Oh, those "investments"

It used to be called "government spending," or just plain "pork," but nowadays the politicians like to call it "investments." That euphemism is all over the place this week. Oregon's senators, Merkley and Wyden, are strutting around bragging about how much federal money they've managed to steer the state's way through the newly revived "earmark" game in Congress.

Meanwhile, the other day the mailman dropped off at our house some taxpayer-funded campaign literature from our representative in the state House of Representatives, Tawna Sanchez. In it, she babbles on about her many accomplishments in the legislative session just finished, but it's pretty much nothing but one "investment" after another.

House Democrats worked to... invest in community saftety and violence prevention... The legislator [sic] supported a $300 million investment to address homelessness and connect people with shelter and critical services, build on investments to increase the supply of affordable housing... We also supported investments to help our youth experiencing homelessness... This short session the legislator [OMG, somebody please tell her] supported a $300 million investment to make our schools stronger... We also supported over $200 million in investments in career pathways and programs to retain and attract workers in critical sectors... Investing in Communit Safety & Violence Prevention... Investment in Childcare...

On and on it goes. These people seem to think that throwing money around is the extent of their jobs. There's never a mention of any sort of actual results, or any gauges of success or failure. They just spend other people's money, and declare "mission accomplished."

The same thing happened the other day when a reporter buttonholed the governor, Killer Kate, and asked her what she has been doing to stop all the shootings and murder in the state's cities, particularly Portland. Here's the answer she got:

Somebody needs to break the news to the politicians that their job is not just to write checks. Their job is to govern, which means getting results. They seem to have never heard of the concept.


  1. So tired of liberal Democrats thinking they know how to run a government. They have completely failed at almost every level. Not saying the opposite is the answer, but can we please start electing people that have pragmatic solutions and experience running a profitable business?

    1. The problem with that is that, most of what government does where “experience running a profitable business” would be an asset is the kinds of thing that government shouldn’t be doing at all, and most of what government is doing that it should be doing is in no way about (and should not be confused with) profit seeking.

      People don’t like to hear it or think about it, but government is not a business, because businesses drop unprofitable lines of business, and they don’t serve everyone based on the idea that every customer has the same worth and is deserving of of the same respect. Doesn’t mean that people in government shouldn’t be folks who are drawn to measurement of results, accountability, etc., but it does mean that “profit” is not just not a helpful metric when evaluating government services, it’s actively destructive.

  2. Portland's brand of liberal democrat are like the current brand of 'conservative republicans' Their politics are not so much the issue as their lack of intelligence and mental stability. I'm a registered demoncrat but only in Oregon do I on occasion vote repuglican.

  3. The House Majority Office writes these scripts for them. It's pretty bleak.


Post a Comment

The platform used for this blog is awfully wonky when it comes to comments. It may work for you, it may not. It's a Google thing, and beyond my control. Apologies if you can't get through. You can email me a comment at jackbogsblog@comcast.net, and if it's appropriate, I can post it here for you.