Tea Party

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

WASHINGTON -- Few candidates in the Republican presidential primary field have decried the federal government with as much gusto as Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.). The three-term congresswoman has belittled the stimulus package, deemed the Obama administration both corrupt and "gangster," and lamented the "orgy" of spending she sees happening in Washington.

The contempt has served her well, helping her craft the type of fiscally conservative, anti-government message that has catapulted her into frontrunner status for the Iowa Caucus and, more immediately, Saturday's crucial Ames Straw Poll.

But it's simply not supported by the Minnesota Republican's actual record.

A Freedom of Information Act request filed by The Huffington Post with three separate federal agencies reveals that on at least 16 separate occasions, Bachmann petitioned the federal government for direct financial help or aid. A large chunk of those requests were for funds set aside through President Obama's stimulus program, which Bachmann once labeled "fantasy economics." Bachmann made two more of those requests to the Environmental Protection Agency, an institution that she has suggested she would eliminate if she were in the White House.

Taken as a whole, the letters underscore what Bachmann's critics describe as a glaring distance between her campaign oratory and her actual conduct as a lawmaker. Combined with previous revelations that Bachmann personally relied on a federally subsidized home loan while her husband's business benefited from Medicaid payments, it appears that one of the Tea Party's most cherished members has demonstrated that the government does, in fact, play a constructive role -- at least in her life and district.

"It had been a longstanding tradition in Congress to be fiscally conservative in every other district other than your own," said John Feehery, president of QGA Communications and a top adviser to former Speaker of the House J. Dennis Hastert. "Bachmann apparently is being a traditionalist."


A traditionalist, perhaps, but only when the cameras are off. When President Obama crafted a $787 billion stimulus package that included historic investments in state aid, infrastructure projects, health care and education reforms as well as a large swath of tax breaks, Bachmann led a chorus of conservatives in decrying the policy.

“During the last 100 days we have seen an orgy [of spending]," she said of the stimulus and auto industry bailout during a conference in Minnesota on May 4, 2009. "It would make any local smorgasbord embarrassed."

Less than three weeks later, she went looking for her piece of the pie.

On May 20, 2009, Bachmann wrote Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, asking him to look into an application for aid that the city of Big Lake, Minn., had made to "develop and finance the Big Lake Rail Park," which she described as "an ambitious commercial and industrial complex which will enhance economic development and job opportunities in this rural Minnesota community." Toward the end of the letter, she added: "We must work together to ensure job creators have access to the vital credit they need to make projects like this a success."

On May 22, 2009, she wrote Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood asking for support for the St. Cloud, Minn., Metropolitan Transit Commission's application for federal funds to "replace twenty-three 35-foot transit buses with compressed natural gas (CNG) powered buses."

On June 4, 2009, she wrote LaHood again seeking grant funding to extend the Northstar Corridor commuter service from Big Lake to St. Cloud.

On June 19, 2009, she made an "urgent" request to LaHood to reverse a decision by the Federal Highway Administration that undermined a project in Waite Park, Minn. The project, she noted, had already received $2.578 million in federal funding through the stimulus package and was "only awaiting the final determination" from the FHWA.

On July 2, 2009, she wrote LaHood again, pleading for money for road improvements in Waite Park. She added that she was "pleased to learn" that Minnesota's Department of Transportation was not going to "pull the nearly $2.8 million in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funding set aside for the project."

On Sept. 15, 2009, Bachmann wrote six separate letters to LaHood asking for help funding six projects (the Northstar line among them) through the Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) grant program. The Center for Public Integrity and MinnPost has previously reported on those letters.

On Oct. 5, 2009, she wrote Vilsack again, praising him for putting money into the nation's beleaguered pork industry and encouraging him to help "stabilize prices through direct government purchasing."

Five days later, she was chastising the concept of government spending in public, saying that the president's efforts to stem the fallout of the recession amounted to a charade. "We hear about fantasy football games. This is fantasy economics," Bachmann said.

