Dollar In-Q-Tel Offshoot for Value," Washington
2001, p. 15.
Post, June 3, 2001, p. A5.
65. See Jerry R. Skees, "The Bad Harvest," Regulation
81. See Congressional Budget Office, "Federal
(Spring 2001): 1621.
Financial Support of Business," July 1995, p. 24.
66. See National Agricultural Statistics Service
82. Ralph Nader, Testimony before the House
Web site, http://www.usda.gov/nass/nassinfo/
Committee on the Budget, 106th Cong., 1st sess., June
importnt.htm.
30, 1999, http://www.nader.org/releases/63099.html.
67. Congressional Budget Office, Budget Options
83. See "Tax Expenditures," in Budget of the United
(Washington: CBO, February 2001), p. 238.
States Government, Fiscal Year 2002--Analytical
68. See General Accounting Office, "DOD
Perspectives (Washington: Government Printing
Research: Acquiring Research by Nontraditional
Office, 2001), p. 61.
Means," GAO/NSIAD-96-11, March 1996, p. 7.
84. Ibid.
69. Ibid.
85. Ibid., Table 5-2, p. 66.
70. For a detailed analysis of the DELG program, as
86. Brent D. Yacobucci and Jasper Womach, "Fuel
well as the Foreign Military Financing and Foreign
Ethanol: Background and Public Policy Issues,"
Military Sales programs, see William D. Hartung,
Congressional Research Service report for Congress,
"Corporate Welfare for Weapons Makers: The
March 22, 2000 (updated July 30, 2001), p. 4.
Hidden Costs of Spending on Defense and Foreign
Aid," Cato Institute Policy Analysis no. 350, August
87. See U.S. International Trade Commission,
12, 1999.
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(Washington: Government Printing Office, 2001).
71. Ibid., p. 5.
88. U.S. International Trade Commission, The
72. Ibid., pp. 912.
Economic Effects of Significant U.S. Import Restrictions:
Second Update 1999 (Washington: Government
73. See Green Scissors Campaign, http://www.
Printing Office, May 1999), p. xv.
greenscissors.org/energy/cleancoal.htm.
74. See Moore and Slivinski, p. 14.
89. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural
Statistics, 1985, cited in Clifton B. Luttrell, The High
75. For a detailed discussion of this project, see the Green
Cost of Farm Welfare (Washington: Cato Institute,
Scissors Campaign Web site, www.greenscissors.org.
1989), p. 100.
76. See Robert W. Poole and Viggo Butler, "How
90. General Accounting Office, "Sugar Program:
to Commercialize Air Traffic Control," Reason
Changing the Method for Setting Import Quotas
Public Policy Study no. 278, February 2001,
Could Reduce Cost to Users," GAO/RECD-99-
http://www.rppi.org/ps278.pdf.
209, July 1999, p. 1.
77. See Jean Love, Wendell Cox, and Stephen
91. General Accounting Office, "Sugar Program:
Moore, "Amtrak at Twenty Five: End of the Line
Supporting Sugar Prices Has Increased Users'
for Taxpayer Subsidies," Cato Institute Policy
Costs While Benefiting Producers," GAO/RECD-
Analysis no. 266, December 19, 1996; and
00-126, June 2000, p. 5.
"Transportation," in Cato Handbook for Congress,
107th Congress (Washington: Cato Institute,
92. Bert Ely, "Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac:
2001), pp. 42325.
What's at Risk?" Paper presented at American
Enterprise Institute second conference on Fannie
78. See U.S. Agency for International
Mae and Freddie Mac: Public Purposes and
Development, "Direct Economic Benefits of U.S.
Private Interests, September 8, 1999, p 1A.
Assistance by State," visited August 28, 2001,
93. Vern McKinley, "The Mounting Case for
www.usaid.gov/procurement_bus_opp/states.
Privatizing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac," Cato
79. Heritage Foundation, A Budget for America
Institute Policy Analysis no. 293, December 29, 1997.
(Washington: Heritage Foundation, 2001), p. 371.
94. Ibid.
80. Vernon Loeb, "CIA Adventures in Venture
95. Dan L. Crippen, "Federal Subsidies for the
Capital; Hill Reviewing Agency's Multimillion
29