Obama Earmark Reform Remarks (FULL TEXT)

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Obama Earmark Reform Remarks (FULL TEXT) stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS


First Posted: 03-11-09 10:41 AM   |   Updated: 04-11-09 05:12 AM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It

President Barack Obama plans to sign a massive spending bill to keep the federal government running, even though it is stashed with the very kinds of pet projects that the campaigning Obama promised to resist.

Obama plans to sign the $410 billion spending package but remains "troubled" by earmarks in the bill that have been assailed as unworthy pork-barrel spending. The president planned to use the signing ceremony to announce earmark reforms. On Wednesday morning, he spoke about his plans to sign the bill and his earmark reforms.

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. I ran for President pledging to change the way business is done in Washington and build a government that works for the people by opening it up to the people. And that means restoring responsibility and transparency and accountability to actions that the government takes. And working with the Congress over my first 50 days in office, we've made important progress toward that end.


Working together, we passed an American Recovery and Reinvestment Act that's already putting people back to work doing the work that America needs done. We did it without the customary Congressional earmarks -- the practice by which individual legislators insert projects of their choosing. We're implementing the Recovery Act with an unprecedented level of aggressive oversight and transparency, including a website -- recovery.gov -- that allows every American to see how their tax dollars are spent and report on cases where the system is breaking down.

I also signed a directive that dramatically reforms our broken system of government contracting, reining in waste and abuse and inefficiency; saving the American taxpayers up to $40 billion each year in the process.

And I've laid out plans for a budget that begins to restore fiscal discipline so we can bring down the $1.3 trillion budget deficit we've inherited and pave the way for our long-term prosperity. For the first time in many years, we've produced an honest budget that makes the hard choices required to cut our deficit in half by the end of my first term in office.

Now, yesterday Congress sent me the final part of last year's budget; a piece of legislation that rolls nine bills required to keep the government running into one, a piece of legislation that addresses the immediate concerns of the American people by making needed investments in line with our urgent national priorities.

That's what nearly 99 percent of this legislation does -- the nearly 99 percent that you probably haven't heard much about.

What you likely have heard about is that this bill does include earmarks. Now, let me be clear: Done right, earmarks have given legislators the opportunity to direct federal money to worthy projects that benefit people in their districts, and that's why I've opposed their outright elimination. And I also find it ironic that some of those who rail most loudly against this bill because of earmarks actually inserted earmarks of their own -- and will tout them in their own states and their own districts.

Story continues below
advertisement

But the fact is that on occasion, earmarks have been used as a vehicle for waste, and fraud, and abuse. Projects have been inserted at the 11th hour, without review, and sometimes without merit, in order to satisfy the political or personal agendas of a given legislator, rather than the public interest. There are times where earmarks may be good on their own, but in the context of a tight budget might not be our highest priority. So these practices hit their peak in the middle of this decade, when the number of earmarks had ballooned to more than 16,000, and played a part in a series of corruption cases.

In 2007, the new Democratic leadership in Congress began to address these abuses with a series of reforms that I was proud to have helped to write. We eliminated anonymous earmarks and created new measures of transparency in the process, so Americans can better follow how their tax dollars are being spent. These measures were combined with the most sweeping ethics reforms since Watergate. We banned gifts and meals and made sure that lobbyists have to disclose who they're raising campaign money from, and who in Congress they send it to. So we've made progress. But let's face it, we have to do more.

I am signing an imperfect omnibus bill 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. But I also view this as a departure point for more far-reaching change.

In my discussions with Congress, we have talked about the need for further reforms to ensure that the budget process inspires trust and confidence instead of cynicism. So I believe as we move forward, we can come together around principles that prevent the abuse of earmarks.

These principles begin with a simple concept: Earmarks must have a legitimate and worthy public purpose. Earmarks that members do seek must be aired on those members' websites in advance, so the public and the press can examine them and judge their merits for themselves. Each earmark must be open to scrutiny at public hearings, where members will have to justify their expense to the taxpayer.

