The Hill:
Leading Democrats on Wednesday appeared to brush aside President Obama's suggestion that they sacrifice earmarks in the federal budget, arguing Congress knows better than "faceless bureaucrats" how to spend taxpayer money.
The pushback came just hours after the president, during his address to a joint session of Congress, implored lawmakers to help put the nation back on a path to fiscal health.
washingtonpost.com: Rejection of 'Earmarks' Angers Democrats
Democrats, GOP Trade Accusations Over Earmarks in Omnibus Legislation
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
if you had 36 days in the over under pool about when the campaign promise of no earmarks was ignored you won.but at least it lasted longer than the promise of no lobbiests in the new administration,but not as long as the promise to post all new leglisation on the web for 48 hours before voting on it.
Reid, Pelosi and all the other Dems better get on board with President Obama on this, their ticket can be cancelled just like the Rethugs, they better not forget who they work for and what the President was voted into office to do, so listen up HARRY, NO EARMARKS!
Too late; they already "forgot."
We have to remove them ourselves.
DO IT IN THE PRIMARIES, FOLKS!
When we do it in the primaries, we can still keep a Democratic majority but get rid of the DINOs!
.
Oddly enough, or maybe not so much, the new OMB does include earmarks from Obama for when he was a Senator last year.
Obama must veto the legislation to remain true to all of his promises regarding earmarks AND to keep his opponents from using this to trash the budget in the media. If the earmark is important, then include it in the legislation, otherwise, drop it.
Well Lady you are right , Congress does pass the stuff. The President can veto and should do so when he sees pork. I think he did run on the idea of transparency, no more lobyists and no more earmarks. I have yet to see any change in the previous three.
Nothing new for Harry.
Here is a youtube of Harry Reid Twisting Arms to Kill Earmark Reform in 2007:
http://www
Harry is a DINO.
.
How much of the money that the good Senators and Reps spent on earmarks in the last 8 years has been borrowed? Do they care? Its not likely, they have a cadillac retirement and health care plan.
Support Pres. Obama by calling your Senators and Rep's let them know who da boss is. We are.
Here is an example from 2007 of how it works:
"Did Nancy Pelosi do anything wrong when she sponsored a $25 million earmark for a waterfront
Source: http://www
earmarks = corrupt government
Here's the reality, everyone talks about and denigrates "pork" and "earmarks", except when we are on the receiving end of that pork or earmark. Politicians get re-elected, based in large part, by their ability to "bring home the bacon." Some of these "earmark" projects may be worthwhile, many aren't, like the infamous "bridge to nowhere." When the Federal government is flush with cash and running surpluses, then these earmarks and pork barrel spending projects might not be so bad. But now, with the crisis we're currently in, such earmarks and pork are unacceptable. Really, what is the difference between a Congressperson or Senator inserting earmarks or pork in a bill and bankers and CEO's giving out bonuses while their companies tank? Politicians that remain in their "little bubbles" and never make it outside the beltway need a reality check. You guys are accomplices to this economic mess and to me earmarks are nothing more than bonuses for politicians. Get the country back on track, get some money in the government bank, then we can talk about spending those surplus dollars on pet projects at home.
Well gee, if we still had States rights we, living in the States, wouldn't need to go hat in hand to the Feds. Worked quite well until the not so brilliant plan called Federal income tax.
Do you even know what you're talking about?
This is the kind of business as usual stuff that has to go. I've seen countless posts on these message boards crowing about how the GOP is irrelevant and that 2010 will bring an even bigger Democratic majority. Well if you all have any hope of that happening you should be calling and/or writing your Representatives and Senators right now and telling them to get out front on this one and remove the earmarks from the Bill.
The President is right. Reid is wrong. The budget battle is already going to be difficult. It becomes markedly more so if these 8000 - 9000 earmarks are pushed through by the Democratic majority. Were Reid and Pelosi not listening?
We need to remind them of the following passage from President Obama's address to the joint session of Congress and the American people Tuesday night:
"My budget does not attempt to solve every problem or address every issue. It reflects the stark reality of what we've inherited — a trillion-dollar deficit, a financial crisis, and a costly recession.
Given these realities, everyone in this chamber — Democrats and Republicans — will have to sacrifice some worthy priorities for which there are no dollars. And that includes me."
That includes you too, Reid and Pelosi, as well as every other sponsor of an earmark in the bill. Get it right or get out.
Whether set-asides are called pork, earmarks, or congressional initiatives depends upon who is talking. The bureaucrats referred to are no more faceless than a member of Congress who anonymously inserts set-asides into legislation. The real issues are transparency and peer review. Every spending measure in every bill should have the initiating legislator's name on it. Anonymous legislation is anti-democratic skimming. Peer review should be required to ensure that every dollar spent supports a worthy project. We cannot afford any more bridges-to-nowhere.
Earmarks or pork? I have absolutely no problem with federal money going towards useful projects outside of my state. I don't think all of them are useful, though, and the President needs line item veto power to reduce this kind of spending. We can't afford all-or-nothing legislation anymore. Bring back the line-item veto so we can stop bills from passing with buried spending. It just makes sense. You don't run a household budget that way.
What you don't think the Federal Government should fund tattoo removal? How intolerant.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha! Yep!
Prez Obama: veto the earmarks! hold the line on spending!
Reid easily disregards any reasonable suggestions of his Democrat president but becomes a gutless tower of Jell-O when facing up to Republicans and will even suck up to them.
That is so right on the money. Reid and Peloci need to go. I'd like to see O veto one of their earmarked laidened bills.
Reid needs to go.
Loading comments…
The Hill | 02/25/09