Fund Gives Congress Way Around Earmark Ban

May 28, 2011 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: WAPT.com

The defense bill that just passed the House of Representatives includes a back-door fund that lets individual members of Congress funnel millions of dollars into projects of their choosing.

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 20 of55
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Lance Winslow

Daly City, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
May 28, 2011
 

Judged:

5

4

2

Now you're starting to get it; Republicans only want to ban other folks' earmarks.
Ex-GOP Con

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
May 28, 2011
 

Judged:

2

1

1

For those who won't bother to actually read the article:

"Roughly $1 billion was quietly transferred from projects listed in the president's defense budget and placed into the "transfer fund." This fund, which wasn't in previous year's defense budgets (when earmarks were permitted), served as a piggy bank from which committee members were able to draw money to cover the cost of programs introduced by their amendments.

And spend they did.

More than $600 million went to a wide number of projects, many of which appear to directly benefit some congressional districts over others.

For example, that $9 million for "future undersea capabilities development" was requested by Rep. Joe Courtney, D-Connecticut, whose district happens to be home to General Dynamics Electric Boat, a major supplier of submarines and other technologies to the U.S. Navy.

And the $19 million for "Navy ship preliminary design and feasibility studies"? Rep. Steve Palazzo, R-Mississippi, asked for that. His district's largest employer is Ingalls Shipbuilding -- a major producer of surface combat ships for the Navy."

Dems spend. That's a given. But they will eventually raise taxes to cover their overspending. The GOP on the other....more of the same old phony conservatism I see. Back to their old tricks again. Promise to cut spending but instead...spend spend spend.

==========
The right IS becoming deranged.
==========

“Freedom Demands Responsibility”

Since: Aug 09

21st Century

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
May 28, 2011
 

Judged:

3

2

1

Lance Winslow wrote:
Now you're starting to get it; Republicans only want to ban other folks' earmarks.
Woof, Lancislow, the article named three "Congresscritters" that took advantage of this provision, two of whom were DEMOCRATS!
PooPoo Platter

Hoffman Estates, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
May 28, 2011
 
Ex-GOP Con wrote:
For those who won't bother to actually read the article:
"Roughly $1 billion was quietly transferred from projects listed in the president's defense budget and placed into the "transfer fund." This fund, which wasn't in previous year's defense budgets (when earmarks were permitted), served as a piggy bank from which committee members were able to draw money to cover the cost of programs introduced by their amendments.
And spend they did.
More than $600 million went to a wide number of projects, many of which appear to directly benefit some congressional districts over others.
For example, that $9 million for "future undersea capabilities development" was requested by Rep. Joe Courtney, D-Connecticut, whose district happens to be home to General Dynamics Electric Boat, a major supplier of submarines and other technologies to the U.S. Navy.
And the $19 million for "Navy ship preliminary design and feasibility studies"? Rep. Steve Palazzo, R-Mississippi, asked for that. His district's largest employer is Ingalls Shipbuilding -- a major producer of surface combat ships for the Navy."
Dems spend. That's a given. But they will eventually raise taxes to cover their overspending. The GOP on the other....more of the same old phony conservatism I see. Back to their old tricks again. Promise to cut spending but instead...spend spend spend.
==========
The right IS becoming deranged.
==========
I did read the article, but thank you for your valuable service!
PooPoo Platter

Hoffman Estates, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
May 28, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

FreeDog wrote:
<quoted text>
Woof, Lancislow, the article named three "Congresscritters" that took advantage of this provision, two of whom were DEMOCRATS!
Nothing passes the House without Republican support, man's best friend...

Since: May 10

Salinas, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
May 28, 2011
 

Judged:

2

1

1

FreeDog wrote:
<quoted text>
Woof, Lancislow, the article named three "Congresscritters" that took advantage of this provision, two of whom were DEMOCRATS!
Did they say they were against earmarks?

lol
WH Kenyan Commie Fraud

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
May 28, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

