The Democratic takeover of Congress hasn’t done much to curb lawmakers’ appetites for pork. The annual omnibus spending bill approved by Congress this week and the defense bill passed last month collectively contain more than 11,000 budget earmarks for home state projects, the Washington Post reported. That’s fewer earmarks than when the GOP was in charge, but it’s still out of control. Included in that earmark list is more than $20 million for an "expeditionary craft" that will connect Anchorage, Alaska, with the rural peninsula of Matanuska-Susitna Borough. So after losing money for his "bridge to nowhere," Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, is back at it with a "ferry to nowhere."
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
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
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
- gster on Open thread 11/24
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/24
- Chas on Open thread 11/24
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/24
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/24
- DavidB on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
30 Comments
Ted Stevens needs to be indicted so he can quit feeding at the trough.
If you check who gets the earmarks the majority go to Republicans who said they wouldn’t vote for the bill unless they got the pork. So Republicans are to blame, not the Democrats.
With the amount of money being spent on Iraq, even a pork project in the U.S. looks like a good investment of our money.
And good-bye to Nancy Boyda. She campaigned decrying the terrible pork by republicans and the republican majorities failure to pass the annual appropriation legislation.
Using her own standards, “Throw the rascals out!”
I will.
The people of KS-2 don’t think Nancy’s earmarks are pork. For the most part, those allocations are for tremendously important project, or for projects that will result in local economic development.
(For more info on Nancy’s appropriation success, check the blog: http://boydabloc.blogspot.com)
Ron Paul will stop that. None of the others from either side will do anything except make things worse.
“If you check who gets the earmarks the majority go to Republicans who said they wouldn’t vote for the bill unless they got the pork. So Republicans are to blame, not the Democrats.”
Sorry Dougie but 70% of the earmarks were proposed by democratic party members.
Neither party holds the high ground on this issue.
Any real politician with any sense of ethics would be against earmarks of any kind, regardless of party affiliation.
The more people like you Dougie put this argument in the R vs. D dynamic, we get nowhere.
Every elected official with an earmark needs to get hung out to dry irrespective of party affiliation.
Wise up and become an independent American and an independent thinker.
“The people of KS-2 don’t think Nancy’s earmarks are pork. For the most part, those allocations are for tremendously important project, or for projects that will result in local economic development.”
Then they need to be brought forward and voted on as per congress rules. They should not be added to when nobody is looking in the dark of night. ALL earmarks are is legal “bribery”. Legal for the moment. The only bright spot in haveing a democratic party win last Novewmber was they might have passed a better earmark reform. That did not happen, and the citizens of all states want it, the politicians though love them.
The partisanship of the Eagle shines through, again.Democrat Earmarks:
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=20856
“Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee David Obey announced yesterday that the House will keep all of its earmarks secret through the initial passage of the appropriations bills, adding them in only at the last minute in conference committees, where they will not be subject to public scrutiny, debate, or floor amendment.”
earmarks are good things, people…they benefit all of us.
I wonder if taxpayers of Wichita/Sedgwick County could obtain an “earmark” from Congress for reimbursement for the $500,000,000.13 unwanted, unneeded white elephant downtown ice hockey arena? Perhaps an opportunity to shove the gigantic waste of local taxpayer funds over to the federal government’s eight?? trillion dollar national debt. Perhaps China would pick up the tab.
Strangely, the arena continues on like a snowball rolling down a hill even though most of its out-of-town supporters, TV talking heads and some key politicians are gone.
Of course, Wichita taxpayers’ billfolds are still wide-open.
I wonder when the Moon will be full again signalling the next meeting of the Browderites on a vacant upper floor of a downtown Wichita office building? Remember their slogan, “From the many hard working Wichita people … to the few regardless of any significant input.”
Note: Local Wichita favorite son, Earl Browder, ran for U.S. President twice, in 1936 and 1940, on the ticket of the American Communist Party.
Kids believe in Santa Claus and think all that free stuff is great.
Then by age 5 or 6, the kids figure out who Santa Clause really is, and that someone must earn money to pay for all those presents.
Democrats are like kids who still believe in Santa Claus. Democrats think all that free stuff comes from Government and it’s truly FREE.
Democrats never grow-up and realize that there is no free-stuff. Somebody has to pay for it. And if you didn’t pay for it, someone else DID.
I think we’ve lost focus of the bigger picture by becoming entangled in a hopeless partisan, blame-game, and never-ending debate about the exact magnitude of pork barrel appropriations.
The fact of the matter is that earmarks are bad policy yet good politics. Every representative has the incentive to tack on his pet projects in order to boost his chances of reelection. All these party promises to curb pork barrel spending are pure rhetoric because nothing is being done to alter the incentives! The truth is that as long as the incentives to ‘earmark’ remain, this wasteful spending cannot be reduced or eliminated.
http://unremarkablepolitics.blogspot.com/2007/12/earmarks-bad-policy-yet-good-politics.html
Ya got that exactly wrong Max.
