Hillary Is The Queen Of Pork

[red states rule]

So much for the Dems keeping their promise to reduce pork projects. I am sure this will be a campaign issue


Hillary Clinton Reigns as Queen of Federal Pork: Kevin Hassett

By Kevin Hassett

Oct. 8 (Bloomberg) -- Democrats came into power this year promising meaningful earmark reform to a U.S. electorate that was rightly disgusted with Congress's free-spending habits. Today, earmarks continue to be out of control, and the predictable result is that the Democratic Congress is now even less popular in national polls than the Republican one before it.

There is an underappreciated angle to the story of how lawmakers steer federal funds toward their pet projects that may yet swing the next presidential election. Democrats have been so busy preparing the coronation of Hillary Clinton that they have failed to train a critical eye on her record.

When it comes to earmarks, an issue that voters responded to more than any other in the last election except for Iraq, her record is about as bad as it gets. If Dennis Hastert was the king of earmarks, Hillary Clinton was his queen. Republicans had their ``bridge to nowhere.'' Hillary has her knitting mill.

The statistics speak for themselves. Ever since she arrived in Washington, Hillary has worked tirelessly to bring the pork home to her adopted state, New York. It used to be that such efforts were cloaked in secrecy. No longer.

To their credit, the Democrats made earmarks a central issue in the 2006 campaign and helped pass a series of reforms. Today, all earmarks are publicized in an online record which, most importantly, identifies the name of the member who submitted each request. Numerous online watchdog databases have since popped up, notably ``Taxpayers for Common Sense,'' which provides a directory of every earmark request for 2008 appropriations bills.

Oddly, this transparency has had a big effect on the Republican presidential candidates, but not on the Democrats.

Nothing to Hide

Among the presidential candidates, many Republicans currently holding office have responded to media requests to make public all their earmarks, including Representatives Ron Paul, Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo. (Senator John McCain notably claims to not submit any such requests). They presumably have done so because they have nothing to hide.

On the Democratic side, however, the major candidates have been much less forthright.

Only Barack Obama has voluntarily made his earmark information publicly available. The others are covering their tracks. Senator Joe Biden's spokeswoman explained, ``We don't release them until the committee has had the opportunity to review the requests.'' A spokeswoman for the Dennis Kucinich campaign argued, ``We never have made our earmarks public.''

The Clinton campaign refused to respond at all to requests that she identify her earmarks.

for the complete article

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=aXWIZU3DOyr4

 

[midcan5]

Maybe you missed it but that is what senators do. And after Bush no one can ever accuse a democrat of wasteful spending. Pork is good if it helps America, nation building is bad last I checked the figures.

 

[red states rule]

Maybe you missed it but that is what senators do. And after Bush no one can ever accuse a democrat of wasteful spending. Pork is good if it helps America, nation building is bad last I checked the figures.

Amazing. Libs rant about wastful government spending - but only when the other guy does it

So what if Dems promised, if elected, they would stop the pork and wastful government spending?

 

[red states rule]

BTW, here is more on how Dems are keeping their promise to carfully spend taxpayer money

The House Democrats' $23 Billion Pork Slush Fund and Spending Spree
by Brian M. Riedl
WebMemo #1503
In response to voter outrage over earmark scandals, the House Democratic leadership pledged to bring transparency to the earmark process. Specifically, the House rewrote its rules to require that earmarks be included in the reports that accompany spending bills so that lawmakers can debate earmarks before passing each spending bill. Now, in a remarkable reversal, House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D-WI) has announced that all earmarks will be kept secret from the American people until after the spending bills have cleared the House of Representatives. Not until soon before spending bills return from the conference committee would the list be released, leaving lawmakers without the chance to debate or amend any earmarks, only to vote up-or-down on entire conference reports. The House Democratic majority should stick to its pledge of transparency and abandon this scheme.

$23 Billion in Added Pork?

Because earmarks are set to remain secret for two more months, taxpayers are left guessing about how much pork-barrel spending Congress plans to enact. Representative Obey claims to have received 32,000 earmark requests, an average of 74 from each of the 435 House members.[1] Representative Obey has also stated that earmarks account for less than 2 percent of discretionary spending, which would place earmarked spending at just under $19 billion.

for the complete article
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Budget/wm1503.cfm

 

[bush lover]

Have you heard that cackle of a laugh? She sounds like a hyena. Reminds of that nutjob Dean's ape scream. She's shrill, polarizing, devisive and has high negatives. That porky broad ain't gonna get elected.

 

[midcan5]

Have you heard that cackle of a laugh? She sounds like a hyena. Reminds of that nutjob Dean's ape scream. She's shrill, polarizing, devisive and has high negatives. That porky broad ain't gonna get elected.

With so profound and articulate a view on the first woman who has a chance to become president of this great country it is not hard to understand your signature.