Pork barrel is the appropriation of government spending for localized projects secured solely or primarily to bring money to a representative's district. The usage originated in American English.In election campaigns,the term is used in derogatory fashion to attack opponents. Scholars, however, use it as a technical term regarding legislative control of local appropriations. - Wikipedia.
When members of Congress try to gain federal funds for projects
in their district or state, they are often accused of playing “pork barrel
politics.” This curious expression dates back
to the days of plantation slavery
before the Civil War, when field hands dipped into large barrels of salt pork
for their food. Similarly, those senators and representatives who win special projects
for their constituents are “bringing home the bacon.”
Legislation authorizing improvements in rivers and harbors, flood control and dams, construction of federal buildings, and highway construction traditionally caused members to scramble to get something in for their state or district. More recently, energy and defense appropriations bills have attracted pork barrel amendments. Members of Congress defend their pork barrel efforts as a way of more evenly distributing federal money throughout the nation. But critics charge that Congress often diverts funds to projects and places not out of national need but to enhance members' chances of reelection. Senator Norris Cotton (Republican–New Hampshire), who served on the Appropriations Committee, spoke for many when he called pork barrel politics “one of the worst features of the whole system of federal grants and subsidies.”
Pork barrel politics has become associated with a variety of colorful legislative terms. When members seize upon a bill that the President is likely to sign into law and then add pork barrel amendments, it is called a “Christmas tree” bill. Special projects are hung upon the bill the way ornaments adorn a Christmas tree. When Congress specifies exactly where and how federal money should be spent—for example, specifying the awarding of a grant to a certain university to conduct weapons research—it is “earmarking” the funds, just as some farm animals are marked on the ear to identify who owns them. And when members trade their votes for each other's pork barrel projects, the practice is called “logrolling.” This expression dates back to the frontier practice of neighbors working together to clear their farmland and gather logs for building their homes, barns, and fences. Whoever helped his neighbors in logrolling would receive their help in return.
Legislation authorizing improvements in rivers and harbors, flood control and dams, construction of federal buildings, and highway construction traditionally caused members to scramble to get something in for their state or district. More recently, energy and defense appropriations bills have attracted pork barrel amendments. Members of Congress defend their pork barrel efforts as a way of more evenly distributing federal money throughout the nation. But critics charge that Congress often diverts funds to projects and places not out of national need but to enhance members' chances of reelection. Senator Norris Cotton (Republican–New Hampshire), who served on the Appropriations Committee, spoke for many when he called pork barrel politics “one of the worst features of the whole system of federal grants and subsidies.”
Pork barrel politics has become associated with a variety of colorful legislative terms. When members seize upon a bill that the President is likely to sign into law and then add pork barrel amendments, it is called a “Christmas tree” bill. Special projects are hung upon the bill the way ornaments adorn a Christmas tree. When Congress specifies exactly where and how federal money should be spent—for example, specifying the awarding of a grant to a certain university to conduct weapons research—it is “earmarking” the funds, just as some farm animals are marked on the ear to identify who owns them. And when members trade their votes for each other's pork barrel projects, the practice is called “logrolling.” This expression dates back to the frontier practice of neighbors working together to clear their farmland and gather logs for building their homes, barns, and fences. Whoever helped his neighbors in logrolling would receive their help in return.
Sources: Norris Cotton, In the
Senate: Amidst the Conflict and the Turmoil (New York:
Dodd, Mead, 1978)
IN THE PHILIPPINES, WE CALL IT THE PDAF or priority development assistance fund
EACH SENATOR IS ENTITLED TO Php 200 million and EACH CONGRESSMAN, Php 70 million every year. Worst, some of them think they OWN THE MONEY.
Sa literal na pagsasalin sa Filipino, ibig sabihin nito ay
“bariles ng karneng baboy.” Pero sa pamahalaan, ang ibig sabihin nito ay pondo
ng gobyerno na maaaring gastusin depende sa proyektong ituturo ng isang
mambabatas. Ang siste, may porsyento sya, kaya nasasakripisyo ang pagawain o
proyektong pambayan. Ang masaklap, naging mas magaling sila ngayon para mas
pakinabangan ang mga pondo – sa paglilipat nito sa mga pribadong organisasyon o
non-government organizations (NGOs), na kung hindi man peke, ay pini-peke ang
kagastusan para maibulsa ang pera.
But even the President has the following PORK BARREL at his disposal:
Special purpose funds are:
- Budgetary support to
state-owned corporations - P45.7 billion
- Allocations to local
government units - P19.7 billion
- Calamity fund P7.5
billion
- Contigent fund - P1
billion
- DepEd school
building program - P1 billion
- E-government fund -
P2.479 billion
- International commitments
fund - P4.8 billion
- Miscellaneous
personnel benefits fund - P80.7 billion
- Pension and gratuity
fund - 120.5 billion
- PDAF - P25.420
billion
- Feasibility studies
fund - P400 million
Total: P229.526
billion
Un-programmed funds are:
- Budgetary support to
government-owned and controlled corporations - P36.268 million
- Support to
foreign-assisted projects - P16.124 billion
- General fund
adjustments - P1 billion
- Support for infra
projects and social programs - P56.349 billion
- AFP modernization
program - P10.349 billion
- Debt management
program - P10.894 billion
- Risk management
program - P30 billion
- People's survival
fund - P500 million
Total: P139.904
billion
Under the President's control
Another item is the
budget for school buildings worth P200 billion.
And this is how they managed to siphon the PEOPLE'S MONEY.
And this is how they managed to siphon the PEOPLE'S MONEY.
 |
| http://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/35210-pdaf-collusion-solons-choose-ngos |
No comments:
Post a Comment