Pork barrel, or simply pork, is a metaphor for allocating government spending to localized projects in the representative’s district or for securing direct expenditures primarily serving the sole interests of the representative.

~Wikipedia

This afternoon, a revised Senate version of the so-called “One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB)” was approved on a vote of 51-50, with Vice-president J. D. Vance casting the deciding vote.  The 50 nays included three GOP Senators–Rand Paul (KY),  Tom Tillis (NC) and Susan Collins (ME).  The 50th aye vote was cast by Alaska senator Lisa Murkowski, who, according to the New York Times, “made no secret of her problems with her party’s bill and the harm she believes it could bring to her state.”

Why then would Murkowski, an independent candidate who, the last time she ran for re-election, beat her Trump-endorsed GOP/MAGA opponent in the general election?  She had already proven her constituents would support her despite Trump’s animosity.  Times Washington reporters Catie Edmondson and Margot Sanger-Katz provided the answer.  In a June 28 article, “Republicans Lavish Alaska With Benefits in Policy Bill, Grasping for a Key Vote,” they wrote that the latest version of the bill included:

…a new tax exemption to fishers from villages in western Alaska. There is now an exemption from new work requirements for food assistance. And several provisions have been added that would funnel federal dollars to Alaskan health care providers.

There is even a provision that would allow certain Alaskan whaling captains to deduct more of their expenses. Right now, people recognized by the Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission as captains can write off $10,000 in whaling-related expenses, like buying explosive projectiles, as a charitable contribution. The Senate bill would allow them to deduct $50,000 of their costs this way.

My first reaction was disgust that a U.S. senator would turn her back on the now estimated 13 million Americans who will lose there health insurance and the millions of children in low-income households who will no longer have access to food through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).  Immediately after casting her vote, she told reporters it was an “agonizing” decision.  Senator, why so?  Because you screwed millions of low-income Americans and will be responsible for the death of millions in underdeveloped countries which relied on USAID health and nutrition assistance?  Or, because as you added during your post-vote press conference, “Did I get everything I wanted?  Absolutely not!”  Of course, the irony of her actions are lost on her, especially when, as a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee in 2019, Murkowski swore she would, “…continue to honor the earmark moratorium enacted on February 1, 2011.”  I guess that only applied until she wanted one.

As crass and amoral as her support for this rob from the poor and give to the rich scheme might be, if you are going to make a Faust-like deal, at least she got something in return. The same cannot be said of MAGA House members, my own congressman Aaron Bean included, who have marched lock-step behind Trump with literally nothing to show for it.

So Aaron, if you’re going to demean yourself, at least get something in return.  For example, the City of Fernandina Beach commission is considering a resolution to issue tax-exempt bonds to finance waterfront improvements including the demolition of Brett’s restaurant and some city-owned facilities.  Why should the City increase its debt when you could pull a Murkowski, hold your support for the OBBB, and promise to vote aye if the waterfront flooding-mitigation project is added to the final version of the bill?

If you’re not going to keep “kosher,” bringing home some pork is the next best thing to do.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

The Trump administration has discussed possibly helping Iran access as much as $30 billion to build a civilian-energy-producing nuclear program, easing sanctions, and freeing up billions of dollars in restricted Iranian funds – all part of an intensifying attempt to bring Tehran back to the negotiating table, four sources familiar with the matter said.

~CNN/June 26, 2025

I can hardly wait for the MAGA-verse’s reaction to this news. For example,  MAGA cultist Charlie Kirk, founder of the conservative student organization Turning Point USA, posted the following on Twitter when Barack Obama freed up “billions of dollars in restricted Iranian funds” AFTER Iran SIGNED the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2015.

Iran funds Hamas. Hamas kills Americans and Jews. Now we give Iran $150 billion. Where do you think that money will go? #IranDeal

Of course, Kirk’s tweet did not include several valuable pieces of information.  According to a Newsweek fact check:

This was not funding given to Iran. The amount quoted refers to foreign assets that belonged to Iran and were frozen by sanctions imposed to impede its nuclear program.  

Furthermore, the funds were deposited in a South Korean bank, and their eventual release to Iran was conditioned on Iranian compliance with the JCPOA, including on-site inspections.  And only American, EU and UN sanctions directly related to Iran’s efforts to acquire nuclear weapons were eased.  Sanctions related to Iranian terrorist activities were not included in the deal.

In return, the JCPOA required Iran to:

• constrain fuel cycle activities that could lead to the production of weapons-grade uranium or plutonium,
• restrain the number and type of centrifuges in operation, the level of uranium enrichment, and the size of Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile,
• repurpose facilities at Fordow, Natanz and Arak for civilian uses such as medical and industrial research, and
• accept more intrusive IAEA monitoring measures of its fuel-cycle related activities.

Now, it appears, President “Art of the Deal” may not only match the JCPOA incentives, but toss in $30 billion of U.S. taxpayer money for good measure.  (I cannot wait for the congressional DOGE caucus’ reaction to that addition to the deficit and national debt.)  More importantly, this swag bag is being held up simply to bring the Iranians back to the negotiating table.

For argument’s sake, let’s assume Iran takes this deal.  Does anyone expect any eventual agreement, purported to ensure Iran never obtains a nuclear weapon, will include anything substantially different from the original JCPOA?  Or will it be the sequel to the NAFTA/USMCA much ado about nothing?  Trump will likely give JCPOA a new name and claim that “he only” made it possible.

The only rational public response to Trump’s sequel to “Back to the Future” is his own reaction to both Israel and Iran violating his non-existent cease-fire, “What the f*** are they doing!”

