Whatever their other benefits, the tighter ethics rules approved by Congress haven’t changed the much-criticized practice of earmarking legislation with lawmakers’ pet projects, such as Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens’ infamous $200 million “bridge to nowhere” proposal.
In fact, the new rule that links legislators’ names to earmarks has actually become a point of pride for lawmakers intent on bringing home the bacon, reports the New York Times.
After one lawmaker derided an earmark by Rep. Nancy Boyda, D-Topeka, that provided $100,000 for a prison museum at Fort Leavenworth, Boyda went on the offensive, boasting that Leavenworth County had more prisons than any other county in America and had housed such luminaries as Machine Gun Kelly and the Birdman of Alcatraz.
“Democracy is a contact sport, and I’m not going to be shy about asking for money for my community,” said Boyda. “My guess is that next year I’m going to be putting in more earmarks.”
How about a few million for an earmark museum in Wichita?
Posted by Randy Scholfield
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/24
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/24
- HLP on Open thread 11/24
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/24
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/24
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/24
- LonnythePlumber on Goldman Sachs ‘apology’ hollow
- LonnythePlumber on It’s the stupidity about the economy
- XXX on Open thread 11/24
44 Comments
Perhaps Tiahrt could have brought in some pork to Wichita. The Eagle gave him the endorsement since they said he’d be the most effective in Congress. How did that end up Randy? Going to give him an endorsement this time around?
Even in light of Everett Dirkson’s observation, “A billion here and a billion there and eventually we’re talking about real money,” Boyda’s measly $100 K isn’t all that much money as far as federal earmarks are concerned.
And it’s substantial money on a local level for a museum that could be a fascinating visit. “Machine Gun Kelly,” the “Bird Man of Alcatraz” (who was actually the bird man of *Leavenworth,* the Kansas City Massacre… I’d spend an hour at that little Kansas museum.
Earmarks have been severely abused. “The Bridge to Nowhere” was absolutely too much money for too little return. And look who abused that little congressional perk? *Republican* stalwart Ted Stevens. But a piddlin’ hundred grand for a museum (especially when you consider it concerns decades of federal presence in Kansas) isn’t that big a deal, either to benefit Boyda or to slice off a wafer-thin chunk of the federal budget.
How come nobody is mentioning the fact that Nancy Boyda walked out of a committee hearing after hearing good news from Iraq testimony, saying “this will split the nation”
Yeah! Good news in Iraq just mean bad news for Democrats, what she really meant.
One-termer!
Joe
Where did you see this:
“Nancy Boyda walked out of a committee hearing after hearing good news from Iraq testimony, saying “this will split the nation”
boyda’s earmarks are a good thing for her district…and, thus, good for Kansas.
Tiahrt should do his district better by bringing back more federal dollars.
I’d spend an hour at that little Kansas museum. But a piddlin’ hundred grand for a museum isn’t that big a deal. Long Time Poster, First Time Lurker
They already have five historical museums in Leavenworth. Have you spent your hour in them?
This is all pork. Until both parties recognize that we as a nation cannot fund every whim for every little town in America – nothing will improve. Our national debt (which Boyda campaigned about) will continue to skyrocket. Imagine, every little podunk town in America with a population of 10,000 getting $100,000 in pork. Any yes, nearly every little town in Kansas has a “historical museum” that will attract “HORDES” of tourists (not).
Everyone saying, “Where is my $100,000?”
Posters herein have proven the point.
“How about a few million for an earmark museum in Wichita?Posted by Randy Scholfield”
Where is that money tree?
WHERE DOES IT END PEOPLE?
When are all the liberatrians going to weigh in on this? Paul Rosell, what say you?
Tiahrt should do his district better by bringing back more federal dollars.
Posted by: Jason
435 in the house, 100 in the Senate adds up to an awful lot of PORK.
What the heck does our federal government exist for?
To hand out money?
You go girl! Get that money for Kansas. The Repub guys don’t care to bring money home.
