Buzzfeed Misleads on Job Loss of U.S. Merchant Marine, Blames Tea Party

Now that Congress passed and the President signed the highway bill, Buzzfeed has jumped in to decry the loss of as many as 10,000 jobs in the U.S. overseas shipping sector. Naturally, since it’s Buzzfeed we’re talking about here, only the left side of the story is being told. Worse, Buzzfeed tries to pin this “job loss” on the Tea Party — as if millions of Tea Partiers nation wide are dead set on causing job loss to our Merchant Marines.

For Buzzfeed, former The Hill employee John Stanton seems to have simply rejiggered a Democrat Party press release to cry about the “jobs loss” he and the left think they see in the Highway bill. He spends no time at all worrying about any Republican response, quotes only Democrats, and also seems to be just regurgitating press releases from lobbyists for the Merchant Marine. Of course, there really isn’t any explanation of what really happened.

One of the claimed “unexpected” results of the highway bill, Stanton tells us, was the reduction in federal funding of the shipping by sea of foreign food aid. Until this bill, 75% of this food aid was shipped aboard American ships. The new bill cuts that to 50% for a savings of some $108 million a year in taxpayer’s funds.

This, Buzzfeed says, is a result of those darn Tea Partiers being so staunchly against earmarks.

“Without earmarks to sweeten the deal for members, and with intense pressure to tighten the federal belt,” Stanton sadly notes, “leaders were forced into making difficult choices that in years past would have been unthinkable.”

Gosh, if only the Tea Partiers would agree to more wasteful pork barrel spending and we’d save the country!

Thanks, but no thanks, Mr. Stanton.

Unfortunately, that savings to the taxpayers, the reduction of federal pork spending on shipping, may put some of the jobs of our Merchant Marine force at risk, so says Buzzfeed. It is that part of the bill that Buzzfeed sought to hang on “the Tea Party,” attempting to further the idea that because the Tea Party desires to cut federal spending they want “job loss.”

We can see Buzzfeed’s attepmt right in the website’s subhead: “A difficult tradeoff buried in the highway bill. ‘This is an effect of the unwillingness of the Tea Party Congress to actually fund highways,’ says Rep. Larsen.”

But, let’s think about this a bit. What is being cut is foreign food aid — paid for by taxpayers — and that cut is giving less work to shippers — who are paid by the taxpayers for that shipping. In other words, we are not “cutting jobs.” We are cutting unnecessary government spending that went improperly to the private sector in the first place. That is what we call pork spending, after all.

The fact is that when government programs start being cut we are going to see many businesses that usually make money off the backs of the American taxpayers losing some of their free cash. But what are these businesses really losing but the government money they have been scamming off the taxpayers for decades, money they should never have come to rely on in the first place! They’ll be losing money that isn’t part of the economy, but money that adds to our massive debt. It is the sort of spending we should be cutting.

This is the whole argument that the Tea Party has been having with the federal government these last few years. All these earmarks, all this government waste and the illicit pork barrel spending that Congress brings home to their favorite campaign donors is exactly what the Tea Party wants to cut. The fact is, Tea Partiers are looking out for the taxpayers. But in the short term, without a doubt, that will hurt some business that are soaking the taxpayer with wasteful spending.

So, while Buzzfeed and John Stanton are trying to turn this into an anti-Tea Party crusade, the fact is this cut is a good thing. We just need a lot more of it at every level of government and if that means government largess doesn’t go to the crony capitalists enriching themselves off our backs, then so be it.

Shortlink:

Posted by on July 15, 2012.
Filed under Barack Obama, Big government, Business, Congress, corruption, Culture Of Corruption, Democrats, Economics, Liberals, Media.
Warner Todd Huston is a Chicago-based freelance writer, has been writing opinion editorials and social criticism since early 2001 and is featured on many websites such as Andrew Breitbart's BigGovernment.com and BigJournalism.com, RightWingNews.com, CanadaFreePress.com, RightPundits.com, StoptheACLU.com, Human Events Magazine, among many, many others. Additionally, he has been a frequent guest on talk-radio programs to discuss his opinion editorials and current events.He has also written for several history magazines and appears in the new book "Americans on Politics, Policy and Pop Culture" which can be purchased on amazon.com. He is also the owner and operator of PubliusForum.com. Feel free to contact him with any comments or questions, EMAIL Warner Todd Huston: igcolonel .at. hotmail.com"The only end of writing is to enable the reader better to enjoy life, or better to endure it." --Samuel Johnson

You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
  • GarandFan

    “Without earmarks to sweeten the deal for members, and with intense
    pressure to tighten the federal belt,” Stanton sadly notes, “leaders
    were forced into making difficult choices that in years past would have
    been unthinkable.”