That the Department of Transportation was the primary target of Bachmann's quest for federal funds isn't surprising. The congresswoman has a record of trying to protect infrastructure projects from her party's budget cutters, arguing that transportation projects should be exempt from the ban on earmarks that the House of Representatives instituted in November 2010. She was also far from the only conservative who attempted to get her hands on some of the $12 billion in funds that DOT received under the stimulus.

"Some members refuse to take stimulus and won't have anything to do with getting government transit money flowing into their states. Others will say that they are against the idea of the stimulus or federal money flowing into the economy but if the money is there, they are going to try and get that money flowing into their district," said Brian Darling, a senior fellow in government studies at The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank.

But that doesn't necessarily absolve Bachmann from attacks from her fellow party members, Darling continued.

"Some conservatives won't like it," he said. "No two ways about it. They will look at it and not like it because they don't want members trying to funnel money back to their state."

Even more problematic, however, could be Bachmann's attempts to get money and assistance from the EPA, an agency that she once said should be "renamed the job-killing organization of America."

In February 2007, well before Obama was in office, Bachmann co-signed a letter to the EPA urging its officials to help fund technical assistance programs and rural water initiatives "in small communities across Minnesota." The authors of the letter, which included nearly the entire Minnesota congressional delegation at the time, noted that FY 2006 funding for the National Rural Water Association had been set at $11 million.

"We need to continue these efforts in 2007," they wrote.

In other communications with the EPA, Bachmann was far colder to agency policy, criticizing spring 2009 federal management standards for coal combustion byproducts and 2008 National Ambient Air Quality standards. But in other instances, Bachmann turned to the EPA for constituent-related problems. In a Feb. 2, 2010, letter to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, she asked the agency to support a $270,806 grant application (filed with the EPA's Clean Diesel Grant Program) that would help a St. Cloud bus company replace two older motor coach vehicles.

"Voigt's Bus Service, with Community Transportation, Incorporated, is committed to bringing long-term benefits to the environment and the economy and they wish to accomplish this through the Clean Diesel Grant Program," she wrote.

More than the specific funding requests, it is Bachmann's private acknowledgement that the EPA can facilitate positive outcomes for both the environment and the economy that stands out for conservative activists. On her campaign website, after all, Bachmann refers to the EPA as the "Job Killing Agency."

"There is a line between representing your district and then trying to lard up on all of this pork spending, pun intended," said Bill Wilson, President of Americans for Limited Government. "There are very few in Congress who have been able to stand strong and say, 'No I'm not going to do this.' And they are, in our view, the heroes … By not being part of that group [Rep. Bachmann] isn't unique, obviously. But I think that she would owe an explanation to the public as to why she did it. Why she asked for certain things, including things from EPA when she's been very vocal about the overreach of the EPA?"

Both Bachmann's presidential campaign and her congressional office did not return requests for comment for this article. In the past, the congresswoman has tried to draw a distinction between the national message she imparts and her professional responsibilities as a representative from Minnesota.

"It is my obligation as a member of Congress to ensure stimulus dollars are spent on the most worthy projects. I did just that when I supported applications for the TIGER grant program," she said last year.

While Bachmann clearly petitioned the federal government for help in multiple venues, she was incredibly unsuccessful in her efforts. Minnesota's sixth congressional district received more than $234 million in stimulus contracts, grants and loans, according to the Obama administration's Recovery.gov website. That may seem like a hefty bundle, but it ranks last among the state's eight congressional districts.

A Department of Transportation official, meanwhile, tells The Huffington Post that the federal government did not end up funding a single one of the projects for which Bachmann solicited help. The department did send funds to the Minnesota state government, which in turn backed transportation initiatives in the state. But the DOT official said that only a small sliver of that pool, if any, was likely to have ended up where Bachmann wanted.

In one instance, moreover, Bachmann wrote LaHood in support of the "Cold Spring Police Department's application for funding through the COPS hiring Recovery Program." That program, the DOT official confirmed, is operated by the Department of Justice. Bachmann was petitioning the wrong agency.

In the end, Bachmann's ineffectiveness in securing federal help for constituents doesn't mitigate the fact that she sought federal help in the first place. And for Republican primary voters, who have been fed a healthy diet of anti-government rhetoric during this election cycle, that may prove to be a blot on her record.

