere (Think Jack Abramoff and his ilk.) Never mind what they say, we need to watch what they do - starting with the Prez.

    D'ya think??