Chris Carney (D, PA-10) defends a 200% ROI on Speaker Pelosi's earmark.

Ed Morrissey wants to know what it is with PA and pork, although that’s probably a rhetorical question. Our latest edition comes to us via a debate between Rep Carney and his challenger Chris Hackett:

Ed notes: “That’s not a rescue plan — it’s a payoff”… and he’s right:

…the lost salmon catch amounts to $22 million. Federal officials put the economic ripple effect including businesses like charter boats and ice houses at $82 million.

But taxpayers are being forced to shell out $174 million. That’s on top of $60 million given out last year.

The salmon bail-out is so huge, it might not have survived debate in Congress. But it didn’t have to, thanks to California’s own Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi. She used her clout as Speaker of the House to insert the massive salmon relief into the Farm Bill as an earmark without a vote.

But what’s really flipping out critics is how it works: Fishermen and business owners get to pick their “best” year, from 2002 to 2005, when they made the most money off salmon, and they get a check for that entire amount.

As I said: great work, if you can get it. Or even if you can get it at least once in a four-year period.

Come, I will conceal nothing from you: Chris Hackett is behind in the polls by a bunch. However, he is also not allocating hundreds of millions of dollars of your money to fatten up Speaker Pelosi’s clients, so if you’ve got it to spare, Chris Hackett certainly wouldn’t say no to a donation. Besides, you never know: maybe a little of that Murtha magic will rub off on this race, too.

Moe Lane

PS: “Most ethical Congress in history.” If you actually believed that, then excuse me while I buy an overpriced salmon from these people, so that I may slap you in the face with it.