Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mitch McConnell bearish on earmark moratorium, GOP goals
Washington Examiner ^ | 11/4/2010 | JP Friere

Posted on 11/04/2010 10:07:49 AM PDT by markomalley

At a speech at the Heritage Foundation, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., made clear his skepticism about an earmark moratorium, saying that “it’s really just a question about discretion.” He didn’t want to give the president a “blank check,” which he believes would occur once the Senate passes an earmark moratorium.

McConnell also said that he would be willing to work with the president and Democrats on “energy independence,” which may just mean that he would support providing more subsidies to American energy producers. He did say that he wanted to vote, repeatedly, to repeal Obamacare, knowing full well that President Obama would veto.

McConnell opened the speech with a jab at Democrats who might want to “bail out” Newsweek. Ironically, McConnell supported the Troubled Asset Relief Program, and later in October 2009, said that it was successful with a few reservations.


TOPICS: Front Page News; Government
KEYWORDS: rino

1 posted on 11/04/2010 10:07:54 AM PDT by markomalley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Mitch McConnell is volunteering to be primaried the next time he runs. Nothing like throwing away Tuesday’s victory, old geezer.


2 posted on 11/04/2010 10:10:08 AM PDT by kittymyrib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kittymyrib

I’ll donate money to anyone who runs against McConnell in the primaries.


3 posted on 11/04/2010 10:12:09 AM PDT by Cheap_Hessian (I am the Grim FReeper.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Mitch hasn’t gotten it.


4 posted on 11/04/2010 10:12:56 AM PDT by skookum55 ("We can give up on America or we can give up on this president ...." D. D'Souza)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Someone needs to give McConnell a drug test. Does this dip$hit realize what happened on Tuesday. What a %ucking idiot!


5 posted on 11/04/2010 10:16:18 AM PDT by Sprite518
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: skookum55

Senator DeMint for Minority Leader. Now.


6 posted on 11/04/2010 10:17:05 AM PDT by p. henry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Cheap_Hessian

Can Rand Paul occupy both Senate seats from Kentucky?
Maybe he can sit in one and prop his feet up on the other...


7 posted on 11/04/2010 10:17:26 AM PDT by counterpunch (“Some election nights are more fun than others” - Baraq Hussein 0bama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cheap_Hessian

Better yet embolden Jim Demint donate to his foundation drain the RNC and RNCC of all their funds.

Demint is our key lets give him the power he needs to promote more conservatives leaders at the same time force the establishment to listen to him.


8 posted on 11/04/2010 10:17:56 AM PDT by USSR Didnt Fall
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

I don’t get this obsession with banning earmarks. If the Congresscritters don’t decide where the pork goes, then Obama and his cronies make that call.


9 posted on 11/04/2010 10:22:41 AM PDT by Chet 99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chet 99
I don’t get this obsession with banning earmarks. If the Congresscritters don’t decide where the pork goes, then Obama and his cronies make that call.

Rush explained this perfectly yesterday: Earmarks are less than 1% of the Federal budget. It's a distraction mechanism by the Government Party.


Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.

10 posted on 11/04/2010 10:30:12 AM PDT by The Comedian (I really missed you. Next time, I'll adjust for windage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Chet 99

Honest question - is it necessary to have “earmarks?” The govt takes in $$. Each agency/dept. creates a budget (with as much detail as Congress insists on). Hopefully, each dept’s budget will be looked at separately going forward.

The budget, if clean, gets passed and the funds allocated. If the budget has junk in it, it gets rejected. Same for Congress’ budget itself.

Where (honestly) do the earmarks come in? The dept budgets should have enough specificity that they don’t have extra funds for projects to study bovine athletes foot or turning the local pawn shop into a “historic site and museum.” Why does the pork have to happen?

I’ll submit maybe we’re all naive on this - if you can help me out in understanding.


11 posted on 11/04/2010 10:30:34 AM PDT by hoyaloya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: p. henry

Great idea! Such a move is really necessary to pound into the head of the establishment GOP that the status quo is unacceptible.

I spoke with a former state Republican committee chairman who is still active in the party two months ago. He told me the party establishment was blowing off the TEA party as a passing fad. I was dumbfounded. The revolution must continue.

An effective way to send the message is every time a Republican operative calls asking for money: (1) tell him that you are no longer a Republican, that you consider yourself an independent conservative constitutionalist, (2) tell him you will give no money to the Republican Party or affiliated organizations as long as the Party refuses to heed the concerns of the TEA party and begins to actively work to restore constitutional government. If the operative is still on the line, I like to ask why not one single Republican member of congress has been patriotic enough to question Barry’s qualifications for office.

Use up his time, and give him nothing but information. I’ve made it clear that I won’t donate money speculatively in the hope that Republicans will turn around; rather, my money will flow once Republicans start walking the walk.


12 posted on 11/04/2010 10:41:57 AM PDT by skookum55 ("We can give up on America or we can give up on this president ...." D. D'Souza)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Chet 99

If we FROZE govt. spending. No % increase anywhere in the budget what would the impact be over time?

I fully believe we need to have actual cuts in spending, however, what would a $0 increase over the next few years mean?


13 posted on 11/04/2010 10:45:09 AM PDT by LeonardFMason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Does McConnell have a cognitive deficit?? We said NO!


14 posted on 11/04/2010 10:46:50 AM PDT by ScottinVA (The West needs to act NOW to aggressively treat its metastasizing islaminoma!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chet 99

“If the Congresscritters don’t decide where the pork goes, then Obama and his cronies make that call.”

If you downsize government the pork fat gets rendered out. Problem solved.