Even Ron Paul brings home earmarks for his district. As recently reported in the Wall Street Journal, his earmarks included “… an $8 million request for the marketing of wild American shrimp and $2.3 million to fund shrimp-fishing research.”
As long as we have a federal government that is about a million times larger than it should be, this activity will happen. The Democrats were elected to lead Congress promising to change things, but the allure of these earmarks — that is, plunder — is too great to resist.
Is Paul Rosell a libertarian? Could have fooled me! Maybe he’s in the Joe Williams “big government” school of libertarianism.
Of course if we had term limits the crooks from both parties would not spend so much of our money to get re-elected.
????,
You mean money that is freely donated by people freely exercising their First Amendment rights?
That money?
Tom-
I think he means the money spent by politicians to buy votes, which is what earmarks are.
No I was referring to this one:
Amendment XVIThe Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
“Even Ron Paul brings home earmarks for his district. As recently reported in the Wall Street Journal, his earmarks included “… an $8 million request for the marketing of wild American shrimp and $2.3 million to fund shrimp-fishing research.”As long as we have a federal government that is about a million times larger than it should be, this activity will happen. The Democrats were elected to lead Congress promising to change things, but the allure of these earmarks — that is, plunder — is too great to resist.Posted by: anonymous | August 13, 2007 at 08:40 AM ”
“Ron Paul’s reasoning, which took me a while to figure out, is this: the money claimed by earmarks WILL be spent; it’s not a question of how much earmarking there will be, but who will get it. The only way to kill the earmarks is to kill the entire bill, which Ron Paul consistently votes to do, year after year. Since he cannot win the overall budget battle, he does his best to ensure that a fair share of the earmarked money at least returns to the taxpayers he represents, and not exclusively to someone else’s constituents. Once in a while his earmarks stick and his constituents get a bit of the federal loot returned to them in public projects (not as good as tax refunds, but better than nothing).Yeah, it’s too clever by half (he gets it both ways–he votes against all spending, but still manages to bring home some bacon), but it is consistent with his philosophy.”
http://lonestartimes.com/2007/08/07/looking-for-shrimp-in-the-constitution/#comment-186061
A better explanation from Ron Paul himself; http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2007/tst061807.htm
Sol, you really a Democrate Devil in Disguise?
Trying to get Republicans to nominate Paul as their candidate, knowing he is completely unelectable?
He’s perceived to be a clown, an extremist right-winger who claims to be able to turn back the clock 150 years.
Nice ideas he has to limit government (though he doesn’t limit his own pork projects), but the time to have put the breaks on government was back in Lincoln’s day – when the Income Tax was created.
Nice isolationist idea to have America withdraw from the world and be its own island. Paul should have been around in Wilson’s day. (and maybe he was)
Paul is a whacckkkko!
If you are a conservative Sol, you need to find another horse to ride.
“Paul is a whacckkkko!”
Great argument. Get that one from Rush? What else did he tell you to say? Isn’t it funny how Ron Paul is a whacko and a non-issue, yet he is talked about so much? Ever wonder why the GOP tries to do whatever they can to make him ‘go away’? Huh. Sounds like they are a little a-feared to me.
“(though he doesn’t limit his own pork projects)”
Check his voting record before you spread lies.
“Nice isolationist idea to have America withdraw from the world and be its own island.”
Prove it. More lies.
So let’s see; call him names and lie about him. Great, just great. Bet you support Romney too. He’s RIGHT up your alley.
“Since he cannot win the overall budget battle, he does his best to ensure that a fair share of the earmarked money at least returns to the taxpayers he represents, and not exclusively to someone else’s constituents.”SolDevVB
So basically, Sol, you are telling us that Paul is just like everyone else in congress.
They all use this same line and they are a winner back home.
Politic’s as usual. Nothing is going to change. That’s the WHOLE PURPOSE of having a two-party system. Keeps American’s so busy blaming the other party for the idiotic behavior of all of them.