Next, any earmark for a for-profit private company should be subject to the same competitive bidding requirements as other federal contracts. The awarding of earmarks to private companies is the single most corrupting element of this practice, as witnessed by some of the indictments and convictions that we've already seen. Private companies differ from the public entities that Americans rely on every day -- schools, and police stations, and fire departments.

When somebody is allocating money to those public entities, there's some confidence that there's going to be a public purpose. When they are given to private entities, you've got potential problems. You know, when you give it to public companies -- public entities like fire departments, and if they are seeking taxpayer dollars, then I think all of us can feel some comfort that the state or municipality that's benefitting is doing so because it's going to trickle down and help the people in that community. When they're private entities, then I believe they have to be evaluated with a higher level of scrutiny.

Furthermore, it should go without saying that an earmark must never be traded for political favors.

And finally, if my administration evaluates an earmark and determines that it has no legitimate public purpose, then we will seek to eliminate it, and we'll work with Congress to do so.

Now I know there are members in both Houses with good ideas on this matter. And just this morning, the House released a set of recommendations for reform that I think hold great promise. I congratulate them on that.

Now I'm calling on Congress to enact these reforms as the appropriation process moves forward this year. Neither I nor the American people will accept anything less.

It's important that we get this done to ensure that the budget process works better, that taxpayers are protected, and that we save billions of dollars that we so desperately need to right our economy and address our fiscal crisis. Along with that reform, I expect future spending bills to be debated and voted on in an orderly way, and sent to my desk without delay or obstruction, so that we don't face another massive, last-minute omnibus bill like this one.

I recognize that Congress has the power of the purse. As a former senator, I believe that individual members of Congress understand their districts best. And they should have the ability to respond to the needs of their communities. I don't quarrel with that. But leadership requires setting an example and setting priorities, and the magnitude of the economic crisis we face requires responsibility on all our parts.

The future demands that we operate in a different way than we have in the past. So 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 that the American people have every right to expect and demand.

If we're going to solve our economic crisis; if we're going to put Americans back to work; if we're going to make the investments required to build a foundation for our future growth -- then we must restore the American people's faith that their government is working for them, and that it's on their side. That's the government I promised. That's the government I intend to lead.

Thank you very much, everybody.

President Barack Obama plans to sign a massive spending bill to keep the federal government running, even though it is stashed with the very kinds of pet projects that the campaigning Obama promised t...
President Barack Obama plans to sign a massive spending bill to keep the federal government running, even though it is stashed with the very kinds of pet projects that the campaigning Obama promised t...
Filed by Rachel Weiner  |  Report Corrections
 
Comments
575
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

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

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (8 pages total)
- Wiseup2Day I'm a Fan of Wiseup2Day 7 fans permalink

Earmarks..how many things did Obama promise..and not deliver on..here it is in his own words..ear­marks..doe­s he think we have alzhiemers? Now I hear there talking about another stimulous bill..there better not be..this admin is totally out of control..or have no idea what they're doing.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:35 PM on 03/12/2009

Personally, i'd say they know exactly what there are doing.... Mussolini, Stalin, Hussien, Chavez, Castro, Hitler..... Obama

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:36 AM on 03/13/2009
- Ron333wood I'm a Fan of Ron333wood 6 fans permalink

TRIPE. You must be someone enthralled with that "Palin wit".

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:53 PM on 03/22/2009

A trap was set to snare a President, either way he goes you people storm out of the workworks to throw stones. He chose the better of two choices. Shake your fist at the clouds, the rest of us aren't as ignorent as you people seem to be.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:24 PM on 03/13/2009
- shadow322 I'm a Fan of shadow322 7 fans permalink
photo

The Republican motto of 'Personal Rights and Personal Repsonsability" can easily be paraphrased as "Follow our dogma or you are anti-American." We need to use these four years to pass laws that prohibit the assets we restore to our nation from beeing looted again by the Republicans.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:05 PM on 03/12/2009

E-gad! - We are watching a train-wreck of unprecedented proportions. I fear the BHO admin wont make it thru 2010. I see the Right storming back.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:50 PM on 03/12/2009
- ltyler01 I'm a Fan of ltyler01 8 fans permalink
photo

Sounds like Mythology.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:24 PM on 03/12/2009

The President of the United States does not have line item veto power. This would be a good reason to give it to him....

