Obama decries earmarks, then signs bill with 9000 of them (many from own cabinet)
03-11-2009, 07:38 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: "It will take time to restore chaos." GWB
Posts: 3,461
Car Info: 72 Vespa with curb feelers
Obama decries earmarks, then signs bill with 9000 of them (many from own cabinet)
How about actions speaking louder than words?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20...latchy/3186392
Obama decries earmarks, signs law with 9,000 of them
By Steven Thomma and David Lightman, McClatchy Newspapers Steven Thomma And David Lightman, Mcclatchy Newspapers Wed Mar 11, 5:38 pm ET
WASHINGTON — As a candidate, Barack Obama once said that a president has to be able to do more than one thing at a time. Wednesday he proved it, though not in the way he had in mind.
He criticized pork barrel spending in the form of "earmarks," urging changes in the way that Congress adopts the spending proposals. Then he signed a spending bill that contains nearly 9,000 of them, some that members of his own staff shoved in last year when they were still members of Congress .
"Let there be no doubt, this piece of legislation must mark an end to the old way of doing business, and the beginning of a new era of responsibility and accountability," Obama said.
He said, however, that it was crucial for him to sign the $410 billion bill as soon as it arrived at the White House from Congress because it's needed to finance much of the government for the rest of this fiscal year. It was largely written last year but was held back while Republican George W. Bush was president because he opposed it.
""I am signing an imperfect . . . bill," Obama said, "because it's necessary for the ongoing functions of government, and we have a lot more work to do. We can't have Congress bogged down at this critical juncture in our economic recovery."
Obama proposed changing the way special projects are financed, including competitive bidding for spending that goes to for-profit businesses. Aides also said that the White House Office of Management and Budget would review the spending bill for examples of wasteful spending. The president then could send those back to Congress as proposed cuts, called rescissions, for an up-or-down vote.
Although Obama insisted that the recently enacted $787 billion plan to stimulate the economy be free of any earmarks — spending on special projects usually in senators' home states or representatives' districts — he made no such demand of this spending bill.
"The president could have done better. He couldn't have eliminated the earmarks in this bill, but he could have at least cut them back significantly," said Steve Ellis , the vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a budget watchdog group. "We appreciate how he kept them out of the stimulus, but we think he's only batting .500."
"The American people know actions speak louder than words," said Rep. John Boehner , R- Ohio , his party's leader in the House of Representatives . "The president's new promises on earmark reform would carry greater weight if they had been accompanied by a veto keeping his earlier promises on earmark reform."
The bill contains 8,816 earmarks worth $7.6 billion , according to Taxpayers for Common Sense.
Notable among them are $155.9 million worth of projects that six members of the Obama administration who were members of Congress last year, when the bill was originally written, inserted into the bill.
Top among them was Vice President Joe Biden . As a senator from Delaware , Biden added 56 earmarks that cost a total of $52.1 million , including $13.7 million for the Intracoastal Waterway from the Delaware River to the Chesapeake Bay and $190,000 to help build a children's museum in Wilmington .
Others:
— White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, who as a House member from Illinois added 16 earmarks worth about $8.3 million , including money for a Chicago planetarium and suburban children's museum.
— Interior Secretary Ken Salazar , formerly a Democratic senator from Colorado , $44.6 million .
— Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood , formerly a Republican congressman from Illinois , $26.5 million .
— Labor Secretary Hilda Solis , formerly a Democratic House member from California , $15.5 million .
— Secretary of State Hillary Clinton , formerly a Democratic senator from New York , $6.7 million .
The White House has pledged to send legislation to Congress seeking the rescission of all earmarks sponsored by current members of the Obama administration.
Geographically, Alaska topped the list, with 100 earmarks valued at $143 million , or $209.71 per capita. Next was North Dakota , with $110 million or $172 per capita.
