More scrutiny of pork-barrel projects

Discussion in 'Politics' started by sealybobo, Mar 12, 2009.

  1. sealybobo
    Offline

    sealybobo Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    50,605
    Thanks Received:
    3,197
    Trophy Points:
    1,845
    Location:
    Michigan
    Ratings:
    +10,176
    "I am signing an imperfect omnibus bill because it is necessary for the ongoing functions of government," said Obama.

    "But I also view this as a departure point for more far-reaching change . . . Let there be no doubt: this piece of legislation must mark an end to the old way of doing business."

    The $410-billion bill will allow the U.S. government to continue operating through the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30 and includes "needed investments in line with our urgent national priorities," Obama said.

    Less than two per cent of the bill's funding goes to pet projects added by members of Congress to benefit their legislative districts.

    "Done right, earmarks give legislators the opportunity to direct federal money to worthy projects that benefit people in their district, and that's why I have opposed their outright elimination," Obama said.

    Going forward, Obama said legislators must prove earmark projects "have a legitimate and worthy public purpose." If they don't, the White House will "seek to eliminate it" from future spending bills.

    Among Obama's proposals to rein in earmark spending is a requirement for individual lawmakers who promoted pet projects to list them on their congressional websites in advance. The move is aimed at preventing Congress from sneaking legislative pork into spending bills at the last minute.

    Any earmark destined for a private company should also be subject to competitive bidding, said Obama.

    "The awarding of earmarks to private companies is the single most corrupting element of this practice, as witnessed by some of the indictments and convictions we have seen," he said.
    But while Republicans blamed Democrats for adding 9,000 pet projects, nine of the Top 20 "earmarking" senators were Republicans.

    "I find it ironic that some of those who railed the loudest against this bill because of earmarks actually inserted earmarks of their own," Obama said.

    More scrutiny of pork-barrel projects: Obama
     
  2. sealybobo
    Offline

    sealybobo Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    50,605
    Thanks Received:
    3,197
    Trophy Points:
    1,845
    Location:
    Michigan
    Ratings:
    +10,176
  3. sealybobo
    Offline

    sealybobo Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    50,605
    Thanks Received:
    3,197
    Trophy Points:
    1,845
    Location:
    Michigan
    Ratings:
    +10,176
    Six Triad projects will receive more than $4.5 million in federal money following passage of budget earmark requests authored by Rep. Howard Coble, a Republican who represents the state’s Sixth District.

    The earmarks were part of the $410 billion omnibus spending bill President Obama signed Wednesday.

    “I would be in favor of continued earmark reform, but as long as earmarks remain a part of the legislative funding process, I would be doing a disservice to the citizens of the Sixth District by not seeking funding for worthwhile projects...” Coble said. “I will take a backseat to no one when it comes to being a fiscal conservative, and I think my voting record will back that up. The name ‘earmarks’ has gotten a bad reputation because of the nefarious and unethical actions of a handful of elected officials and lobbyists — some of whom are sitting in prisons today.”

    The projects to receive federal funding include:

    Spending bill includes Triad earmarks - The Business Journal of the Greater Triad Area:
     
  4. sealybobo
    Offline

    sealybobo Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    50,605
    Thanks Received:
    3,197
    Trophy Points:
    1,845
    Location:
    Michigan
    Ratings:
    +10,176
    I knew you fucking Republicans wouldn't want to discuss this:

    Rep. Howard Coble, a Republican who represents the state’s Sixth District.

    The earmarks were part of the $410 billion omnibus spending bill President Obama signed Wednesday.

    “I would be in favor of continued earmark reform, but as long as earmarks remain a part of the legislative funding process, I would be doing a disservice to the citizens of the Sixth District by not seeking funding for worthwhile projects...” Coble said. “I will take a backseat to no one when it comes to being a fiscal conservative, and I think my voting record will back that up. The name ‘earmarks’ has gotten a bad reputation because of the nefarious and unethical actions of a handful of elected officials and lobbyists — some of whom are sitting in prisons today.”
     
  5. sealybobo
    Offline

    sealybobo Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    50,605
    Thanks Received:
    3,197
    Trophy Points:
    1,845
    Location:
    Michigan
    Ratings:
    +10,176
    Here are science/genetics projects that Sen. McCain consider earmarks or pork-barrel:

    “$819, 000 for catfish genetics research in Alabama”
    “$1,427,250 for genetic improvements of switchgrass - I thought switchgrass genes were pretty good already, guess I was wrong.”
    “$1 million for mormon cricket control in Utah - is that the species of cricket or a game played by the brits?”
    “$650,000 for beaver management in North Carolina and Mississippi”
    “$250,000 to enhance research on Ice Seal populations”
    “$209,000 to improve blueberry production and efficiency in GA”

    Alabama, Utah, N. Carolina, Mississippi? Aren't these all red states?
     
  6. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,617
    This obsession with "earmarks" is goofy.

    Bad spending is bad spending whether its done via earmarking process, or its done as part of an overall spending package.
     
  7. GHook93
    Offline

    GHook93 Aristotle

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2007
    Messages:
    17,921
    Thanks Received:
    3,126
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Chicago
    Ratings:
    +4,931
    I gave Ron Paul a lot of crap when he had the highest amount of Pork of any of the Republican Congressional candidates on the R side. However, see below he never voted for any of them! But the man makes a ton of sense when he says everything should be earmarked, every last penny, so the spenders, pork or non-pork spending, can be accounted for. He is 100% right on spending, pork or regular, should be transparent and accounted for!

     
  8. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,617
    It does NOT make sense to earmark everything.

    Most money goes to well established fully understood extant projects, or to the states and so earmarking that money, which is understood well enough because it is based on the BUDGETS of those extant programs would be a waste of time.

    Earmarking should be reserved for those specific projects which are NOT part of the normal business of the budgetary process.

    For example, suppose that we suddenly dicovered that the Golden Gate Bridge needed to be replaced.

    Now since the DOT of CALIFORNIA didn't have THAT in their request for funding, and since that bridge was needed BEFORE the next budgetary process, it would make trememndous sense to put an earmark to rebuild that bridge in the next avaialable spending bill.

    It's an earmark, but it would NOT be pork, right?

    Do we all understnad the difference yet?

    I hope so, because this flap about earmarks is a waste of all our time, UNLESS we are partisan hacks who don't fucking understand jackshit about anything.
     
  9. bk1983
    Offline

    bk1983 Off too Kuwait..

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    1,431
    Thanks Received:
    109
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +109
    Does anyone find it amusing that a number of the democrats and republicans who opposed the spending bill on the grounds of earmarks, actually had their own earmarks included? So they got the money for their pet projects and got to look like a wasteful spending fighter at the same time.. But the simple minded will never pay attention to the details, just keep looking at the yea and nay..
     
  10. Meister
    Offline

    Meister VIP Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2009
    Messages:
    25,900
    Thanks Received:
    8,099
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Conservative part of the Northwest
    Ratings:
    +8,100
    I think most of the republicans are waiting to hear what the new definition of "earmark" is.
     

Share This Page