We can imagine that a bill in Congress to fund the war in Afghanistan might include a range of things: a variety of weapons and ammunition, equipment for our troops, food supplies and so forth.
But one would not normally associate a “war-funding” bill with tens of billions of dollars in domestic spending that has absolutely nothing to do with prosecuting the war.
And yet, that is exactly the type of spending that Democrats in the House have loaded onto a bill that is supposed to be funding our troops’ mission in Afghanistan. The House has passed an $80 billion bill for the Afghan war, but it includes $20 billion in “add-ons,” such as money for Pell Grants for U.S. education, which have no connection to the war. Democrats are labeling that domestic spending part of their “jobs agenda” — even though similar spending over the past year or so has failed to stave off high unemployment.
Top Democrats “insisted on adding the domestic dollars, viewing the war funding bill as their last, best shot at resuscitating their faltering jobs agenda,” The Associated Press reported.
“The Democrat majority is treating this troop funding bill like a cash-cow for their election-year wish-list,” said U.S. Rep. Jerry Lewis, R-Calif.
Whatever you may think of the extra domestic spending that Democrats are seeking, shouldn’t it have to rise or fall on its own merits? Isn’t it wrong to tack such spending onto a much more necessary war-funding bill?