"This will come up in the context of the battle for the Republican nomination and it will be up to Mrs. Bachmann to explain these things adequately," said Craig Shirley, a longtime Republican operative. "The task for any good candidate is to explain why they did such and such which might not conform with party orthodoxy, and then pivot very quickly to convince enough primary voters why it is they who should be the nominee and not the other contenders."

Mostly for Generali, as our resident Tea Party admirer....;)

Me? I reckon they're mostly a bunch of hypocritical right wing zealots dressed in Libertarian clothing.

Generali

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Mostly for Generali, as our resident Tea Party admirer....;)

Me? I reckon they're mostly a bunch of hypocritical right wing zealots dressed in Libertarian clothing.

I admire libertarianism. The problem I have with the Tea Party is their social conservatism: if you think the economy is better when left to its own devices why wouldn't you think the same thing about people? The economy is just the name that we give to some of the actions of people after all.

That a pollie tries to jump onto a popular bandwagon is nothing new. Obama pretty much did that with his team's use of social media and the interweb in general.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Generali wrote: »

I admire libertarianism.

Me too.

The problem I have with the Tea Party is their social conservatism: if you think the economy is better when left to its own devices why wouldn't you think the same thing about people?

Agreed.

The thing that bothers me about the Tea Party is it has completely been hijacked by the extreme right of the Republican party.

If they were socially liberal, and fiscally conservative, in other words, truly libertarian....... that would be a wonderful thing.

But they have become a refuge for racists, homophobes, social conservatives and other right wing nutters.

Mr_Mumble

I don't see the hypocrisy here. If a local councillor in the UK said s/he wanted more taxation via the council tax and nowt from central government it doesn't make them a hypocrite to accept the ~80% of funding from central government that's required right now.

Politicians have to work within the framework of the current system and that system in the US means the federal government giving money to states. Just because a politician doesn't like "pork" as its called in the US doesn't mean you don't have a duty to look after your constituents interests and try and get a 'fair share' for your district or state.

Libertarians are often overly idealistic, kinda like utopian socialists but smarter. Many Americans associate with being of Libertarian mind but very few will vote for 'em because their policies make no sense. A good example would be immigration. Ideally we want completely open borders but then Libertarians make this their message without putting across that open borders would only work if you dismantled the social security system before hand.

Libertarians make revolutionary suggestions without thinking through the evolutionary steps needed in-between. That's why Bachmann has been a successful politician for many years before the tea party even existed. Politicians in power have to be pragmatic.

Also, research from the Huffpo... that's a neutral source

The thing that bothers me about the Tea Party is it has completely been hijacked by the extreme right of the Republican party.

That's just left-wing attack point #1 with no basis in fact.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Mr_Mumble wrote: »

That's just left-wing attack point #1 with no basis in fact.

Ahem.....

http://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/the-10-craziest-michele-bachmann-quotes

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/19/AR2010071903686.html

http://news.change.org/stories/the-homophobic-and-racist-true-colors-of-the-tea-party-movement

http://linlithgow-libdems.blogspot.com/2010/09/tea-party-homophobic-extremists.html

And ,my personal favourite.....

Michelle Bachmann says's you can "pray away the gay"....

However, whilst the fallout from the Truth Will Out’s video has been huge and homosexuals in America are predictably reeling from the revelation that Medicare has funded reparative treatment, it has actually had the bizarre effect of solidifying Michele Bachmann as the candidate of the Republican base.

Becker, who leaked the video to ABC News (above), attended the Bachmann and Associates Clinic, co-owned by Michelle and her husband Marcus, early last week. And, during a routine consultation offered to all walk-in ‘patients’, his counselor sat him down, offered him a drink and proceeded to inform him that the centre can ‘cure’ homosexuality, leaving him ‘totally free’ of his ‘homosexual urges’ – that he could, essentially, pray away the gay.