The data show that it pays to be a top Appropriations Committee official. Hawaii , the home state of Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel Inouye , came in third, at $165 million , or $128.12 per capita. Fourth was Mississippi , represented by top Republican Appropriations member Thad Cochran , with $324 million in earmarks, or $110.59 per capita.
Last on the list: Arizona , the home state of Sen. John McCain , with $54 million , or $8.41 per capita. McCain railed against the practice throughout the weeklong Senate debate, just as he did in last year's presidential campaign, but his effort to effectively erase earmarks from the bill failed by a big margin Monday night.
MORE FROM MCCLATCHY
McClatchy-Ipsos poll: How's Limbaugh do against Obama?
Regulatory reports show 5 biggest banks face huge loss risk
South Carolina's Sanford to become first governor to reject funds
http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20...latchy/3186392
Obama decries earmarks, signs law with 9,000 of them
By Steven Thomma and David Lightman, McClatchy Newspapers Steven Thomma And David Lightman, Mcclatchy Newspapers Wed Mar 11, 5:38 pm ET
WASHINGTON — As a candidate, Barack Obama once said that a president has to be able to do more than one thing at a time. Wednesday he proved it, though not in the way he had in mind.
He criticized pork barrel spending in the form of "earmarks," urging changes in the way that Congress adopts the spending proposals. Then he signed a spending bill that contains nearly 9,000 of them, some that members of his own staff shoved in last year when they were still members of Congress .
"Let there be no doubt, this piece of legislation must mark an end to the old way of doing business, and the beginning of a new era of responsibility and accountability," Obama said.
He said, however, that it was crucial for him to sign the $410 billion bill as soon as it arrived at the White House from Congress because it's needed to finance much of the government for the rest of this fiscal year. It was largely written last year but was held back while Republican George W. Bush was president because he opposed it.
""I am signing an imperfect . . . bill," Obama said, "because it's necessary for the ongoing functions of government, and we have a lot more work to do. We can't have Congress bogged down at this critical juncture in our economic recovery."
Obama proposed changing the way special projects are financed, including competitive bidding for spending that goes to for-profit businesses. Aides also said that the White House Office of Management and Budget would review the spending bill for examples of wasteful spending. The president then could send those back to Congress as proposed cuts, called rescissions, for an up-or-down vote.
Although Obama insisted that the recently enacted $787 billion plan to stimulate the economy be free of any earmarks — spending on special projects usually in senators' home states or representatives' districts — he made no such demand of this spending bill.
"The president could have done better. He couldn't have eliminated the earmarks in this bill, but he could have at least cut them back significantly," said Steve Ellis , the vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a budget watchdog group. "We appreciate how he kept them out of the stimulus, but we think he's only batting .500."
"The American people know actions speak louder than words," said Rep. John Boehner , R- Ohio , his party's leader in the House of Representatives . "The president's new promises on earmark reform would carry greater weight if they had been accompanied by a veto keeping his earlier promises on earmark reform."
The bill contains 8,816 earmarks worth $7.6 billion , according to Taxpayers for Common Sense.
Notable among them are $155.9 million worth of projects that six members of the Obama administration who were members of Congress last year, when the bill was originally written, inserted into the bill.
Top among them was Vice President Joe Biden . As a senator from Delaware , Biden added 56 earmarks that cost a total of $52.1 million , including $13.7 million for the Intracoastal Waterway from the Delaware River to the Chesapeake Bay and $190,000 to help build a children's museum in Wilmington .
Others:
— White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, who as a House member from Illinois added 16 earmarks worth about $8.3 million , including money for a Chicago planetarium and suburban children's museum.
— Interior Secretary Ken Salazar , formerly a Democratic senator from Colorado , $44.6 million .
— Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood , formerly a Republican congressman from Illinois , $26.5 million .
— Labor Secretary Hilda Solis , formerly a Democratic House member from California , $15.5 million .
— Secretary of State Hillary Clinton , formerly a Democratic senator from New York , $6.7 million .
