Only Change is Who Gets the Goodies
By: Melanie Scarborough
Examiner Columnist
November 17, 2008
Suppose you earn the median income of $50,000 and are walking down the street with your boss, who makes the average salary of a Fortune 500 CEO, $15 million. Encountering a panhandler, the boss orders you to give the beggar almost half of the paycheck you just cashed - then congratulates himself for being such an extraordinarily generous fellow.
If you are a conservative, you would be outraged. If you are a liberal, you would be enamored. Apparently, Democratic voters are enthralled by rich people who demand that they give away their money.
Consider some of the most popular and prominent Democratic politicians. The wealthiest senator, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, is John Kerry of Massachusetts; the 2004 presidential nominee is worth an estimated $336 million.
The other Bay State senator, the inexplicably admired Ted Kennedy, is worth $103 million. When they’re not wind-surfing or yachting, both pretend to identify with the plight of the middle class. Can you picture either of them fishing through their car for enough change to buy a gallon of gasoline?
Sen. Hillary Clinton and her husband no longer feel our pain. Since leaving the White House, they earned more than $100 million. How many times do you think they rifle through the discount sock bin at Wal-Mart? House Speaker Nancy Pelosi hardly has to shop the weekly specials. Her estimated wealth is between $62 million and $92 million.
Yet these wealthy Democrats aren’t philanthropists; they spend their lives trying to force other people to give away more of their own earnings. Today, for instance, Congress begins talks about transferring $50 billion from the Treasury to members of the United Auto Workers union - i.e., taking from the average taxpayer whose compensation totals $28 an hour to give to UAW members whose hourly compensation averages $73.
Robbing the poor to give to the rich? So much for all that campaign blather about “fairness.” But, of course, this bailout isn’t about propping up the domestic auto industry; it’s about currying favor with union workers who reliably support Democrats.
So where are all the people who spent the past eight years screeching about Halliburton, their shorthand for Republican cronyism? If they were so outraged by the possibility that George W. Bush and Dick Cheney were funneling favors to their friends by helping them get high-paying jobs, why aren’t they outraged by the Democrats funneling high-paying handouts to their pals?
And why aren’t the same people insistent that any bailout package include a ban on excessive compensation for CEOs just as outraged by politicians who fleece taxpayers for extravagant perks? Recall that after becoming Speaker, Pelosi insisted on having access to an Air Force jet to fly her non-stop from Washington to San Francisco whenever she travels home.
The C-40 she requested costs $15,000 an hour to operate, which means the four-leg trip of dropping her in California and returning to Andrews Air Force Base, then flying back to California to pick her up and return her to D.C. costs taxpayers $300,000.
That is far more abusive than the former CEO of Countrywide having access to the corporate jet.
Hillary Clinton, who tearfully told us during the presidential campaign that she has devoted her whole life to the people of this country, accepts Secret Service protection to keep those beloved citizens at bay. As a former First Lady, she is entitled to the protection, but she has no obligation to take it. Even Richard Nixon declined the Secret Service perk after he was no longer president.
To be sure, the outgoing administration is just as guilty of availing themselves of the lush trappings of office. In the name of security, Bush and Cheney provided their family and friends with benefits befitting royalty. But didn’t we elect Barack Obama and a Democratic Congress on the promise of change?
Obama hasn’t been inaugurated yet; the 111th Congress has not been seated, and already Democrats have signaled a lamentable intent: When it is their turn in power, they too will enrich their friends and enjoy every available advantage.
Out with Halliburton, in with bailouts. Only the names have changed.
For a federal handout of $50 billion, Examiner columnist Melanie Scarborough will happily change her opinion.
Follow The Examiner