Like violence against woman and child abuse, the desire or belief that one can ‘cure’ homosexuality is so deplorable it almost needn’t be rebuked. Disgust is just assumed. However, amongst those who find the urge to comment too appealing in any situation, most have confirmed the stupidity of Bachmann’s politics. Fellow Republican Primary candidate Fred Krueger said:

“She’s a liar and now that she’s been busted, she’s trying to divert attention away from her lies. She is just another hypocrite and bigot.

http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2011/07/18/michele-bachmann-and-the-homophobia-vote/

It absolutely boggles the mind that.....

1. Such a person could be the preferred candidate of the Tea Party wing of the Republicans for the Presidential primaries.

and

2. That there are still any apologists for the extraordinary racism, homophobia and right wing nuttery so obviously permeating the tea party.

Mr_Mumble

Fellow Republican Primary candidate Fred Krueger said:

He's not a slasher horror character! the guy's name is Fred Karger. That tells you how informed the Independent piece is. As for the rest Hamish, did you just google to get that nonsense?

You've just linked to the activist change.org who have recently been in the news to make Bert and Ernie get married. Some of those comments are outright lies, btw. (If you disagree Andrew Breitbart is offering $100,000 for proof of any n-word use at the event in question. Note that was a mass crowd with thousands of recording devices but the only person who heard such abuse was the accusing politician).

Some random blogger and Eugene Robinson (who is a talking head for MSNBC) just mention a single instance of racism amongst the tens of millions of Americans who support the tea party. Because there are no racists who'd vote for the Democrats, Republicans, Tories, Labour, Greens, Lib Dems are there?

I wouldn't vote for Bachmann - her beliefs on sexuality are odd - but the character assassination of her is ridiculous. The buzzfeed quotes being a case in point. If one of the "craziest" quotes of hers in a long political career is "not all cultures are equal" then outside her husband's business there's a lot of clutching of straws here. Do you think stuff like female circumcision, eating dogs or burning children at the stake for witchcraft is equal to our culture Hamish? Bachmann is a three-term congresswoman, she is hardly representative of a political movement started less than 30 months ago.

You've offered nothing more than the usual ad-hominem attacks and dubious "evidence" about the Tea Party Hamish. You don't get the essense of the Tea Party either, its a movement and an ethos rather than a people.

geneer

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Mostly for Generali, as our resident Tea Party admirer....;)

Me? I reckon they're mostly a bunch of hypocritical right wing zealots dressed in Libertarian clothing.

Bleedin el'.

I'm with Hamish.

Eep.

Losing_the_way

Its all well casting a critical eye on the Tea Party/Republicans in the US but they are saints compared to our domestics politicians. Most politicians try to hide this hypocrisy behind different colour flag and reading these comments it appears that they are quite successful.

freeoffers

Liberals are scared of her, that's why they attack her. She's no more a hypocrite than any other politician. As for your mate Obama, his policies haven't done much for unemployment or the economy have they? And it's very easy to attack the TEA Party with rhetoric and name-calling rather than debate the issues.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

freeoffers wrote: »

Liberals are scared of her, that's why they attack her. She's no more a hypocrite than any other politician. As for your mate Obama, his policies haven't done much for unemployment or the economy have they? And it's very easy to attack the TEA Party with rhetoric and name-calling rather than debate the issues.

The polarised nature of US politics is bafflng to any sane external observer.

The only solution that will work involves middle ground..... both cuts to expenditure and raising taxes.

But this thread is less to do with economics, and more to do with the extraordinarily bigoted nature of the American right.

I find it quite bizarre that people can embrace libertarian economic theology whilst being deeply illiberal and intolerant on a social level.

Generali

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

The polarised nature of US politics is bafflng to any sane external observer.

The only solution that will work involves middle ground..... both cuts to expenditure and raising taxes.

But this thread is less to do with economics, and more to do with the extraordinarily bigoted nature of the American right.

I find it quite bizarre that people can embrace libertarian economic theology whilst being deeply illiberal and intolerant on a social level.

It is perfectly possible to get rid of the deficit by cuts alone. The defense budget is out of control as are bills for Medicare, Medicaid and pensions both payable and especially those to yet be paid.

The problem is neither side will address that. The UK has a similar problem with the welfare budget, especially the NHS. The UK can't afford the NHS: it's expensive and mediocre. That's politically unsayable but is, unfortunately, true.