Skip to comments.House Republicans discuss reviving earmarks
Posted on 03/31/2012 5:28:12 PM PDT by Olog-hai
The huge federal transportation bill was in tatters in early March when Representative Mike Rogers of Alabama posed a heretical idea for breaking through gridlock in the House.
In a closed-door meeting with fellow Republicans, Rogers recommended reviving a proven legislative sweetener that became politically toxic a year ago.
Bring back earmarks, Rogers, who was first elected to Congress in 2002, told his colleagues.
New Republican members backed by the Tea Party movement have railed against earmarks as a symbol of out-of-control government spending and unaccountable lawmakers.
Congress has another nine months to operate under an earmark ban, so discussions on lifting the ban are in their early stages, members and aides say.
But on the House side, where a splintered Republican majority is struggling to muster enough votes to pass bills, second thoughts about the earmark ban are "pretty pervasive," said a senior aide.
Rogers' remarks in the closed caucus meeting in early March were echoed by two other Republican lawmakers, Representatives Louie Gohmert and Kay Granger, according to some at the meeting.
House Speaker John Boehner, who pushed for the earmark ban, is considering forming a committee to study earmarks reforms, according to Rogers. Other sources also said that during the closed meeting, the speaker said he would consider reforms, and other leading Republicans did not shoot down the idea.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
I hope they are successful at returning to using earmarks, it is the the correct way to allocate money and direct it’s spending. The other way is to let the Executive Branch decide where the money is to be spent.
The Republicans are bound and determined to give the House, Senate, and White House to the Demoncrats in November!
Washington, whose very air is corruption.
Breathe it in, breathe it in.
Time to sharpen the pitchforks and light the torches!
There needs to be some Aristotelian guidance
The ear marks must not get out of hand
Fits right in with their turn towards Romney and turn towards sleazy.
The Stupid Party steps up to the plate....and hits it out of the park, once again.....right before nominating the Mittster....
With Romney marching to the nomination it’s becoming more obvious by the day that the tea party is a paper tiger; ceasing to pay attention to the dead movement’s demands is fully pragmatic on their part.
Don’t blame me, I’m only the messenger.
No, it’s stabbing them in the back now that they got into power. Their leftist “pragmatism” will be their undoing.
The ballot box has become a worthless lost cause.
Contractor fascism, right out of the operational D.C. playbook. And MandateMitt fits the bill perfectly.
And if Mandate-Mitt, isn’t the selectomatic-nominee, they’ll find away to force The Undocumented Fake, to step aside from the “democrats” side. Like suddenly, “he really is a fraud” pulled right out of the waiting files. (Or buy him off).
I agree. In the absence of earmarks, Obama's minions determine how appropriated money will be spent. And it's important to remember that, in the absence of earmarks, spending has only gone up. The whole earmark brouhaha was just boob bait for the bubbas.
There are some reasons why Earmarks are good but this is great evidence why banning them slows down spending.
They cant get this popular pork bill passed without them.
They tax us and then dole the money back out to the states in earmarks.
What garbage! Why should I pay for an earmark that goes to Nebraska and doesn’t benefit me and those in my state?
Who does my representative represent? Me, or Nebraskans?
Whose money is it? It’s MINE!
The problem is that the porkers stay 2 steps ahead of "reforms."
See how they Cave,
See how they Cave,
Rogers says it is really nice,
See how he Caves,
See how he Caves.
EXCERPT .......a former Massachusetts Congressman has taken graft to the next level......caught with his hand in the (federal) cookie jar and feels compelled to give up his share of the loot.Here are some excerpts from a report in the New York Times.
A former congressman who became a lobbyist has abandoned his plans to collect $90,000 from working on an energy project that he helped finance through Congress. An apologetic Mr. Delahunt told town officials he wanted to eliminate the black mark created by questions of a possible financial conflict, Patrick Cannon, chairman of the Hull Light Board, said on Saturday.
Delahunt, a Democrat who retired from Congress last year, had faced criticism for the last week from legal and ethics specialists over the unusual lobbying arrangement he had struck with the town, which is seeking federal help to build an offshore wind energy plant at a cost of more than $60 million. While in Congress, Mr. Delahunt earmarked $1.7 million for the same project, and he was to be paid 80 percent of his monthly consulting fees out of that same pot of money. Mr. Delahunt and executives at his firm did not respond to e-mails Saturday seeking further comment on the decision.
Wow. For all intents and purposes, Congressman Delahunt directly pilfered the Treasury for personal gain.This is amazing. But whats remarkable isnt that he stole money. After all, the federal budget is largely a big scam enabling various groups of people to obtain unearned loot.The noteworthy thing about this story is that he didnt launder the money.
In most cases, politicians do earmarks as part of a corrupt quid pro quo. They direct money to a certain group of beneficiaries and, in exchange, get campaign contributions from both the lobbyists who facilitated the deal and the interest groups that receive the taxpayer funds. But Delahunt cut out one of the middlemen. He created an earmark, and then became one of the lobbyists pocketing the cash.
Money is still being wasted. Delahunt is still a lobbyist. Government is still too big. And corruption is still rampant.And if you think the former Congressman is genuinely apologetic .well, please get in touch with me. Im selling a bridge in Brooklyn and need a gullible buyer i.e., the kind of person who doesnt think theres anything wrong with this unseemly example of sleaze.
REFERENCE The report said 248 of 435 House members used their positions for their familys gain; Watchdog group says Cong Rob Andrews (D-NJ) donated more than $100,000 in campaign funds to area theaters that hosted performances by his daughter, Josie.
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) also said Andrews directed $8,700 in political donations and $1.5 million in federal earmarks to his wifes employer, the Rutgers Law School in Camden where she is associate dean of enrollment.
The organization said Andrews donated $68,350 to the Walnut Street Theater in Philadelphia during the 2010 election cycle. The same theater got $25,000 in the 2008 cycle. Josie, 17, is an aspiring entertainer. Andrews wife, Camille, is a trustee there.
In 2008, Andrews campaign donated $6,500 to the Prince Music Theater and $5,000 to the Rock School of Dance in Philly. The Broadway Theater in Pitman got $391. The watchdog group said Josie appeared at the Prince and Broadway and trained at the Rock School.
CREW said Andrews campaign spent $119 for a meal at Six Flags Great Adventure on a day Josie performed there. CREWs study did not cover campaign spending in 2011 when Andrews used political donations for a family trip to Scotland and four trips to Los Angeles that coincided with recording sessions for Josie. Andrews reimbursed the campaign for more than $13,000 for the Scotland trip.
LAUGH BREAK A spokesperson said Cong Andrews is proud to support the arts and all campaign expenses are disclosed and in accordance with the law. (Thats because Congress passes these laws.)
CREWs executive director, Melanie Sloan, told the Courier-Posts Jim Walsh that in general spending on things related to lawmakers families reinforces the widely held view that members of Congress are more interested in enriching themselves than in public service. Andrews is a 12-term congressman from South Jersey.