Welcome to PatsFans.com

GOP Leaders Among Top 20 Earmarkers

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by DarrylS, Mar 5, 2009.

  1. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    43,273
    Likes Received:
    330
    Ratings:
    +829 / 27 / -33

    Whine all you want, but the Republicans are part of the problem..

    Newsmax.com - GOP Leaders Among Top 20 Earmarkers

    [QUOTEWho are the top offenders when it comes to requesting the most earmarks? You may be surprised to learn that three of the top five, and eight of the top 20, are Republicans -- including GOP Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, who ranks ninth with $51.19 million in earmark requests.

    Here are the top 20 earmarks solicitors in the Senate, based on dollar amount of individual earmark requests in the omnibus spending bill:

    1. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va. -- $122.80 million.

    2. Richard Shelby, R-Ala. -- $114.48 million.

    3. Kit Bond, R-Mo. -- $85.69 million.

    4. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. -- $77.90 million.

    5. Thad Cochran, R-Miss. -- $75.91 million.

    ][/QUOTE]
     
  2. PatsWSB47

    PatsWSB47 Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    8,012
    Likes Received:
    106
    Ratings:
    +253 / 1 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    [/QUOTE]

    Or to put it another way 12 of the top 20 are democrats. The point is Obama isn't doing what he said he'd do in the campaign. Where's the line by line checking here? It's Washington earmarks as usual and McCain for one “whined” about the president, republicans and democrats alike in front of congress the other day.
     
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2009
  3. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,929
    Likes Received:
    291
    Ratings:
    +788 / 18 / -23

    #24 Jersey

    Exactly. Republicans here don't have the hero worship for their side that the mindless Democrats do for Him. Shame on the Republicans for still spending too much, shame on them for having three defectors to pass this spending bill. But, mostly, shame on Obama for being a liar.
     
  4. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    43,273
    Likes Received:
    330
    Ratings:
    +829 / 27 / -33

    But weren't the Republicans whining about earmarks???, all the while they take their share of the pork..

    None of it is right, but to just say the dems did it is wrong.. there are two parties sucking the big teat of the Government.
     
  5. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,929
    Likes Received:
    291
    Ratings:
    +788 / 18 / -23

    #24 Jersey

    We're saying OBAMA is wrong because he's the one who made it a fairly big part of his campaign saying he'd stop them. Republicans talk against them in general terms but I don't know that any of those listed have made "no earmarks" a big part of their campaign.

    For Congressmen, they're kind of stuck. They may be against earmarks but they're not representing their constituents to not get them because if all this federal money (aka, tax money) is being spent and Congressmen X gets none then his constituents aren't having any money saved, it's just going elsewhere. So at an individual Congressman level they may be against them but they almost have to request them because they're part of the system. To get rid of them we need Congress as a whole, or the President, to actually do it for all then there's no uneven playing field for someone taking a stand against them. I'm against earmarks - but if we're going to have them I want as much of the money to come here to CA as possible.
     
  6. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    43,273
    Likes Received:
    330
    Ratings:
    +829 / 27 / -33

    Do you righties ever read what you say??, never seen so much situational ethics in my life, if it is wrong it is wrong, not right because everyone else does it.. come on, do not whine about earmarks and then blame the Dems with the Republicans were not to blame.. this bill was left over from the Bush days and was not acted on.

    Is McCain "not representing his constituents"????
     
  7. STFarmy

    STFarmy In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,677
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    Both parties are to blame for creating a system whereby they award themselves for being in power. Earmarks and special interests aren't an (R) thing or a (D) thing, both have issues with it. The "us vs them" mentality shouldn't be divided among party lines - the "us" should be the American public and the "them" should be those in political office. We need to make sure they do their jobs properly, because this is what happens when they're left to their own devices.
     
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2009
  8. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,929
    Likes Received:
    291
    Ratings:
    +788 / 18 / -23

    #24 Jersey

    I didn't say it's OK because everyone does it. I said that earmarks come out of the pot that we all contribute to - federal taxes or debt - so I want to "get mine back". Being the biggest state we in CA obviously put a lot of money into the pot so if we were to "just say no" we'd just be taxing ourselves for the rest of you. No thanks.
     
  9. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,457
    Likes Received:
    327
    Ratings:
    +918 / 7 / -3

    Obama said no earmarks cuz he's different, or represents a different kind of politics. Obviously he lied, or was FOS when he said that. The fact that republicans who stood on the largest expanse of gubmit in history, love earmarks to, is like telling us a bear likes to poop in the woods. The point isn't that pubs, or dems, earmark. the point is that the current president said he never would. Whoops.

    Meet the new guy, same as the old guy. That's what some in here are trying to say.
     
  10. Leave No Doubt

    Leave No Doubt PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    May 10, 2008
    Messages:
    5,608
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0


    Post Of The Day.
     
  11. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    19,006
    Likes Received:
    323
    Ratings:
    +598 / 24 / -19

    Why this kneejerk opposition to earmarks? Most earmarks are for good things that are of local importance. They're often for research to benefit local farming or manufacturing, for improving schools, updating roads, and so on. A small number of the projects are wasteful, but in general they're for good things that decent people have worked hard for. Many local projects, such as in research or in trial programs to help inner city youth, may have national implications -- may have more potential to the nation than to the specific region, thus funding from the federal government makes sense. Th key is transparency. If all the records are online, we can make sure those earmarks are being used as intended and more easily identify cases where they are serving only a representative's political ends, and not the common good.
     
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2009
  12. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,929
    Likes Received:
    291
    Ratings:
    +788 / 18 / -23

    #24 Jersey

    There is no reason to have all this crap go through the federal government. This spending should be gone and either taxes should be lowered or the money could be used to lower the deficit/debt.

    Important projects you say ? Fine, let the state and local government decide what they need, they're closer to it, and if they need to raise taxes then do it at the state/local level. Not only are those smaller governments going to be more realistic about what they need it would also get rid of a lot of the quid pro quo crap in Congress.
     
  13. PatsWSB47

    PatsWSB47 Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    8,012
    Likes Received:
    106
    Ratings:
    +253 / 1 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    Ask Obama . He's the guy that campaigned on getting rid of the wasteful ones by going line by line until they were eliminated. He could end the "kneejerk opposition" just by doing what he said he would.
     
  14. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    19,006
    Likes Received:
    323
    Ratings:
    +598 / 24 / -19

    Why not have this crap go through the federal government? Local and state offices often have different priorities or are more focused on short-term issues. Earmarks often fund things like research, which may have greater implications to the nation than to the particular state where the research is done, and research may focus on long-term projects, the types of projects that do not attract seed money.
     
  15. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,929
    Likes Received:
    291
    Ratings:
    +788 / 18 / -23

    #24 Jersey

    Most earmarks aren't research. You want the feds to fund research for AIDS/Cancer, alternative energy, etc ? Great. Fantastic. But make that a line item funding by itself, it doesn't need to be done through earmarks.
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>