Two Faced Republicans

Let's say for the sake of argument that the Congressional Republicans are correct. That the Obama stimulus is bad for the economy, that it won't create jobs and it will not work. Wouldn't it follow that these Congressional Republicans wouldn't want any of the stimulus funds given to their state? How, then, can this be explained?

Sen. Christopher S. Bond regularly railed against President Obama's economic stimulus plan as irresponsible spending that would drive up the national debt. But behind the scenes, the Missouri Republican quietly sought more than $50 million from a federal agency for two projects in his state.

Mr. Bond was not alone. More than a dozen Republican lawmakers, while denouncing the stimulus to the media and their constituents, privately sent letters to just one of the federal government's many agencies seeking stimulus money for home-state pork projects.

The letters to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, expose the gulf between lawmakers' public criticism of the overall stimulus package and their private lobbying for projects close to home. (link)

And why did Senator Bond want these toxic funds for his state?

In a letter to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, Mr. Bond noted that one project applying to the USDA for stimulus money would "create jobs and ultimately spur economic opportunities."

It would what? Create jobs? Spur economic opportunity?

But Senator Bond isn't the only federal legislator who admits privately what he denies publicly. Remember Rep. Joe Wilson who yelled "You lie!" to President Obama during his speech to Congress last September? He voted against the stimulus bill, but guess what benefit he hopes to gain from the stimulus funds for his congressional district.

Rep. Joe Wilson, South Carolina Republican who became famous after yelling, "You lie," during Mr. Obama's addresses to Congress in September, voted against the stimulus. Nonetheless, Mr. Wilson elbowed his way into the rush for federal stimulus cash in a letter he sent to Mr. Vilsack on behalf of a foundation seeking funding.

"We know their endeavor will provide jobs and investment in one of the poorer sections of the Congressional District," he wrote to Mr. Vilsack in the Aug. 26, 2009, letter.

At times this kind of hypocrisy from the Congressional Republicans has a short time frame:

On Feb. 13, 2009, Sen. Robert F. Bennett, Utah Republican, issued a statement criticizing the stimulus — but two days earlier, he privately forwarded to Mr. Vilsack a list of projects seeking stimulus money.

"I believe the addition of federal funds to these projects would maximize the stimulative effect of these projects on the local economy," he wrote.

Isn't that interesting? Just two days before Senator Bennett was—publicly—certain that the stimulus package wouldn't work. Two days later—privately—Senator Bennett had his hand out and praised that "stimulus effect" that the funds would provide.

And on and on it goes: Congressional Republicans who publicly opposed the stimulus bill, privately endeavoring to have their states and districts benefit from it. What explains this dissonance?

I believe the explanation for their hypocrisy is simple, in spite of their attempts to justify it. These Congressional Republicans are liars. They took a public position for political purposes that was contrary to their privately held beliefs. They knew that the stimulus package would create and save jobs. They simply lied publicly about what they knew. But when they thought no one would find out, they expressed their privately held belief that the stimulus package would be helpful to their states and districts.

There is no nuance here. Just lying. Just publicly denying what is good and helpful as part of a strategy to regain political power. In other words, just anti-social behavior.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Republican Stimulus Hypocrisy: They Knew it Would Work (usnews.com)
• Obama Says Republicans Can Help End Washington's 'Sour Climate' (businessweek.com)