Comments on: Why Earmarks Matter http://www.frumforum.com/why-earmarks-matter Building a conservatism that can win again Fri, 12 Mar 2010 22:39:22 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: balconesfault http://www.frumforum.com/why-earmarks-matter/comment-page-1#comment-67065 balconesfault Thu, 08 Oct 2009 00:39:36 +0000 http://www.newmajority.com/?p=13345#comment-67065 Escape says, seemingly completely ignorant of everything written by Midcon. Escape says, seemingly completely ignorant of everything written by Midcon.

]]> By: EscapeVelocity http://www.frumforum.com/why-earmarks-matter/comment-page-1#comment-67062 EscapeVelocity Wed, 07 Oct 2009 22:23:23 +0000 http://www.newmajority.com/?p=13345#comment-67062 I dont think this targets Democrat voters well enough. Targeted spoils is the key. Maybe if they limited it to so called Blue States, then it would have already been an add in on the Porkulus bill. I dont think this targets Democrat voters well enough. Targeted spoils is the key. Maybe if they limited it to so called Blue States, then it would have already been an add in on the Porkulus bill.

]]> By: midcon http://www.frumforum.com/why-earmarks-matter/comment-page-1#comment-67023 midcon Wed, 07 Oct 2009 17:38:29 +0000 http://www.newmajority.com/?p=13345#comment-67023 Come on Clay, you make it sound as if NextGen is sitting on the shelf somewhere waiting for govenment to spend the money to buy it. Even if Congress were to appropriate the entire sum in a single year that NextGen is expected to cost it would still take years to get get the National Airspace System transition. NextGen is extremely complex and requires outfitting and retrofitting every single aircraft that would be authorized to transit the NAS. Do you have any idea of the number of aircraft that would be? Additionally, you must remember that there are multiple types of radar that serve multiple purposes. NextGen is extremely complex and the lack of appropriations is not a significant factor in being able to transition. The program planning for NextGen is continuing and the lack of acquisition dollars is not a constraint in it's implementation. Current radars are not outdated. Many of the radars are brand new. Does radar as a concept date from WWII? Sure, but the radars themselves do not date from WWII. You make it sound as if they are using WWII parts and that it's virtually the same the exact thing and there has been no improvements in the technology for over 50 years. For those who want some real information on NextGen, there are many sites, but here is one source: http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/avs/offices/afs/afs400/rnp/media/RNProadmap.pdf Come on Clay, you make it sound as if NextGen is sitting on the shelf somewhere waiting for govenment to spend the money to buy it. Even if Congress were to appropriate the entire sum in a single year that NextGen is expected to cost it would still take years to get get the National Airspace System transition. NextGen is extremely complex and requires outfitting and retrofitting every single aircraft that would be authorized to transit the NAS. Do you have any idea of the number of aircraft that would be? Additionally, you must remember that there are multiple types of radar that serve multiple purposes. NextGen is extremely complex and the lack of appropriations is not a significant factor in being able to transition. The program planning for NextGen is continuing and the lack of acquisition dollars is not a constraint in it’s implementation. Current radars are not outdated. Many of the radars are brand new. Does radar as a concept date from WWII? Sure, but the radars themselves do not date from WWII. You make it sound as if they are using WWII parts and that it’s virtually the same the exact thing and there has been no improvements in the technology for over 50 years.

For those who want some real information on NextGen, there are many sites, but here is one source: http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/avs/offices/afs/afs400/rnp/media/RNProadmap.pdf

]]> By: Oneon1isto http://www.frumforum.com/why-earmarks-matter/comment-page-1#comment-67020 Oneon1isto Wed, 07 Oct 2009 17:30:42 +0000 http://www.newmajority.com/?p=13345#comment-67020 Totally agree with this. Not sure about the I'd use the GAO for airline statistics. Must be better sources for data. Totally agree with this. Not sure about the I’d use the GAO for airline statistics. Must be better sources for data.

]]> By: balconesfault http://www.frumforum.com/why-earmarks-matter/comment-page-1#comment-67017 balconesfault Wed, 07 Oct 2009 17:12:00 +0000 http://www.newmajority.com/?p=13345#comment-67017 <b>Maybe they’ve been listening to the enviros telling them that airliners emit too much pollution and greenhouse gases, and we should all go back to the days when it took 2 days to cross the continent by rail (plus a couple more days to reach Hawaii by steamship).</b> Probably not, but thanks for giving me the Limbaugh moment for the day. Saves me tuning in to the blowhard and listening to him praising himself every 5 minutes. Maybe they’ve been listening to the enviros telling them that airliners emit too much pollution and greenhouse gases, and we should all go back to the days when it took 2 days to cross the continent by rail (plus a couple more days to reach Hawaii by steamship).

Probably not, but thanks for giving me the Limbaugh moment for the day. Saves me tuning in to the blowhard and listening to him praising himself every 5 minutes.

]]> By: sinz54 http://www.frumforum.com/why-earmarks-matter/comment-page-1#comment-67016 sinz54 Wed, 07 Oct 2009 16:58:30 +0000 http://www.newmajority.com/?p=13345#comment-67016 I'm surprised Obama/Pelosi/Reid haven't fully funded this. It's a perfect example of the infrastructure improvement that the Dems are always shouting about. Maybe they've been listening to the enviros telling them that airliners emit too much pollution and greenhouse gases, and we should all go back to the days when it took 2 days to cross the continent by rail (plus a couple more days to reach Hawaii by steamship). I’m surprised Obama/Pelosi/Reid haven’t fully funded this. It’s a perfect example of the infrastructure improvement that the Dems are always shouting about.

Maybe they’ve been listening to the enviros telling them that airliners emit too much pollution and greenhouse gases, and we should all go back to the days when it took 2 days to cross the continent by rail (plus a couple more days to reach Hawaii by steamship).

]]> By: balconesfault http://www.frumforum.com/why-earmarks-matter/comment-page-1#comment-67001 balconesfault Wed, 07 Oct 2009 14:49:57 +0000 http://www.newmajority.com/?p=13345#comment-67001 <b>The FAA estimates that it will cost up to $42 billion to implement a modern air traffic control system.</b> After the last decade, I tend to think of such numbers in terms of "weeks in Iraq" at our peak burn rate in the 2005-2008 timeframe. This sum is about 10 Iraq-weeks. Certainly well worth the investment, considering the value to America. We should just fund it - if we had the cash to spend on Iraq, then we have the cash for this. The FAA estimates that it will cost up to $42 billion to implement a modern air traffic control system.

After the last decade, I tend to think of such numbers in terms of “weeks in Iraq” at our peak burn rate in the 2005-2008 timeframe.

This sum is about 10 Iraq-weeks. Certainly well worth the investment, considering the value to America. We should just fund it – if we had the cash to spend on Iraq, then we have the cash for this.

]]>