Republicans are like toddlers who have never been to kndergarten.
Me! Mine MINE! I am the center of the universe and everything revolves around ME.
Democrats know that in an organized society, we must all share and help each other. Lest we fall into the anarchy of every man for himself and the biggest guy wins.
Democrats campaigned on getting rid of earmarks and ending the war.
All they have done is create their own earmarks and cut the spending for the war which in turn will be harmful to our family members that are serving over there.
Will they be held accountable for the deaths? No they will blame someone else.
Earmarks are not for the “general welfare” — earmarks are for the “SPECIFIC WELFARE” of the Congressman or Senator, who asks for the earmark.Earmarks also are a pain, sometimes, for the various agencies that are the “beneficiaries” of the earmarks.Often, the item earmarked is not wanted or needed by the agency. But, it is hard for a MOC (Member of Congress) to get “credit” for a general funding increase. If they can point to an earmark, that they offered, it strokes egos.—-To the socialists on the Blog:
What percentage of the nations wealth should the government control?Have you ever stopped to wonder why anyone would work, at all, if you take too much from the producters to give those who refuse to earn their own keep?
The truly disabled deserve help.
However, that is not what earmarks are about.
Very few earmarks help the poor.
Earmarks buy votes with public money, no debate, and, often, little public benefit.
And all of you are surprised? I think most of you are jealous you can’t fill your pockets up at the trough. A lot of happy people out there tonight, got their pockets and bellies full. Merry Christmas.
To the socialists on the Blog:
What percentage of the nations wealth should the government control?
I don’t have a figure. I would say a percentage large enough to insure that no man is a defacto wage slave to another. And we are FAR from that in favor of the “haves”.
Socialism or Feudalism? I’d rather not choose. Make me choose and I take socialism.
To the socialists on the Blog:
What percentage of the nations wealth should the government control?
I don’t have a figure. I would say a percentage large enough to insure that no man is a defacto wage slave to another. And we are FAR from that in favor of the “haves”.
Socialism or Feudalism? I’d rather not choose. Make me choose and I take socialism.
JR posted: “Democrats know that in an organized society, we must all share and help each other. Lest we fall into the anarchy of every man for himself and the biggest guy wins.”And what are you doing JR? Are you sharing and helping others or are you sitting on your ass blogging all day and letting others provide for you? You are always first to claim others must give something. What do you give JR? I’ll tell you what Democrats know, they know they can gain and retain power by buying votes with entitlements, taking from those that work and giving to those that don’t, and calling those that earn evil.
I don’t know any posters with the nic “Clear eyed”.
Do ya have it for the straight guy?
Since the nic is new you must be too huh?
“You are always first to claim others must give something.”
Well that means you at least read here til now. More likely you are a known poster hiding in a different new nic.
So since you seem to have me at a disadvantage, I think I’ll hold my fire til you better define yourself or post in your regular nic. I don’t owe you an answer yet.
My question and your answer would be the same irregardless of a nic. A nic is irrelevant.You are correct, you don’t owe me anything and I in turn don’t feel I owe you anything. Try to incorporate that line of thought into your socialistic attitude.
Good answer, JR.
Graffitti Trolls do not deserve to have their questions dignified with a response.
Seems to me that complaining about “earmarks” is ridiculous. Considering that we’re spending 2-3 BILLION A WEEK to make Iraq safe for big oil, anything else is irrelevant.
A nic is irrelevant.
Why didn’t you say it was you “kansasJM”?
NOW I can answer you.
Well, you DON’T work. So your comments as to my work or speculation thereto are made from a weak position.
The rest of your “Clear eyed” troll post?
I find that those who feel most defensive lash out and attack.
YOU are a drain on society. But if you can project that on others? Well that lets you out.
Nope.
You are correct, you don’t owe me anything and I in turn don’t feel I owe you anything. Try to incorporate that line of thought into your socialistic attitude.
Posted by: Clear Eyed | December 21, 2007 at 10:35 PM______________
EXCELLENT answer, Clear Eyed!
PERFECT answer Clear Eyed.
These libs have a saying,
“What’s mine is mine. And what’s yours is mine.”
I’m not scared by terrorists. They never did anything to me. Could you please stop taking my money to fight your fear?
Appropriations will never go away. Matter of fact, Tiarht often gets praise when he brings that money back to Kansas now doesn’t he? It’s only PORK when it’s someone else getting the money.
So stop your bellyaching. Hypocrites. This money ends up doing good most of the time.
Posted by JR: “I find that those who feel most defensive lash out and attack.”For someone that is so consistently wrong you have hit a couple of things right. I am fed up with people (if the shoe fits, wear it) thinking I owe them a living or anything else. I will decide that on my own. And yes, I am lashing out and attacking in response to what I consider to be a threat to myself, my family and the future prosperity of this country by neo-liberals, secular progressives and socialists/communists. JR it is not you peronally I mean to lash out against, but it is your attitude that I or anybody else owes you or anybody else anything other than what we personally decide to give.