The White House has pledged to send legislation to Congress seeking the rescission of all earmarks sponsored by current members of the Obama administration.
Geographically, Alaska topped the list, with 100 earmarks valued at $143 million , or $209.71 per capita. Next was North Dakota , with $110 million or $172 per capita.
The data show that it pays to be a top Appropriations Committee official. Hawaii , the home state of Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel Inouye , came in third, at $165 million , or $128.12 per capita. Fourth was Mississippi , represented by top Republican Appropriations member Thad Cochran , with $324 million in earmarks, or $110.59 per capita.
Last on the list: Arizona , the home state of Sen. John McCain , with $54 million , or $8.41 per capita. McCain railed against the practice throughout the weeklong Senate debate, just as he did in last year's presidential campaign, but his effort to effectively erase earmarks from the bill failed by a big margin Monday night.
MORE FROM MCCLATCHY
McClatchy-Ipsos poll: How's Limbaugh do against Obama?
Regulatory reports show 5 biggest banks face huge loss risk
South Carolina's Sanford to become first governor to reject funds
03-11-2009, 09:44 PM
#2
Registered User
Join Date: May 2006
Location: I was up above it, now I'm down in it
Posts: 5,686
Car Info: New Government Motors SUV!
https://www.i-club.com/forums/showpo...&postcount=923
Paul beat you to it.
Ear marks are unimportant. It's used interchangeably with "pork" but they are two different things.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earmark_(politics)
Oh the horror!!!!!!
Paul beat you to it.
Ear marks are unimportant. It's used interchangeably with "pork" but they are two different things.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earmark_(politics)
In the United States legislative appropriations process, Congress is required, by the limits specified under Article I, Section 9 of the United States Constitution, to pass legislation directing all appropriations of money drawn from the U.S. Treasury. This provides Congress with the power to earmark funds it appropriates to be spent on specific named projects. The earmarking process has become a regular part of the process of allocating funds within the Federal government.
Earmarking differs from the broader appropriations process, defined in the Constitution, in which Congress grants a yearly lump sum of money to a Federal agency. These monies are allocated by the agency according to its legal authority and internal budgeting process. With an earmark, Congress has given itself the ability to direct a specified amount of money from an agency's budget to be spent on a particular project, without the Members of the Congress having to identify themselves or the project.
Earmarking differs from the broader appropriations process, defined in the Constitution, in which Congress grants a yearly lump sum of money to a Federal agency. These monies are allocated by the agency according to its legal authority and internal budgeting process. With an earmark, Congress has given itself the ability to direct a specified amount of money from an agency's budget to be spent on a particular project, without the Members of the Congress having to identify themselves or the project.
03-12-2009, 10:51 AM
#3
Registered User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: "It will take time to restore chaos." GWB
Posts: 3,461
Car Info: 72 Vespa with curb feelers
https://www.i-club.com/forums/showpo...&postcount=923
Paul beat you to it.
Ear marks are unimportant. It's used interchangeably with "pork" but they are two different things.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earmark_(politics)
Oh the horror!!!!!!
Paul beat you to it.
Ear marks are unimportant. It's used interchangeably with "pork" but they are two different things.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earmark_(politics)
Oh the horror!!!!!!
03-12-2009, 10:56 AM
#5
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 1,090
Car Info: 2002 Subaru WRX PSM
Obama is a cheat and we all know it. Those that voted for him will just say that he is a politician, and politicians lie. That is no excuse though, and the worst part about it is that once again, this excessive spending goes unchecked.
03-12-2009, 11:56 AM
#8
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Monterey, CA
Posts: 340
Car Info: Subaru STI
It's less than 2% of the bill, and 25 of the 28 senators with earmarks are republicans. While the statement he made was stupid, lets not rush out and claim the sky is falling. Lindsey Graham wanted to get rid of all the earmarks then said he would put his earmark back into the next bill. Most earmarks fund much needed programs and research, its just Fox Noise that belittle scientific endeavors. If you really want a change in Washington, a real revolution, you shouldn't have voted for either party.
03-12-2009, 12:25 PM
#9
Registered User
Join Date: May 2006
Location: I was up above it, now I'm down in it
Posts: 5,686
Car Info: New Government Motors SUV!
It's less than 2% of the bill, and 25 of the 28 senators with earmarks are republicans. While the statement he made was stupid, lets not rush out and claim the sky is falling. Lindsey Graham wanted to get rid of all the earmarks then said he would put his earmark back into the next bill. Most earmarks fund much needed programs and research, its just Fox Noise that belittle scientific endeavors. If you really want a change in Washington, a real revolution, you shouldn't have voted for either party.
Earmarks aren't inherently bad, it all depends on what the money is allocated for. Pork projects that don't deserve any funding yet alone federal funding should be the actual concern. Not the number of earmarks in each bill.
C/N: The $7.7 Billion in earmarks is less than 2% of the entire bill and aren't necessarily all for pork projects.
03-12-2009, 12:34 PM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: May 2006
Location: I was up above it, now I'm down in it
Posts: 5,686
Car Info: New Government Motors SUV!
It should be noted that the earmarks were split at about 60%(D) and 40%(R)
03-12-2009, 12:44 PM
#11
VIP Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Detroit, Where the weak are killed and eaten...
Posts: 2,064
Car Info: 02 Impreza WRX Sedan & 2008 GMC Sierra 4x4
Interesting article about the people who voted NO on the Omnibus bill and the earmarks they had in the bill
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archi...1/1832273.aspx
Say one thing whilst doing another.....which is par for the course.....
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archi...1/1832273.aspx
Say one thing whilst doing another.....which is par for the course.....
03-12-2009, 12:48 PM
#12
VIP Member
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 22,776
Car Info: '13 BRZ Limited / '02 WRX
It's true that earmarks consist of less than 2% of the bill. However, the point is that he rallied against them and signed a bill that had a noticeable amount.
Earmarks aren't inherently bad, it all depends on what the money is allocated for. Pork projects that don't deserve any funding yet alone federal funding should be the actual concern. Not the number of earmarks in each bill.
C/N: The $7.7 Billion in earmarks is less than 2% of the entire bill and aren't necessarily all for pork projects.
Earmarks aren't inherently bad, it all depends on what the money is allocated for. Pork projects that don't deserve any funding yet alone federal funding should be the actual concern. Not the number of earmarks in each bill.
C/N: The $7.7 Billion in earmarks is less than 2% of the entire bill and aren't necessarily all for pork projects.
03-12-2009, 12:57 PM
#13
VIP Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Detroit, Where the weak are killed and eaten...
Posts: 2,064
Car Info: 02 Impreza WRX Sedan & 2008 GMC Sierra 4x4
Basically of the 35 members of congress that voted against Omnibus....28 had solo earmarks in the bill. They knew it was going to pass so they get their pet projects in there and then can say they voted against the measure. Classic political work....
With earmarks and voted NO
Barrasso R-WY (4 earmarks, $2.7 million)
Bayh D-IN (4 earmarks, $1.2 million)
Bennett R-UT (23 earmarks, $18 million)
Brownback R-KS (21 earmaks, $12 million)
Bunning R-KY (5 earmarks, $735,000)
Burr R-NC (3 earmarks, $1.3 million)
Chambliss R-GA (7 earmarks, $4.3 million)
Collins R-ME (1 earmark, $380,000)
Corker R-TN (1 earmark, $760,000)
Cornyn R-TX (5 earmarks, $2.5 million)
Crapo R-ID (1 earmark, $100,000)
Enzi R-WY (5 earmarks, $1.7 million)
Graham R-SC (14 earmarks, $9.5 million)
Grassley R-IA (8 earmarks, $350,000)
Gregg R-NH (19 earmarks, $10 million)
Hatch R-UT (7 earmarks, $700,000)
Hutchison R-TX (35 earmarks, $9.9 million)
Inhofe R-OK (34 earmarks, $53 million)
Isakson R-GA (2 earmarks, $1.4 million)
Kyl R-AZ (3 earmarks, $5 million)
Lugar R-IN (10 earmarks, $3.3 million)
Martinez R-FL (8 earmarks, $18.8 million)
McConnell R-KY (36 earmarks, $51 million)
Roberts R-KS (11 earmarks, $2.2 million)
Sessions R-AL (12 earmarks, $4.3 million)
Thune R-SD (6 earmarks, $4.3 million)
Vitter R-LA (16 earmarks, $4 million)
Voinovich R-OH (6 earmarks, $13.5 million)
No earmarks and voted no
Coburn (R-OK)
DeMint (R-SC)
Ensign (R-WY)
Feingold (D-WI)
McCain (R-AZ)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Risch (R-ID)
What I find even more interesting is a few of the most outspoken opponents of the bill asked for the most money!
Sen. James Inhofe - 34 earmarks, $53 million
Sen Mitch McConnell - 36 earmarks, $51 million
With earmarks and voted NO
Barrasso R-WY (4 earmarks, $2.7 million)
Bayh D-IN (4 earmarks, $1.2 million)
Bennett R-UT (23 earmarks, $18 million)
Brownback R-KS (21 earmaks, $12 million)
Bunning R-KY (5 earmarks, $735,000)
Burr R-NC (3 earmarks, $1.3 million)
Chambliss R-GA (7 earmarks, $4.3 million)
Collins R-ME (1 earmark, $380,000)
Corker R-TN (1 earmark, $760,000)
Cornyn R-TX (5 earmarks, $2.5 million)
Crapo R-ID (1 earmark, $100,000)
Enzi R-WY (5 earmarks, $1.7 million)
Graham R-SC (14 earmarks, $9.5 million)
Grassley R-IA (8 earmarks, $350,000)
Gregg R-NH (19 earmarks, $10 million)
Hatch R-UT (7 earmarks, $700,000)
Hutchison R-TX (35 earmarks, $9.9 million)
Inhofe R-OK (34 earmarks, $53 million)
Isakson R-GA (2 earmarks, $1.4 million)
Kyl R-AZ (3 earmarks, $5 million)
Lugar R-IN (10 earmarks, $3.3 million)
Martinez R-FL (8 earmarks, $18.8 million)
McConnell R-KY (36 earmarks, $51 million)
Roberts R-KS (11 earmarks, $2.2 million)
Sessions R-AL (12 earmarks, $4.3 million)
Thune R-SD (6 earmarks, $4.3 million)
Vitter R-LA (16 earmarks, $4 million)
Voinovich R-OH (6 earmarks, $13.5 million)
No earmarks and voted no
Coburn (R-OK)
DeMint (R-SC)
Ensign (R-WY)
Feingold (D-WI)
McCain (R-AZ)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Risch (R-ID)
What I find even more interesting is a few of the most outspoken opponents of the bill asked for the most money!
Sen. James Inhofe - 34 earmarks, $53 million
Sen Mitch McConnell - 36 earmarks, $51 million
03-12-2009, 02:49 PM
#14
VIP Member
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 22,776
Car Info: '13 BRZ Limited / '02 WRX
Basically of the 35 members of congress that voted against Omnibus....28 had solo earmarks in the bill. They knew it was going to pass so they get their pet projects in there and then can say they voted against the measure. Classic political work....