Shelby (AL) $114,484,250
Bond (MO) $85,691,491
Cochran (MS) $75,908,475
Murkowski (AK) $74,000,750
Inhofe (OK) $53,133,500
McConnell (KY) $51,186,000
Specter (PA) $25,320,000
Martinez (FL) $18,758,000
Voinovich (OH) $13,501,000
Brownback (KS) $12,020,048
Gregg (NH) $10,028,000
Hutchison (TX) $9,851,000
Graham (SC) $9,545,000
Alexander (TN) $5,402,000
Kyl (AZ) $4,950,000
Wicker (MS) $4,324,000
Thune (SD) $4,275,000
Chambliss (GA) $4,253,000
Sessions (AL) $4,250,500
Vitter (LA) $4,034,000
Barrasso (WY) $2,713,000
Cornyn (TX) $2,518,000
Roberts (KS) $2,202,000
Enzi (WY) $1,725,000
Isakson (GA) $1,425,000
Burr (NC) $1,284,000

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:47 AM on 03/12/2009
- wrrock I'm a Fan of wrrock 2 fans permalink

The Old Washington always lends itself to political expediency--we got to get it done now or else. This is exactly what Obama did, follow the same-old rules. He could have taken a stance against earmarks, as he told everyone he would during the campaign, but he did not. The new Washington looks more and more like the old. The only thing different is the way actions are explained to the public. However, the results will be the same.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:28 AM on 03/12/2009
- loria I'm a Fan of loria 144 fans permalink
photo

The GOP has become the party that obstructs and they are taking pride in it. In a time where our country was devastated by the Republican policies and their control, they are playing politics with people's lives. They are in an uproar over the very bill they helped write and the earmarks they inserted. If they had a problem with the earmarks, why didn't they remove them and reduce the spending in the bill?

While I am just as frustrated with GOP as I was during the election (I had hoped their tactics would change once Obama was elected and it became clear that we are in such a mess we need everyone working together to solve the problems we face), I do take some comfort in knowing that the GOP has been wrong about most everything for a long time. McCain thought if he chose Palin, the women would flock to him. The RNC thought if they chose Steele they would be a party of diversity. They now think if they obstruct they will set themself up for wins in 2010 and 2012. They use the playbook of Limbaugh and those on the far right and come up appealing to their base, and they would have them no matter what. In the meantime, they lose the moderates and independents who are increasingly disgusted with their politics. They just don't get that the country clearly said they wanted change. Yet, they are sticking to their tired old playbook.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:38 AM on 03/12/2009
- sandals I'm a Fan of sandals 33 fans permalink

Listening to morning GOP joe, you would think the world has come to an end, he says what economic policies, like the President hasn't done anything for the economy, he just signed the bill 3wks ago and the economy is suppose to be fixed now!
He shows some report card from economist from the Wall St. Journal, and it gives the President a 59 out of 100, well at least this President can walk and chew gum at the same time.
He is an intelligent man who has a thought process, like most of us use daily, Morning GOP Joe is a big
wind bag.
Is this all they got is to attack the President?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:33 AM on 03/12/2009
photo

Yes, that's all they have. And, yes, Joe is a windbag. Of course, Mika sitting there with her arms folded, smiling into the camera or just rolling her eyes, doesn't help. I want her job! How much does she get paid to just sit in that chair and not ask one serious, intellectual question or challenge Joe's rants and opinions?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:50 AM on 03/12/2009
- loria I'm a Fan of loria 144 fans permalink
photo

Mika is the Fox version of the know nothing blond, and yet I am sure she is intelligent. Zbig should call his daughter everyday and talk to her about her sophomoric understanding of the issues. For dramas sake she sometimes nods her head in agreement with that very serious look on her face, yet I often wonder if she's even really listening to what Joe says.