    I’m confused! I thought Barry was AGAINST “earmarks”. But since this is an election year, maybe not.

    There was a piece in the local rag this week about cities being required to pay “prevailing wages” on public works projects. Prevailing wages means “union scale”. So in jobs spending taxpayer money – there’s already a built-in bias towards the job costing more. One of their examples was that “flag man” you see on highway resurfacing jobs. Prevailing wage for Mr Flag Man is $48/hr! However, if the municipality is a “Charter City” it can ignore the prevailing wage strictures out of Sacramento. Translation: In those cases, Mr Flag Man collects about $25/hr.

  • jim_m

    as if millions of Tea Partiers nation wide are dead set on causing job loss to our Merchant Marines.,

    I confess! I have been actively working to eliminate Merchant Marine jobs for the last 4 years.

  • Commander_Chico

    Not going to be able to count on Greek-owned, Panamanian and Liberian flag vessels to ship war material for the next Big One. Just sayin’

    More destruction of American capacity. Decline and fall.

    • jim_m

      That would suit the left since they would want us to lose anyway.

      • Commander_Chico

        Seems to suit a lot of people as long as they don’t have to pay taxes.

    • warnertoddhuston

      Destruction? How? By taking free gov’t money from the shipping industry? What a stupid claim you have there.

      • Commander_Chico

        I am professionally familiar with the maritime industry and its military uses.

        The removal of peacetime requirements to ship U.S. government cargo by U.S. flag ships will inevitably lead to less U.S. flag shipping and crews being available in times of war. U.S. flag shipping cannot compete on price with foreign flags which skirt IMO safety and environmental standards and pay slave wages. See the book “Sweatshops at Sea” for a look at the issues. I’ve been on these ships – for example you will have Ukrainian or Croatian officers with Indian or Filipino crew. All are paid a lot less than Americans would be. And more and more ships are Chinese-owned and crewed.

        It’s simple economics – if you want to preserve a U.S. maritime industry for use in war, you have to protect and subsidize it in peace. It is a matter of national defense no less than having a uniformed reserve being paid to be weekend warriors. $108 million a year is cheap compared to other massive boondoggles.

        Why do you want to destroy America?

        • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

          $108 mil? That’s what – about a fifth of a Solyndra?

          The US has a bad habit of not paying attention to minor things like this, while spending billions on glossy shit that either never actually breaks ground, never gets finished, or never performs as touted.

          Sea transport isn’t glamorous – but it’s necessary. And it’s a false economy to cut back on it.

        • Chris Sanders

          I am a National Guard logistics officer with a primary range of experience in transportation. I agree with (surprises even me) Chico on this topic. Reduction in capacity can have a real impact on war time shipping need. However as a citizen I would prefer a reduction in cost and after having over 18 state armories closed due to budget limits I understand the need for the reduction and savings.

          • warnertoddhuston

            It does not bother me at all. If we are floating these people (pun intended) with tax money, then they may as well not BE a private industry at all. IF they “lose capacity,” too bad. If jobs are lost, too bad. I’d like to see most jobs floated by tax dollars lost. If they cannot survive in the market place, then they just don’t need to exist.

  • Pingback: Buzzfeed Misleads on Job Loss of US…

  • http://www.rustedsky.net JLawson

    For a look at the current state (well, current as of a decade back) of the Merchant Marine system and culture, I’d recommend McPhee’s book “Looking For A Ship”.

    It certainly wasn’t what I was expecting.

    http://www.amazon.com/Looking-Ship-John-McPhee/dp/0374523193