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

National Journal ^ | December 2, 2010 | Reid Wilson

[Hawk720]

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."

[cripplecreek]

My congressman hasn’t been seated yet.

[Mrs Mayor]

Who is this Congressional Tea Party Caucus, and how did they become designated as such? Did they appoint themselves?

~Founder, TEA New York

[tired_old_conservative]

Of course they did. And if they agree to ban earmarks, they'll simply do the same thing under a new name.

C’est la vie.

[brooklyn dave]

Throw the bums out. If they are not being replaced in January give them hell. Politicians suck bug time if they are not watched.

[tcrlaf]

This is like a Business dealing with federal programs, in imho.

If it’s available, and they DON’T take it, they are at a disadvantage to competitors that do, and are almost FORCED to participate.

Get rid of ALL EARMARKS, and this won’t be a problem, and the pol can’t be attacked for not bringing home the bacon at election time.

[central_va]

Congressional Tea Party Caucus

Well I googled this and got very little information on it. I got something about July 10, 2010 and Michelle Bachmann. This caucus has no web site or members list on-line.

[Zarro]

The article provided this list of members and their requests:

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

[TaxMe]

Pleased to see that my representative, Pete Sessions of Texas, had no earmark requests. Keep the faith, Pete!

[ari-freedom]

The real tea party caucus:

Bachmann (R-MN) 0 0
Broun (R-GA) 0 0
Burton (R-IN) 0 0
Coffman (R-CO) 0 0
Luetkemeyer (R-MO) 0 0
Lummis (R-WY) 0 0
Marchant (R-TX) 0 0
McClintock (R-CA) 0 0
Myrick (R-NC) 0 0
Neugebauer (R-TX) 0 0
Pence (R-IN) 0 0
T. Price (R-GA) 0 0
Roe (R-TN) 0 0
P. Sessions (R-TX) 0 0
Shadegg (R-AZ) 0 0
Westmoreland (R-GA) 0 0

[Lorianne]

This money did not add to the budget because it had already been appropriated. Earmarks only assign where the money goes, and if you don’t get it assigned to you and yours, it’ll get assigned to them and theirs.

The problem with earmarks is not the items themselves (though they can be nutty and wasteful). The problem is with the process ... the horse-trading that goes on behind the scense between Congress members to garner the money for their State/district.

1) They are BRIBES by which congressmen buy each other’s votes

1a) They are BRIBES by which the party leadership keeps its members in line

2) They are the PAYBACK, the quid pro quo, by which congressmen pay back their campaign contributors: Give my campaign $100,000 and I will make sure the Air Force buys 12 more jet engines they don’t need, or supports another huge honking federal entitlement program we don’t need (think health care and the cornhusker kickback).

3)They are the POWER that keeps senior dinosuars in congress, particularly in leadership of significant committees. This makes it difficult or impossible to replace incumbents as they can bring home the bacon that a new member cannot.

Earmarks are the gateway drug to deceit, cronyism, and corruption,

Nothing will change until WE CHANGE and stop voting based on how much bacon our Congressional reps bring home.

[Zarro]

Good add!

[privatedrive]

Agreed!

But let’s remember that it’s important to vote NO for ANY bill that contains ANY earmarks. The Congressional S**T List must include any YES votes for any bills that contain other people’s earmarks. It’s not enough anymore to just be able to say you didn’t request any earmarks.

What we’ll never know is:

What huge spending bills did they vote for - in exchange for someone’s pet earmark project? This is where the big money goes.

The “earmarks don’t reduce spending” crowd knows this - they just think we’re all stupid.

This is not just about requesting earmarks, it’s about the inherent corruption and bribery of the earmark scheme.

The article it purely a hit piece on sitting repubs who requested earmarks in the past - it is irrelevant going forward. Let the count begin on the day they pledged “no more earmarks”. From this day forward - we are watching!

[privatedrive]

The Article’s Title Exposes the Lie:

“Takes” - present tense - means they do it now.

The title should read:

“Sitting Congressional Tea-Partiers Requested Earmarks in the Past”

Of course if they used a title that was True, nobody would read it. Or care.

[ri4dc]

I learned a lot about earmarks from this thread. I appreciate the knowledge. It all just reinforces my disdain for this process. I must be abolished. If projects in some state need funding, submit a bill and take vote on it’s own merits. The crap congress gets away with is helping to destroy our nation and it must ALL STOP!