BTW, I don't the talk about the ambien and the alcohol they refer to when they are talking about Mika. I watch the show for a few minutes most mornings and am always left wondering what that is all about. Is that another attempt to define her as the know nothing blond while Joe has all of the knowledge in the room and she is just fortunate to be there with him.

I just wish this stupid show didn't have such good guests. It would be easy to never watch again if they didn't have some good people on there most every day.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:45 AM on 03/12/2009

Why is this bill so "massive." It is a regular US spending bill.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:32 AM on 03/12/2009
- loria I'm a Fan of loria 144 fans permalink
photo

You are used to the Bush spending bills where they backed out the cost of two wars as if we weren't fighting them.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:47 AM on 03/12/2009
- wrrock I'm a Fan of wrrock 2 fans permalink

The Old Washington always lends itself to political expediency--we got to get it done now or else. This is exactly what Obama did, follow the same-old rules. He could have taken a stance against earmarks, as he told everyone he would during the campaign, but he did not. The new Washington looks more and more like the old. The only thing different is the way actions are explained to the public. However, the results will be the same.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:28 AM on 03/12/2009
photo

This is getting tremendous criticism from the talking heads. Everyone is saying that President Obama should have vetoed the bill. It's very clear, when you read ALL his speech, why he didn't, but is that being discussed in any depth by the talking heads? Noooooo. I would like to hear a good debate about earmarks, with senators and representatives on both sides of the issue. I especially would like to hear why Senator Byrd thinks that a President eliminating all earmarks results in the executive branch of the government overreaching into the legislative branch. Byrd is considered an expert on the constitution and even carries around a copy of the constitution with him at all times. Why does he think that a President eliminating all earmarks creates a lopsided power between the executive and legislative branches?

I think this whole earmark conversation has become very reactionary because of the financial crisis we are currently in, but before we make serious changes in funding, we need to have a serious conversation about why that's necessary and why it may or may not be constitutional to do so, and I don't hear that happening.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:30 AM on 03/12/2009

aloud = allowed...sorry coffee is still brewing

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:21 AM on 03/12/2009

What a croc.

If you don't believe the sound bites from Pelosi and the culture of corruption are not going to be merged with her comments in late 08 about tabling this spending bill precisely for after they won the election so they could take out the earmarks and begin the new era of open government....this bill marks the end of Pelosi's speakership. Obama can talk the talk...albeit with a couple of glass plates standing to each side of him (you know all tv cameramen are now required to capture him in a tighter mid shot, and no zooming out to reveal the plates is aloud....when he is speaking to the right and then to the left...it's to the f'ing prompter plates.........but he couldn't walk the walk if his life depended upon.

He will be the last president from the senate for some time. They have no clue how to govern

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:20 AM on 03/12/2009
- loria I'm a Fan of loria 144 fans permalink
photo

Fifty days into his presidency and you think you know what is going to happen.

So Obama, who was a senator has no idea how to govern. How about that govenor from TX. He did a great job didn't he? He so totally screwed the country a president who was a senator has to clean it up. Why don't you do away with the blind hate of Obama. He hasn't even had an opportunity to earn that hate. Bush, on the other hand, did.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:25 AM on 03/12/2009

can't you just see him lighting up a smoke in front of his kids, and saying now don't you smoke.