Ex-GOP Con wrote:
For those who won't bother to actually read the article:
"Roughly $1 billion was quietly transferred from projects listed in the president's defense budget and placed into the "transfer fund." This fund, which wasn't in previous year's defense budgets (when earmarks were permitted), served as a piggy bank from which committee members were able to draw money to cover the cost of programs introduced by their amendments.
And spend they did.
More than $600 million went to a wide number of projects, many of which appear to directly benefit some congressional districts over others.
For example, that $9 million for "future undersea capabilities development" was requested by Rep. Joe Courtney, D-Connecticut, whose district happens to be home to General Dynamics Electric Boat, a major supplier of submarines and other technologies to the U.S. Navy.
And the $19 million for "Navy ship preliminary design and feasibility studies"? Rep. Steve Palazzo, R-Mississippi, asked for that. His district's largest employer is Ingalls Shipbuilding -- a major producer of surface combat ships for the Navy."
Dems spend. That's a given. But they will eventually raise taxes to cover their overspending. The GOP on the other....more of the same old phony conservatism I see. Back to their old tricks again. Promise to cut spending but instead...spend spend spend.
==========
The right IS becoming deranged.
==========
So dem spending = good
Gop spending = bad

Got it.
conservative crapola

Philadelphia, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
May 29, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

An explosion of earmarking under GOP control of Congress in the late 1990s and early 2000s sparked a "pay to play" culture in which lobbyists and business executives seeking earmarks lubricate the system with campaign contributions.

The earmark ban has been driven chiefly by House Speaker John Boehner, who vows not to send Obama any spending bills containing them.

Mr.s Boner finds himself some wiggle room. Thanks nitwit. America hates you.
just candid

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
May 29, 2011
 
Some things never change, cheaters win.

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
May 29, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

1

PooPoo Platter wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing passes the House without Republican support, man's best friend...
amazing what 4.5 months make to you loons. The lefts hypocracy reeks of two week old road kill.

Since: May 08

Deltona Fla

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
May 29, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Lance Winslow wrote:
Now you're starting to get it; Republicans only want to ban other folks' earmarks.
Now go back and read the story. Both Democrats and Republicans are involved. If you look at the examples of who and what you may also notice that these are things we probably do want money spent on. Please don't tell me you think we should not be studying advanced submarine warfare. The problem is that the term earmark has become synonymous with pork barrel because that was the tool they used to load the barrel. Earmarking is in fact what Congress is suppose to do. By simply saying you will spend so much on domestic and so much on defense you have just "earmarked". The fact is somebody does have to decide how much money gets spent where. If Congress is not earmarking how the money is being spent, who is?
Ex-GOP Con

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
May 29, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

But it's the GOP/TEA Birther McCarthyists who whine about spending. It's like if members of the party advocated for passing a Defense of Marriage Act or sought to impeach a President for adultery but committed adultery themselves and got divorces and then turn around and go...."bu---buu--but. the Dems do it. waahhh..".

==========
The right IS becoming deranged.
==========
swampmudd wrote:
<quoted text>Now go back and read the story. Both Democrats and Republicans are involved. If you look at the examples of who and what you may also notice that these are things we probably do want money spent on. Please don't tell me you think we should not be studying advanced submarine warfare. The problem is that the term earmark has become synonymous with pork barrel because that was the tool they used to load the barrel. Earmarking is in fact what Congress is suppose to do. By simply saying you will spend so much on domestic and so much on defense you have just "earmarked". The fact is somebody does have to decide how much money gets spent where. If Congress is not earmarking how the money is being spent, who is?

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
May 29, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Ex-GOP Con wrote:
But it's the GOP/TEA Birther McCarthyists who whine about spending. It's like if members of the party advocated for passing a Defense of Marriage Act or sought to impeach a President for adultery but committed adultery themselves and got divorces and then turn around and go...."bu---buu--but. the Dems do it. waahhh..".
==========
The right IS becoming deranged.
==========
<quoted text>
OBAMA FLASHBACK:'When I'm president, I will go line by line to make sure we are not spending money unwisely'...ANOTHER QUOTE, ANOTHER LIE.

If Obama really cared about the people of Joplin he would have when addressing the joint session of Parliament ask for a moment of silent prayer…………especially sense he is supposed to tout his religious beliefs during his new campaigning. Oh well another fly over annother upteen thousands of pounds of fuel just so he won't have to be in the white house and look presidential.

FLASH: THIS JUST IN.........JOPLIN, MO. The mayor of Joplin today will present to President Obama a "Round Two-it", in honor of his finally getting around to visiting the storm ravaged town. A round two-it resembles a wooden nickle and is as worthless and meaningful as Obama's delayed actions from yet another vacation and expense riddled trip.