PS: If Ron Paul can’t win any battles now, what makes you think he can from the White House?
A blind man can watch Ron Paul speak and see what a nut he is.
Ever meet Paul Sol?
Ever see him give a speech?
Watch him on TV?
Listen to him on radio?
Everyone I talk to see’s him as a clown.
And Paul had a good turnout at the Iowa Poll, but then again, I’ve never seen so many out of state license plates in the middle of Iowa before either.
Let’s see 9% of the votes in the Iowa straw poll – good enough for 5th place.
(Though Fred Thompson and Giuliani didn’t get votes as the Republicans protested their lack of appearance and participation in Iowa)
So really, 7th place for Paul after factoring in Thompson and Giuliani.
For the seven days ending August 12, 2007, Rudy Giuliani earns 27% of the vote. Fred Thompson is second at 22% followed by Mitt Romney at 14%. John McCain now earns 10% support followed by Mike Huckabee at 4%. Five other candidate split 5% of the vote while 19% are undecided. Those candidates, mentioned by name in the polling question, are Sam Brownback, Ron Paul, Duncan Hunter, Tom Tancredo, and Tommy Thompson (review history of weekly results)http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/2008_republican_presidential_primary
Bones, is Ron Paul gonna make it?
He’s dead Jim. Sorry.
He supports the constitution and that makes him a clown. Outstanding.
What in his message is funny (clown-like)? That we went into Iraq illegally after something that wasn’t there – OBL, weapons, and al-qaeda. That we screwed that up and need to get out. Hysterical.
The federal government is enormous and sucking up our tax dollars. We need to decrease the Fed. Laughing my a$$ off.
The federal reserve prints money at its leisure and is creating inflation. The federal reserve is transparent as a brick. The federal reserve has oversight by which gov’t agency? Oh, please stop. My stomach hurts now.
Yeah, I can see where you find this funny.
“And Paul had a good turnout at the Iowa Poll, but then again, I’ve never seen so many out of state license plates in the middle of Iowa before either.”
OK so people are willing to travel to another state to support him. That is bad how? Sounds to me like a pretty major positive.
Paul’s campaign purchased 500 tickets for supporters. Romney offered every person in Iowa 2 tickets. Romeny spent how many millions and how many days in Iowa? Romney paid between 500 and 1000 per vote (the number isn’t exact because the campaign is too embarrassed to reveal how much it spent in Iowa). OK, so Romney bought the straw poll. Great job. What is your point?
Paul is certainly a loser in every poll in the country.
Everyone else can see he is a clown Sol, why can’t you?
Paul is the Republican counterpart to Kucinich for the Dems. Nice guy, just no appeal. Sorta like the Edsel.
Sol
He may be the right guy, Sol. But pigs will fly before he can get elected. It’s a lost cause.
Pull the plug. Save yourself . . .
Polls and Ron Paul*****************************************************http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18661804/http://ianschwartz.com/2007/08/05/drudge-poll-38-say-ron-paul-won-the-debate/http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18436681/http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Decision2008/popup?id=3436820&POLL299=1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000http://www.freestateblogs.net/node/1609http://ronpaul2008.typepad.com/ron_paul_2008/2007/07/press-release-r.htmlhttp://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=45339http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/haman1.htmlhttp://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/may2007/160507foxclaims.htmhttp://disinter.wordpress.com/2007/02/20/ron-paul-wins-straw-poll-again-pajamas-media-removes-his-name/*****************************************************He’s a clown and he wins all these polls. Go figure. And instead of focusing on the winner of the straw poll, gues who this article is about? Whoops, no mention of clown here. Might speak volumes about the “Everyone [you] talk to”http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Iowa_straw_poll_guages_Republican_support_0811.html
Earmarks is the politically correct way of saying pork.
They all still roll in the mud and get dirty.
It is wrong for my elected representative Nancy Boyda and just as wrong for Ron Paul to say they don’t like pork, but everyone else is getting some, why not me?