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

My latest guilty pleasure is crime stories.  It does not matter whether they are fictional such as the recent Jon Hamm vehicle “Your Friends and Neighbors” or a documentary like “The Murdaugh Murders: A Southern Scandal.”  A road trip is not complete without at least one episode of the podcast “Small Town Murders.”

My curiosity about a possible synchronistic connection between my new pastime and 2025 politics was triggered by James Patterson and President Bill Clinton’s guest appearance on last night’s episode of “The Daily Show.”  These two “partners in literary crime” were hawking their latest collaboration, “The First Gentleman.”  The plot revolves around a murder for which a former NFL all-star who is married to the first female president of the United States becomes a prime suspect.

Not yet having the benefit of reading the book, I would still bet the farm the investigation of motive, like that in every other crime story, focuses on the question, “Cui bono,” Latin for “Who benefits.”  Regardless how brilliant this installment of the Patterson/Clinton alliance might be, it pales in comparison to the crime against humanity and civility perpetrated by the current White House occupant.  And it does not take that proverbial McArthur Genius Award winner to figure out, “Cui bono.” Trump and his circle of new faux best friends consisting of major donors, billionaires and tech bros.

How about the  other side of the coin, “Who losses?”  Which explains the title of today’s post, “Cui damnum.”  The answer should be equally simple.  Does each presidential action represent his Shermanesque path of retribution for every one of his perceived grievances?  Is it more about the grift that keeps on grifting?  Or his campaign against the “other,” which we now know is anyone who does not support his perverted view of the U.S. Constitution, rule of law and public service.  The story of the 2024 election, especially after watching every major promise in Project 2025 become reality, is, “Why did so many Americans either vote against their own self interests or stayed home on election day because they did not believe it mattered who won?”

Perhaps the best metaphor for this textbook case of cognitive dissonance is the climatic scene in the film “The Sixth Sense” between a troubled young boy Cole Sear (Haley Joel Osment) and child psychologist Malcolm Crowe (Bruce Willis) when Cole reveals his secret.

COLE:  I see dead people…some of them scare me.

MALCOLM:  Dead people?  Like in graves and coffins?

COLE: No, walking around like regular people…Some of them don’t know they’re dead. 

MALCOLM: How often do you see them?

COLE:  All the time.  They’re everywhere.

Except in this 2025 reboot, the origin of Cole’s unease are MAGA cultists walking around like regular people who don’t know they are being conned.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

A change of venue can be illuminating.  For the last four weeks, I have been living in Boca Raton, Florida to support my mother’s recovery from a serious, but not life-threatening medical condition.  I need not tell you South Florida might as well be halfway around the globe from its Northeast counterpart.  This morning, however, I found a unexpected strand of connective tissue.  It was triggered by an article on CNBC.COM titled, “Musk’s role leading DOGE qualifies as ‘continuing and permanent,’ federal judge says.”

D.C. District judge Tanya Chutkan refused to dismiss a suit filed by 14 state attorneys general challenging Elon Musk’s role in the dismantling of various federal agencies and programs.  The plaintiffs claim Musk “lacked the legal authority to make sweeping cuts and other changes to the federal government because he is not a Senate-confirmed officer of the government, and DOGE was never authorized by Congress.”

My first instinct?  I wondered what my representative Aaron Bean, co-chair of the congressional DOGE caucus, might have to say about this latest development, especially since he and two other Florida men (Cory Mills and Byron Daniels) had introduced House Resolution H.R. 2006, codifying the creation of the Department of Government Efficiency and enumerating its authorities.  One would think Bean might use Chutkan’s finding to bolster passage of the bill.  Of course, one would be wrong.  Crickets from the distinguished congressman from Amelia Island.

However, as I researched Bean’s view of the pending case, I stumbled on an unexpected factoid.  For the last month, I was temporarily residing in the congressional district represented by Jared Moskowitz, the first Democrat to join the DOGE caucus.  On December 3, 2024, Moskowitz released the following statement.

Today. I will join the Congressional DOGE Caucus, because I believe that streamlining government processes and reducing ineffective government spending should not be a partisan issue. I’ve been clear that there are ways we can reorganize our government to make it work better for the American people.

At the time, he and the other Democrat who joined the caucus (Val Doyle/4th district of Oregon) were roundly criticized for legitimizing the effort though both felt it was essential for someone not beholden to Trump to represent “working Americans.”  However, on February 5, 2025 Doyle resigned from the caucus, stating:

It is impossible for us to do that important work when unelected billionaire Elon Musk and his lackeys are set on burning down the government—and the law—to line his own pockets and rip off Americans across the country who depend on government services to live with dignity.

Moskowitz continues to be listed as a member of the caucus.  However, during a May 14 interview with Politico, he declared:

The DOGE caucus is dead. It’s defunct. We haven’t met in months. We only had two total meetings in five months. And we weren’t involved at all in anything [happening at DOGE], which Elon was in charge of. Zero. Zilch. Nada. [Musk] did it all on his own.

Quite a contrast to what Aaron Beans tells his constituents through a never ending string of photo ops and interviews on right-wing media.  And what happened to Bean’s effort to pass H.R. 2006 which would have given DOGE the legal authority to address the issues it claims are its mission.  The bill was introduced on March 10, 2025.  Then, as Jared Moskowitz would say, “Zero, Zilch. Nada.”

Surely, there is a Jared Moskowitz or Val Doyle in NE Florida who could better represent us.  For the record, Doyle has held more town hall meetings around the country in the last month than Aaron Bean has held in his own district in two and half years.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP