Congress Approved $5.1 Billion Earmarks in 2016 Despite Ban

longknife

Diamond Member
Sep 21, 2012
42,221
13,096
2,250
Sin City
They just can't stop themselves. They're own futures are more important to them than that of the nation.



The report also found $8 million for an aquatic plant control program, and $5 million for the State Department’s “Asia Foundation,“ which is “committed to improving lives across a dynamic and developing Asia.”



Read more @ Report: Congress Approved $5.1 Billion Earmarks in 2016 Despite Ban
 
Yes, well trans gender toilets seem to have all the press now. Why would the Congress not use that smoke screen since the Presidential election is the distraction that it is. Seems reasonable to me :itsok:
 
They just can't stop themselves. They're own futures are more important to them than that of the nation.



The report also found $8 million for an aquatic plant control program, and $5 million for the State Department’s “Asia Foundation,“ which is “committed to improving lives across a dynamic and developing Asia.”



Read more @ Report: Congress Approved $5.1 Billion Earmarks in 2016 Despite Ban

Yes, earmarks are absolutely armed robbery. Taking money from one citizen and giving to another. Just like any other welfare program
 
They just can't stop themselves. They're own futures are more important to them than that of the nation.



The report also found $8 million for an aquatic plant control program, and $5 million for the State Department’s “Asia Foundation,“ which is “committed to improving lives across a dynamic and developing Asia.”



Read more @ Report: Congress Approved $5.1 Billion Earmarks in 2016 Despite Ban
Do you know what earmarks are? And why do so many folks see them as wasteful additional spending?
 
They just can't stop themselves. They're own futures are more important to them than that of the nation.



The report also found $8 million for an aquatic plant control program, and $5 million for the State Department’s “Asia Foundation,“ which is “committed to improving lives across a dynamic and developing Asia.”



Read more @ Report: Congress Approved $5.1 Billion Earmarks in 2016 Despite Ban
Do you know what earmarks are? And why do so many folks see them as wasteful additional spending?

They just can't stop themselves. They're own futures are more important to them than that of the nation.

The report also found $8 million for an aquatic plant control program, and $5 million for the State Department’s “Asia Foundation,“ which is “committed to improving lives across a dynamic and developing Asia.”



Read more @ Report: Congress Approved $5.1 Billion Earmarks in 2016 Despite Ban
Do you know what earmarks are? And why do so many folks see them as wasteful additional spending?

Of course I do!

They are spending attached to unrelated bills specifically designed to assist those supporting the politician adding them. They are also designed to provide anonymity but give the politician the ability to take credit with his or her voters.

The idea was to have such spending bills stand on their own with proper scrutiny, Earmarks get around that,.
 
Earmarks are a way for Congressmen to direct monies already in the budget to address an issue as provided for in the budget…………It is not an increase in spending as some would like folks to think it is……. Nor is it a budgetary trick to direct monies as a “political favor” or a special slush fund……….

It is an accepted way to target funds in a specific area to meet the stated need and as a method of oversight and control of bureaucratic domination of the use of the budget funds….

Earmarks are good………..
 
They just can't stop themselves. They're own futures are more important to them than that of the nation.



The report also found $8 million for an aquatic plant control program, and $5 million for the State Department’s “Asia Foundation,“ which is “committed to improving lives across a dynamic and developing Asia.”



Read more @ Report: Congress Approved $5.1 Billion Earmarks in 2016 Despite Ban
Do you know what earmarks are? And why do so many folks see them as wasteful additional spending?
Um!

Because they build a bridge to nowhere?

Just asking.
 
Last edited:
Term Limits! :dunno:

Republicans only talk "term limits" when it comes to Dems; HYPOCRITES! :lame2: :mad:
I'm a Dem and I don't feel, I know, it is a waste of resources.
When we're talking about the kind of money involved in politics today and what it takes to get elected there is no wonder why corruption has creeped into it. We have people entering the house and senate as middle class folks only to become wealthy in a very short time. The Clinton's are in it knee deep just like many Republicans are as well. I think the only way to stop the corruption is to remove the money. Public financing and three month election seasons will solve the problem until the elected ones find a way to screw it up again...in their favor of course.
 
Term Limits! :dunno:

Republicans only talk "term limits" when it comes to Dems; HYPOCRITES! :lame2: :mad:
I'm a Dem and I don't feel, I know, it is a waste of resources.
When we're talking about the kind of money involved in politics today and what it takes to get elected there is no wonder why corruption has creeped into it. We have people entering the house and senate as middle class folks only to become wealthy in a very short time. The Clinton's are in it knee deep just like many Republicans are as well. I think the only way to stop the corruption is to remove the money. Public financing and three month election seasons will solve the problem until the elected ones find a way to screw it up again...in their favor of course.
Term limits and criminalize the graft.
 

Forum List

Back
Top