Because nothing will ever change with that attitude. It’s all legal, but all these same politicians will complain about the big national debt or how much the social programs are costing, or the billions we give to foreign nations when we have people starving at home.
I just wonder how long before the bank goes broke.
So this is it? Name calling and pork spending. Damn. Ron Paul definitely has my vote if this is all that his opponents can say.
I mean damn, look in the closets of Romney and Giuliani. You could write books. And all y’all can say about Paul is pork spending.
Unless y’all are hypocrite liars, you just chose Paul as your candidate too (less GMC who merely believes pigs will fly)
Sol, I’ve looked at your polls and can conclude either you are Intentionally Misleading (thus you are a Democrat in Disguise) or you have been Duped by Obscure Online Bullcrap.
I don’t think you are stupid, I think you are a Democrat in Disguise intentionally trying to get the weakest Republican Candidate to win the Primary, because you know none of your Liberal Dem Candidates have a chance against a Giuliani, Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee.
Nice try though. Some people are stupid enough to believe everything they read.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18661804/**Online survey which says “Not a scientific survey” (No online survey is cause 1 person can vote 1,000 times and survey subjects are not always likely voters)http://ianschwartz.com/2007/08/05/drudge-poll-38-say-ron-paul-won-the-debate/**Ian Schwartz who? Oh yeah. The online blogger. Good source. -cough cough-http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18436681/**Another MSNBC Online survey which says “Not a scientific survey” (No online survey is cause 1 person can vote 1,000 times and survey subjects are not always likely voters)
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Decision2008/popup?id=3436820&POLL299=1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000**Another online poll. -cough cough-http://www.freestateblogs.net/node/1609**Another blog, and a straw poll at the Annual Taxpayer Reunion Picnic in New Hampshire (How many beers did they have?)http://ronpaul2008.typepad.com/ron_paul_2008/2007/07/press-release-r.html**Not even looking at Paul’s own web site for objective poll data.http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=45339**Same New Hampshire Picnic as above. “Dr. Paul received 182 of 294 votes cast, or 65 percent. In second place was Rudy Giuliani with 24 votes, or 8 percent. The poll took place on Saturday, July 7.” Wow!!!! There were 294 people at this picnic!http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/haman1.html**This is a summary of several online polls – some of which are listed separately above.http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/may2007/160507foxclaims.htm**Story trying to give credibility to the online polls. -cough cough-http://disinter.wordpress.com/2007/02/20/ron-paul-wins-straw-poll-again-pajamas-media-removes-his-name/**Pajamas Media? Who? WTF?
*****************************************************He’s a clown and he wins all these polls. Posted by Solly
For some REAL POLLS like:
RasmussenCNNUSA Today/GallupNBC/WSJZogby
try this link for all of the above, and more Real Polls:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-192.html
So he has won almost every online or txt msg poll run. He has won, by these polls, every republican debate. But, yeah, uhm, let’s try to pick them apart.
No, wait, let’s go by phone polls. They call a household in the middle of the day and speak to… a housewife? A kid? Who can really say? They cast their vote for the name they recognize. I fully admit that Paul doesn’t have a lot of name recognition yet. Have the people the ‘telephone pollers’ are calling heard Ron Paul or know his platform?
Yeah, let’s just look at the phone poll data.
And again, all you have is name calling and trying to invalidate internet polling. Let’s look at Romney’s platform, whoops, he is waiting on the next ‘phone poll’ to decide that. Let’s look at Giuliani’s past. You could fill a graveyard with all his skeletons.
Now, take a look at all three of their voting records. Huh. Who practices what they preach?
But let me hear you call a few more names. I notice you haven’t named the candidate you back. Wonder why that is.
Fred Thompson’s has the voting record that is closest to my view of conservatism, has a broad and well-qualified background (from working man to attorney to Senator to actor), and was NOT born with a silver spoon in his mouth.