Since: May 08

Deltona Fla

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
May 29, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

Ex-GOP Con wrote:
But it's the GOP/TEA Birther McCarthyists who whine about spending. It's like if members of the party advocated for passing a Defense of Marriage Act or sought to impeach a President for adultery but committed adultery themselves and got divorces and then turn around and go...."bu---buu--but. the Dems do it. waahhh..".
==========
The right IS becoming deranged.
==========
<quoted text>
But of course. You didn't think they would actually get rid of "earmarks" if they didn't already have another way of buttering the bread, do you?
conservative crapola

Philadelphia, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
May 29, 2011
 

Judged:

1

Ex-GOP Con wrote:
But it's the GOP/TEA Birther McCarthyists who whine about spending. It's like if members of the party advocated for passing a Defense of Marriage Act or sought to impeach a President for adultery but committed adultery themselves and got divorces and then turn around and go...."bu---buu--but. the Dems do it. waahhh..".
==========
The right IS becoming deranged.
==========
<quoted text>
hahahahaha. Priceless!

The two-headed monster of conSWERVatism exposed like Larry Craig in the men's room.
Ex-GOP Con

Houston, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
May 29, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

all i hear is ""bu---buu--but. the Dems do it. waahhh.."

the GOP is SUPPOSEDLY the party of fiscal conservatism. either do it. or shut up about it.

and i gave you a spam and lemon for the rest of what you wrote.

==========
The right IS becoming deranged.
==========
Le Jimbo wrote:
<quoted text>OBAMA FLASHBACK:'When I'm president, I will go line by line to make sure we are not spending money unwisely'...ANOTHER QUOTE, ANOTHER LIE.
If Obama really cared about the people of Joplin he would have when addressing the joint session of Parliament ask for a moment of silent prayer…………especially sense he is supposed to tout his religious beliefs during his new campaigning. Oh well another fly over annother upteen thousands of pounds of fuel just so he won't have to be in the white house and look presidential.
FLASH: THIS JUST IN.........JOPLIN, MO. The mayor of Joplin today will present to President Obama a "Round Two-it", in honor of his finally getting around to visiting the storm ravaged town. A round two-it resembles a wooden nickle and is as worthless and meaningful as Obama's delayed actions from yet another vacation and expense riddled trip.

“Freedom Demands Responsibility”

Since: Aug 09

21st Century

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
May 29, 2011
 
swampmudd wrote:
<quoted text>Now go back and read the story. Both Democrats and Republicans are involved. If you look at the examples of who and what you may also notice that these are things we probably do want money spent on. Please don't tell me you think we should not be studying advanced submarine warfare. The problem is that the term earmark has become synonymous with pork barrel because that was the tool they used to load the barrel. Earmarking is in fact what Congress is suppose to do. By simply saying you will spend so much on domestic and so much on defense you have just "earmarked". The fact is somebody does have to decide how much money gets spent where. If Congress is not earmarking how the money is being spent, who is?
Woof, Swampmudd, This is actually an excellent reply. Very good. If Congress did not define on what the money it approved was to be spent upon, it would be simply handing the Executive branch a checking account and no directions. The "earmarking" that has so irritated the voters is as you pointed out the pointless "pork barrel" spending both parties engage in.

“Freedom Demands Responsibility”

Since: Aug 09

21st Century

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
May 29, 2011
 
swampmudd wrote:
<quoted text>But of course. You didn't think they would actually get rid of "earmarks" if they didn't already have another way of buttering the bread, do you?
Woof, Swampmudd, This reply isn't very good in comparison to your previous one.
LOL

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
May 29, 2011
 
there is money laying in special fund accounts all over washington....

did anyone actually believe either republicans or democrats would give up "ear marks" and vote buying projects......

come on, people.....don't act like you don't know what is going on......

just because it's too hard and takes too much of your time to put a stop to it....
Rattle Kattle

Debary, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
May 29, 2011
 

Judged:

1

Americans have the government they deserve.

When will the american house of cards collapse under the weight of its own self deception is anyone's guess.

Meanwhile...who are we bombing today under the banner of FREEDOM??

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 20 of55
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••