With earmarks and voted NO
Barrasso R-WY (4 earmarks, $2.7 million)
Bayh D-IN (4 earmarks, $1.2 million)
Bennett R-UT (23 earmarks, $18 million)
Brownback R-KS (21 earmaks, $12 million)
Bunning R-KY (5 earmarks, $735,000)
Burr R-NC (3 earmarks, $1.3 million)
Chambliss R-GA (7 earmarks, $4.3 million)
Collins R-ME (1 earmark, $380,000)
Corker R-TN (1 earmark, $760,000)
Cornyn R-TX (5 earmarks, $2.5 million)
Crapo R-ID (1 earmark, $100,000)
Enzi R-WY (5 earmarks, $1.7 million)
Graham R-SC (14 earmarks, $9.5 million)
Grassley R-IA (8 earmarks, $350,000)
Gregg R-NH (19 earmarks, $10 million)
Hatch R-UT (7 earmarks, $700,000)
Hutchison R-TX (35 earmarks, $9.9 million)
Inhofe R-OK (34 earmarks, $53 million)
Isakson R-GA (2 earmarks, $1.4 million)
Kyl R-AZ (3 earmarks, $5 million)
Lugar R-IN (10 earmarks, $3.3 million)
Martinez R-FL (8 earmarks, $18.8 million)
McConnell R-KY (36 earmarks, $51 million)
Roberts R-KS (11 earmarks, $2.2 million)
Sessions R-AL (12 earmarks, $4.3 million)
Thune R-SD (6 earmarks, $4.3 million)
Vitter R-LA (16 earmarks, $4 million)
Voinovich R-OH (6 earmarks, $13.5 million)
No earmarks and voted no
Coburn (R-OK)
DeMint (R-SC)
Ensign (R-WY)
Feingold (D-WI)
McCain (R-AZ)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Risch (R-ID)
What I find even more interesting is a few of the most outspoken opponents of the bill asked for the most money!
Sen. James Inhofe - 34 earmarks, $53 million
Sen Mitch McConnell - 36 earmarks, $51 million
With earmarks and voted NO
Barrasso R-WY (4 earmarks, $2.7 million)
Bayh D-IN (4 earmarks, $1.2 million)
Bennett R-UT (23 earmarks, $18 million)
Brownback R-KS (21 earmaks, $12 million)
Bunning R-KY (5 earmarks, $735,000)
Burr R-NC (3 earmarks, $1.3 million)
Chambliss R-GA (7 earmarks, $4.3 million)
Collins R-ME (1 earmark, $380,000)
Corker R-TN (1 earmark, $760,000)
Cornyn R-TX (5 earmarks, $2.5 million)
Crapo R-ID (1 earmark, $100,000)
Enzi R-WY (5 earmarks, $1.7 million)
Graham R-SC (14 earmarks, $9.5 million)
Grassley R-IA (8 earmarks, $350,000)
Gregg R-NH (19 earmarks, $10 million)
Hatch R-UT (7 earmarks, $700,000)
Hutchison R-TX (35 earmarks, $9.9 million)
Inhofe R-OK (34 earmarks, $53 million)
Isakson R-GA (2 earmarks, $1.4 million)
Kyl R-AZ (3 earmarks, $5 million)
Lugar R-IN (10 earmarks, $3.3 million)
Martinez R-FL (8 earmarks, $18.8 million)
McConnell R-KY (36 earmarks, $51 million)
Roberts R-KS (11 earmarks, $2.2 million)
Sessions R-AL (12 earmarks, $4.3 million)
Thune R-SD (6 earmarks, $4.3 million)
Vitter R-LA (16 earmarks, $4 million)
Voinovich R-OH (6 earmarks, $13.5 million)
No earmarks and voted no
Coburn (R-OK)
DeMint (R-SC)
Ensign (R-WY)
Feingold (D-WI)
McCain (R-AZ)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Risch (R-ID)
What I find even more interesting is a few of the most outspoken opponents of the bill asked for the most money!
Sen. James Inhofe - 34 earmarks, $53 million
Sen Mitch McConnell - 36 earmarks, $51 million
03-12-2009, 11:18 PM
#15
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 1,808
Car Info: 2015 WRX
I didn't vote--because the only ones with a chance of winning are all ****ing liars.