You can see his record here:
http://www.vote-smart.org/bio.php?can_id=22003
And here:
http://ontheissues.org/Fred_Thompson.htm
I know, he has NOT declared himself officially yet. Just a matter of time….
Oh, and Sol, reread the critique I gave your Poll links, and tell me which comment is invalid.
Logically, anyone that would use so much unreliable data to make a point can be concluded to be Intentionally Misleading or Ignorant.
There was a basis for the name calling.
Don’t take it personally.
• 1991: Consulted for pro-abortion group, as part of law firm. (Jul 2007)
Whoops• Doesn’t recall 1994 survey ok’ing abortion; doesn’t ok it. (Jun 2007)
Then why did he work for a pro-abortion group?• Roe usurped 200 years of law; return decision to states. (Jun 2007)
OK so where does he stand? Pro-life or Pro abortion• Roe v. Wade was bad law and bad science. (Jun 2007)I agree
• Appoint strict constructionist judges. (Jun 2007)
Outstanding• Has never been pro-choice despite 1994 news reports. (Jun 2007)
Whoops – see above. Sounds kinda like Romney on this one.
• Voted YES on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions. (Jun 2000)
Bully fr him !!!!• Voted YES on banning partial birth abortions. (Oct 1999)
OUT-FREAKIN-STANDING. Good man.• Voted YES on banning human cloning. (Feb 1998)
Again, way to go.
Voted YES on Amendment to prohibit flag burning. (Dec 1995)I don’t like it, but the first amendment thing here…
Voted NO on ending special funding for minority & women-owned businessThis legislation would have abolished a program that helps businesses owned by women or minorities compete for federally funded transportation.
Status: Cloture Motion Rejected Y)48; N)52Have to disagree on this one. Why is he giving special rights?
Voted NO on banning more types of Congressional gifts.
To exclude certain items from the Congressional Gift Ban.
Status: Amdt Failed Y)39; N)60; NV)1
Was he getting something he liked?
Pre-emptive war fan?
Q: If it’s clear that Iran is getting close to getting a nuclear weapon, would it be your policy to support preemption as a means of taking out or wiping out those facilities, considering they’ve repeatedly threatened to wipe Israel off the map?
A: Yes, yes.
Voted YES on allowing all necessary force in Kosovo.Voted NO on authorizing air strikes in Kosovo.WTF?
So Fox, ABC and MSNBC ran polls after the debate. This isn’t new. I posted the top google links to those sites.
So if they are ignorant and misleading, then Fox, ABC and MSNBC must be ignorant and misleading.
And phone calls to housewives is so much more accurate. Gotcha
I too like Thompson and think I can provide additional information when I have time to review his record.
I think SolDev, you were somewhat selective in picking his voting record.
Thompson on the record:
Pro Life
Gay Rights – Let States Decide Civil Unions
Pro-Gunagainst gun controlhandguns in home
Voted for Campaign Reform (McCain Reform)
Immigration Reform(some aspiration of citizenship)is not realistic round up 12 million – 20million peopleEnforcement at Border PrimarySolve Border Security Problem First
Iraq – do what Bush is doing as long as it works.
“Iraq – do what Bush is doing as long as it works.”
Then we can look forward to an immediate return of our troops. I’m all for that.
Max,
Yes I was. Hawkeye provided the link to his record in retort. I pulled it in, found it too long to post, so I put up what I had objection with. If you would like to pull back every vote and comment, be my guest.
Tom,
Whom do you support?
I find it a bit odd the Ron Paul is referenced so often. Lots of sharp shooters and VERY few folks stumping for thier candidate…
*that. Holly crap I’m losing it !!!
Sol,
I could have supported Ron Paul if he hadn’t written and sponsored a bill specifically targeting gay and lesbian Americans. It was written to block us, as a class, from having our grievances heard in Federal courts.
As to the rest, I haven’t even started looking at them in any detail. I’m pretty focused on the inside intricacies of Kansas politics. I’ll probably start paying more attention to the presidential campaign next winter.