It's the same thing

and it's not hate, it's dissent, something that was revered in your party for the last 7 years. Now if someone makes a mockumentary about assassinating Obama like the two they made of W, then that will be hate.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:20 AM on 03/12/2009

Why more than ten of treasure department’s appointees are blocked by lawmakers? GOP led by Limbaugh implicitly wants the president to fail. Is this the sneakiest, but effective, way, to make Obama administration to fail by paralysing his economic team?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:46 AM on 03/12/2009
- TOOO I'm a Fan of TOOO 11 fans permalink

I voted for this President, and I still support him - but not blindly. This "give him time" argument is getting old.

What we're seeing here is typical Democrat Timidity. These are baby steps the President is taking. As usual, Ms. Huffington was right - he needs to be bolder. Once again, Mr. President: stop trying to appease the Republicans. You're the leader of the country (and the Free World, for that matter), so please LEAD.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:33 AM on 03/12/2009
- ltyler01 I'm a Fan of ltyler01 8 fans permalink
photo

Rethugs are a bunch of liars and hypocrites!

40% of the earmarks in the omnibus appropriations bill are Republican earmarks. The earmarks in the omnibus appropriations bill total less than 1% of the budget, and that they were reduced by 43% from last year, and the omnibus appropriations bill reduces earmarks by another 5%. Republicans are continuing to try to sweep their history under the rug and convince the American people that they are committed to fiscal responsibility. But their record on earmarks and the amount of earmarks contained in the omnibus appropriations bill make it clear that Republicans are just using this as another political ploy.

Phonies, and liars... and everyone else who follows their nonsense.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:32 AM on 03/12/2009
- loria I'm a Fan of loria 144 fans permalink
photo

And what percent do they make up in the Senate and the House? About 40%. So, they are about equal with the earmark requests. You'd never know it by their grandstanding and their horror over the earmarks.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:49 AM on 03/12/2009
- Servility I'm a Fan of Servility 12 fans permalink

Fiscal responsibility is sooooo overrated

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:53 AM on 03/12/2009
- rsprags I'm a Fan of rsprags 26 fans permalink

Your lame-duck Bush baby didn't have the guts to sign it; Our guy has courage and he is not afraid to sign a bill that personally was more mess left over from ****Bushed­dddd******­* Let us be clear, personally I don't care if the President signed a bill with """EARMARKS""""". John McCain has erroneously informed you repurgs....(short memories) that the President stated he would eliminate all earmarks. President Obama did not say he would not allow "earmarks"; he said he was against excess spending and that he would work with Congress to reform earmarks to improve on the changes the democratic congress did when they took over congress two years ago (President was one of the senators that sponsored and introduced the bill). He said he would review the bill line by line and work with congress to remove any unnecessary spending. He has put these parameters in place to work with congress going forth on this initiatives.
You hear excuses because you are offended at the Idea of "Barack Obama" being the voted by the people as the President of the USA. IT DOES NOT MATTER WHAT HE DOES OR DOES NOT DO; YOU DISLIKE HIM POSSIBLY EVEN H*TE HIM. MY ADVICE IS TO GET OVER IT ; IT IS GOING TO BE A LONG 8 YEARS FOR YOU! LOL

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:11 AM on 03/12/2009
- Servility I'm a Fan of Servility 12 fans permalink

You do realize congress never presented it to Bush for signature, don't you?!?!?!

Real courage is using the lame excuse that it was "last year's business" to justify abandoning a campaign promise to go after earmarks "line-by-line."

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:01 AM on 03/12/2009
- loria I'm a Fan of loria 144 fans permalink
photo

Just what was Bush doing as the economy was melting down before him? I seem to remember little coming from him once they got the TARP. Now we find that they didn't even both to make sure the money went where it was supposed to.

This was last years business. Also, in case you didn't know (and I doubt Rush and Fox gave you this little tidbit of information), the president doesn't have the ability to do a line item veto. Congress needs to pass a law to allow it, and they haven't. The choice is to veto the entire bill and send it back to Congress. You might think that was the right thing to do except that we do have a government to run, a couple of wars to fight and it takes some money to do that.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:09 AM on 03/12/2009
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (8 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect