Senate Voted Down Ban on Earmarks.

[Perchoutofwater]

Senate votes down ban on earmarks

By J. Taylor Rushing - 11/30/10 09:52 AM ET

 

The Senate on Tuesday morning defeated a proposal from Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) to ban congressional earmarks.

 

In a 39-56 vote, members defeated a temporary ban on the appropriations procedure. The moratorium was offered as an amendment to a food-safety bill that is scheduled for a final vote Tuesday morning.

 

Senate Republicans have already passed a voluntary ban on earmarks in their caucus, but several GOP senators have objected to it. Democrats have so far declined to ban earmarks from their members.

 

The legislation would have established an earmark moratorium for fiscal years 2012 and 2013, and also would have covered the fiscal year that began on Oct. 1. Congress has yet to pass an appropriations bill for the current fiscal year, and in the lame-duck session lawmakers are likely to approve either an omnibus spending bill or a continuing resolution to keep the government operating.

 

In speeches on Monday, Coburn said the ban was the only way to rein in out-of-control spending. He did not speak on Tuesday morning, but Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who supports the ban, alluded to the issue in remarks about the current debate over tax cuts.

 

"Republicans have heard the voters loud and clear," McConnell said. "They want us to focus on preventing a tax hike on every taxpayer, on reining in Washington spending and on making it easier for employers to start hiring again."

 

But Democrats repeated the argument they laid out in floor speeches on Monday, asserting that the earmark process has already been made transparent.

 

"We have put in place the most dramatic reform of this appropriations process since I've served in Congress," said Majority Whip and Appropriations Committee member Dick Durbin (D-Ill.). "There is full disclosure in my office of every single request for an appropriation. We then ask those who have made the requests to have a full disclaimer of their involvement in the appropriation, so it's there for the public record. This kind of transparency is virtually unprecedented."

 

Like other Democrats and some Republicans, Durbin said he would not abdicate any earmarking authority.

 

"I believe I have an important responsibility to the state of Illinois and the people I represent to direct federal dollars into projects critically important for our state and our future," Durbin said.

 

Link

 

I'd like to know that GOP members that vote against the ban, or that didn't vote. I know that earmarks are small potatoes, but when families across America are having to make all the cuts they can, Washington should as well.

[Azazello1313]

party line vote with R's for the ban and D's against it, except for these folks:

 

Eight GOP senators voted to preserve earmark spending, including Thad Cochran (Miss.), Susan Collins (Maine), James Inhofe (Okla.), Dick Lugar (Ind.), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Richard Shelby (Ala.). Retiring Sen. George Voinovich (Ohio) and defeated Sen. Bob Bennett (Utah) also voted against it.

 

Two Democrats facing potentially tough reelection battles in 2012 also voted for the earmark moratorium: Sens. Claire McCaskill (Mo.) and Bill Nelson (Fla.)

 

Retiring Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) and defeated Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) also voted for the earmark ban, as did Colorado Sens. Michael Bennet (D) and Mark Udall (D).

[redrumjuice]

Now we know who to go after in 2012. I am thankful they even allowed the vote.

 

Anyone defending the earmark process should be hung for treason.

[borge007]

Now we know who to go after in 2012. I am thankful they even allowed the vote.

 

Anyone defending the earmark process should be hung for treason.

Would that include Kyl??

[redrumjuice]

Anyone.

 

It's not because of the waste, it's the message they send.

Edited November 30, 2010 by redrumjuice

[Square]

Anyone.

 

It's not because of the waste, it's the message they send.

You lost me. I'm not a fan of earmarks because of the waste. What message are you against?

[PPIchamp]

Monetarily, earmarks are a very small portion of the budget, but they are used to "influence" (bribe) legislators to vote how the briber wants them to vote. Earmarks assist the corruption of the Government.

If a state wants money to fund a local project, they can collect the money locally, if the local people want the project, they can vote to choose to fund it, and pay for it themselves.

And personally, I don't care how small a portion of the federal budget earmarks are, every dollar of those earmarks is money taken away from a taxpayer that they had to work hard for, work overtime and spend time away from their family for, and it ought to anger everyone to no end seeing taxpayer money pissed away. Government doesn't create wealth, they confiscate it from the people.

[redrumjuice]

You lost me. I'm not a fan of earmarks because of the waste. What message are you against?

 

 

This is why: http://coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/...earDisplay=2010

 

That explains it very clearly.

[cre8tiff]

Isn't it funny how it's OK to cut unemployment loose, but this is too precious to pass. And if anyone expects different things to happen after January 1st, think again.

[Perchoutofwater]

Monetarily, earmarks are a very small portion of the budget, but they are used to "influence" (bribe) legislators to vote how the briber wants them to vote. Earmarks assist the corruption of the Government.

If a state wants money to fund a local project, they can collect the money locally, if the local people want the project, they can vote to choose to fund it, and pay for it themselves.

And personally, I don't care how small a portion of the federal budget earmarks are, every dollar of those earmarks is money taken away from a taxpayer that they had to work hard for, work overtime and spend time away from their family for, and it ought to anger everyone to no end seeing taxpayer money pissed away. Government doesn't create wealth, they confiscate it from the people.

[Duchess Jack]

[Azazello1313]

GOP earmarkers already enabling higher govt spending

[bpwallace49]

Anti-earmark Tea Party Caucus takes $1 billion in earmarks

 

Members of the Congressional Tea Party Caucus may tout their commitment to cutting government spending now, but they used the 111th Congress to request hundreds of earmarks that, taken cumulatively, added more than $1 billion to the federal budget.

 

According to a Hotline review of records compiled by Citizens Against Government Waste, the 52 members of the caucus, which pledges to cut spending and reduce the size of government, requested a total of 764 earmarks valued at $1,049,783,150 during Fiscal Year 2010, the last year for which records are available.

 

"It's disturbing to see the Tea Party Caucus requested that much in earmarks. This is their time to put up or shut up, to be blunt," said David Williams, vice president for policy at Citizens Against Government Waste. "There's going to be a huge backlash if they continue to request earmarks."

 

In founding the caucus in July, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) said she was giving voice to Americans who were sick of government overspending.

 

"The American people are speaking out loud and clear. They have had enough of the spending, the bureaucracy, and the government-knows-best mentality running rampant today throughout the halls of Congress," Bachmann said in a July 15 statement. The group, she wrote in a letter to House Administration Committee chairman Bob Brady, "will serve as an informal group of Members dedicated to promote Americans' call for fiscal responsibility, adherence to the Constitution, and limited government."

 

Bachmann and 13 of her Tea Party Caucus colleagues did not request any earmarks in the last Fiscal Year, according to CAGW's annual Congressional Pig Book. But others have requested millions of dollars in special projects.

 

Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.), for one, attached his name to 69 earmarks in the last fiscal year, for a total of $78,263,000. The 41 earmarks Rep. Rodney Alexander (R-La.) requested were worth $65,395,000. Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.) wanted $63,400,000 for 39 special projects, and Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah) wanted $93,980,000 set aside for 47 projects.

 

Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.) takes the prize as the tea partier with his name on the most earmarks. Rehberg's office requested funding for 88 projects, either solely or by co-signing earmark requests with Sens. Max Baucus (D) and Jon Tester (D), at a cost of $100,514,200. On his own, Rehberg requested 20 earmarks valued at more than $9.6 million.

 

More than one member can sign onto an earmark. Still, there are 29 caucus members who requested on their own or joined requests for more than $10 million in earmark funding, and seven who wanted more than $50 million in funding.

 

Most offices did not respond right away to a request for comment. Those that did said they supported Republicans' new efforts to ban earmarks.

 

Alexander, for one, "stands with his fellow Republicans in the House in supporting the current earmark ban. Since joining the Tea Party Caucus in July, he has not submitted any earmark requests and has withdrawn his outstanding requests that were included in the most recent Water Resources Development Act," said Jamie Hanks, his communications director.

 

Rep. Gregg Harper (R-Miss.), who requested 25 earmarks in the last Fiscal Year at a total cost of just over $80 million, has agreed to abide by the Republican earmark ban, according to spokesman Adam Buckalew. "He supported the moratorium and the prohibition adopted recently by the Conference on House earmarks for the 112th Congress," Buckalew said of Harper.

 

"It's easy to be a member of the TEA Party Caucus because, like them, I agree that we're Taxed Enough Already and we've got to balance the budget by cutting spending instead of raising taxes. Deficit spending is not new, but the unprecedented rate of spending in Congress is," Rehberg said in a statement emailed by his office. "Montanans have tightened their belts, and it's way past time for Congress to follow their lead. The TEA Party Caucus is about listening to concerned Americans who want to fundamentally change how Congress spends their tax dollars. On that, we're in total agreement."

 

 

Bachmann's office did not respond to emails or phone calls seeking comment.

 

Still, some Republicans -- albeit none who belong to the Tea Party Caucus -- have said they will not abide by the voluntary earmark ban. And, said CAGW's Williams, the anti-spending organization isn't waiting with baited breath.

 

"Seeing is believing. It's going to take a lot more than rhetoric to convince us," he said.

 

A list of Tea Party Caucus members and their earmark requests in Fiscal Year 2010, courtesy of Citizens Against Government Waste's Pig Book:

 

 

NAME EARMARKS AMOUNTAderholt (R-AL) 69 $78,263,000Akin (R-MO) 9 $14,709,000Alexander (R-LA) 41 $65,395,000Bachmann (R-MN) 0 0Barton (R-TX) 14 $12,269,400Bartlett (R-MD) 19 $43,060,650Bilirakis (R-FL) 14 $13,600,000R. Bishop (R-UT) 47 $93,980,000Burgess (R-TX) 15 $15,804,400Broun (R-GA) 0 0Burton (R-IN) 0 0Carter (R-TX) 26 $42,232,000Coble (R-NC) 19 $18,755,000Coffman (R-CO) 0 0Crenshaw (R-FL) 37 $54,424,000Culberson (R-TX) 22 $33,792,000Fleming (R-LA) 10 $31,489,000Franks (R-AZ) 8 $14,300,000Gingrey (R-GA) 19 $16,100,000Gohmert (R-TX) 15 $7,099,000S. Graves (R-MO) 11 $8,331,000R. Hall (R-TX) 16 $12,232,000Harper (R-MS) 25 $80,402,000Herger (R-CA) 5 $5,946,000Hoekstra (R-MI) 9 $6,392,000Jenkins (R-KS) 12 $24,628,000S. King (R-IA) 13 $6,650,000Lamborn (R-CO) 6 $16,020,000Luetkemeyer (R-MO) 0 0Lummis (R-WY) 0 0Marchant (R-TX) 0 0McClintock (R-CA) 0 0Gary Miller (R-CA) 15 $19,627,500Jerry Moran (R-KS) 22 $19,400,000Myrick (R-NC) 0 0Neugebauer (R-TX) 0 0Pence (R-IN) 0 0Poe (R-TX) 12 $7,913,000T. Price (R-GA) 0 0Rehberg (R-MT) 88 $100,514,200Roe (R-TN) 0 0Royce (R-CA) 7 $6,545,000Scalise (R-LA) 20 $17,388,000P. Sessions (R-TX) 0 0Shadegg (R-AZ) 0 0Adrian Smith (R-NE) 1 $350,000L. Smith (R-TX) 18 $14,078,000Stearns (R-FL) 17 $15,472,000Tiahrt (R-KS) 39 $63,400,000Wamp (R-TN) 14 $34,544,000Westmoreland (R-GA) 0 0Wilson (R-SC) 15 $23,334,000TOTAL 764 $1,049,783,150

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Visit National Journal for more political news

.

 

Soooo the fiscally responsible Tea Party patriots . . . ahve already started asking for earmarks.

 

Raise your hand if you are surprised at all about this startling development . . . .

[Perchoutofwater]

.

 

Soooo the fiscally responsible Tea Party patriots . . . ahve already started asking for earmarks.

 

Raise your hand if you are surprised at all about this startling development . . . .

 

While that is disheartening, I wonder how many were requested after they were running on not requesting them? I don't like them but as long as they are part of the game being played I'd hope my congressman is doing all he can to get everything he could for our district. Would I rather not have them at all yes! As long as they are around it is very similar to the guys on the left saying we need higher taxes, but not actually voluntarily paying higher taxes themselves. Both are stupid straw man arguments. The fact of the matter is we had a chance to do away with them and 8 or so Republicans failed to rise to the occasion. I fault those 8 or so much more than I fault the people you have listed.

[bushwacked]

.

 

Soooo the fiscally responsible Tea Party patriots . . . ahve already started asking for earmarks.

 

Raise your hand if you are surprised at all about this startling development . . . .

 

Earmarxists.

[Jimmy Neutron]

.

 

Soooo the fiscally responsible Tea Party patriots . . . ahve already started asking for earmarks.

 

Raise your hand if you are surprised at all about this startling development . . . .

 

Ya mean the Team Partiers that haven't even taken office yet? Calling RINOs that jumped on the Team Party bandwagon shows just how slanted this article is...

[bpwallace49]

Ya mean the Team Partiers that haven't even taken office yet? Calling RINOs that jumped on the Team Party bandwagon shows just how slanted this article is...

 

Are you kidding me? These are all current members of the Tea Party caucus . . . so current members of Congress that hate the evil ol gubment . . until THEY want money.

[Jimmy Neutron]

Are you kidding me? These are all current members of the Tea Party caucus . . . so current members of Congress that hate the evil ol gubment . . until THEY want money.

 

Uh-huh. The Tea Party caucus that got rolling exactly when? Launched 7/16/10 by senorita psychopath Miclelle Bachmann. These RINOs were in office getting dirty long before the Tea Party idea was hatched.

[Ursa Majoris]

Uh-huh. The Tea Party caucus that got rolling exactly when? Launched 7/16/10 by senorita psychopath Miclelle Bachmann. These RINOs were in office getting dirty long before the Tea Party idea was hatched.

Need to clean up the membership credentials somewhat, then. Mad Michelle's push for numbers has evidently let the riffraff in.

[Perchoutofwater]

Need to clean up the membership credentials somewhat, then. Mad Michelle's push for numbers has evidently let the riffraff in.

 

This. I did notice my representative was one of the Republicans listed. He brought back a little over $7MM. I'll have to give him a call and let him know that while I appreciate his efforts to have them eliminated that taking them now even though it is allowed under the current rules does seem somewhat hypocritical.

[driveby]

Need to clean up the membership credentials somewhat, then. Mad Michelle's push for numbers has evidently let the riffraff in.

Speaking of your girl

 

There's a clip floating around the innernets of her on the house floor talking about this. I can't do youtube here but check it out.

[Ursa Majoris]

Speaking of your girl

 

There's a clip floating around the innernets of her on the house floor talking about this. I can't do youtube here but check it out.

Are there any of her nekkid? She is as crazy as a loon but hawt.

Edited December 3, 2010 by Ursa Majoris

[westvirginia]

Monetarily, earmarks are a very small portion of the budget, but they are used to "influence" (bribe) legislators to vote how the briber wants them to vote. Earmarks assist the corruption of the Government.

If a state wants money to fund a local project, they can collect the money locally, if the local people want the project, they can vote to choose to fund it, and pay for it themselves.

And personally, I don't care how small a portion of the federal budget earmarks are, every dollar of those earmarks is money taken away from a taxpayer that they had to work hard for, work overtime and spend time away from their family for, and it ought to anger everyone to no end seeing taxpayer money pissed away. Government doesn't create wealth, they confiscate it from the people.

 

Gawd my pants are tight now...

 

Are there any of her nekkid? She is as crazy as a loon but hawt.

 

+1 bazillion I'll bet these repressed hot right wingers are like alley cats in bed, too.