15 posted on 11/04/2010 10:46:50 AM PDT by A Strict Constructionist (Oligarchy...never vote for the Ivy League candidate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: The Comedian

Rush is wrong on this one. While Earmarks themselves don’t account for much, the receipt of Earmarks lead to votes for large, unnecessary spending bills. They are bribes. They were responsible for both stimulus and Obamacare. That is more than $11 Trillion over the next 10 years, well more than 1%. Neither bill would have ever passed without the bribes.


16 posted on 11/04/2010 10:49:37 AM PDT by wolfman23601
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: LeonardFMason

Up until a few years ago it would have “auto-balanced” the budget after a few years.

Now though I don’t think it would work.


17 posted on 11/04/2010 10:52:38 AM PDT by RockinRight (if the choice is between Crazy and Commie, I choose Crazy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: LeonardFMason

Hate to say it, but ENTITLEMENTS must be dealt with.

I believe govt spending ACROSS the board should be AT WORST frozen, and in many cases completely eliminated.

It can’t happen overnight, but it’s time to send these cuts to Obama and let him tell the people who believes government should be doing...EVERYTHING. Then he’ll be history.

However, cutting the FDA, EPA or DEA won’t amount to jack crap on the budget...we need to go after the BIG STUFF.

Disclaimer: I am also for a strong auditing of military spending too...the amount we’re tossing to defense contractors is just as obscene as what we toss down the socialist rat hole.


18 posted on 11/04/2010 10:52:52 AM PDT by Conservative_Pragmatist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

This man must go. He thinks energy independence is a subsidy. We’ve turned the best oil prospecting territories over to the National Park Service. Ditto for mining.

Kill the EPA, and put most of the national park land that isn’t really national park land up for sale.

Also, tell the NRC that they can get to work approving a Thorium based reactor in the next 12 months and put the uranium reactor out of business for good.

Voila - energy indepedence, and not a dime in subsidies required. In fact, you’ll make a boatload selling all that land.


19 posted on 11/04/2010 10:54:01 AM PDT by RinaseaofDs (Does beheading qualify as 'breaking my back', in the Jeffersonian sense of the expression?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wolfman23601

Yep, earmarks are basically taxpayers money used for the reelection of incumbents. They don’t need to go home and brag to their constituents on how much they robbed the rest of the country.


20 posted on 11/04/2010 10:55:55 AM PDT by Brett66 (Where government advances, and it advances relentlessly , freedom is imperiled -Janice Rogers Brown)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: RinaseaofDs

Obama advances the Progressive agenda 20 notches and Republicans like McConnell will rathchet back 10, leaving us 10 nothces worse instead of 20.


21 posted on 11/04/2010 10:56:02 AM PDT by AU72
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: wolfman23601

EXACTLY! Earmarks are corruption.


22 posted on 11/04/2010 11:02:49 AM PDT by SC_Pete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: AU72

Exactly.

He’s got to go. He’s useful in the interim, however. He’s still in the minority there, which means all he can do is obstruct the reforms going on in the house. The Tea Party will still need morons in the party to run against. Steele appears to have been scared straight for now.

Woe betide him if he does. He better make some hot cider, stoke his fireplace, and tuck into a copy of the Constitution, the Declaration, and the Federalist Papers, and then come on back to work after Thanksgiving with a more Jeffersonian bent that he has at this point.


23 posted on 11/04/2010 11:06:55 AM PDT by RinaseaofDs (Does beheading qualify as 'breaking my back', in the Jeffersonian sense of the expression?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: RinaseaofDs

Mitch has proven he is a moron. And the staff insiders who should know better, are either corrupt or Democrats.


24 posted on 11/04/2010 11:07:30 AM PDT by SC_Pete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
Egads! And we have to wait four more long years before we can dump this jack-hole. Then again we have other targets for 2012...

Olympia Snowe of Maine
Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas
Orrin Hatch of Utah

Only 10 R's up for senate in 2012. Should be able to get some pickups.

25 posted on 11/04/2010 11:09:41 AM PDT by Drill Thrawl (Palin Haley O'Donnell - mmm mmmm mmmmmmmmm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SC_Pete

It’s time to let him know that the election isn’t over yet. Time for him to either remember how to learn, or get ready to retire.

He’s done whatever damage he’s going to do. I don’t intend to leave my kids great grandchildren in de factor economic slavery.

QE2 started today. Bernanke’s decided to plunge the knife in now that the election’s over. That’s Obama’s subtle F.U. to post-liberal America on 11/4.


26 posted on 11/04/2010 11:14:34 AM PDT by RinaseaofDs (Does beheading qualify as 'breaking my back', in the Jeffersonian sense of the expression?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Cheap_Hessian
I’ll donate money to anyone who runs against McConnell in the primaries.

Dittos....Calling The Great RINO Hunter, Sarah Palin...fresh target emerging from the brush!

27 posted on 11/04/2010 11:16:27 AM PDT by fedupjohn ("They act like permanent residents of a unicorn ranch in fantasy land"....Sarah Palin 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: skookum55

The better idea is to have Republican legislatures and governors require all candidates to file their birth certificate. The media and the Democrats will call us “birthers,” and call us crazy. There are other jobs to be done.


28 posted on 11/04/2010 11:38:05 AM PDT by namvolunteer (I can see November from my house.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: skookum55

Ooops. I just meant the Barry stuff. I agree on every else.


29 posted on 11/04/2010 11:40:50 AM PDT by namvolunteer (I can see November from my house.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: wolfman23601
Rush is wrong on this one. While Earmarks themselves don’t account for much, the receipt of Earmarks lead to votes for large, unnecessary spending bills. They are bribes. They were responsible for both stimulus and Obamacare. That is more than $11 Trillion over the next 10 years, well more than 1%. Neither bill would have ever passed without the bribes.

You never refuted the original point that earmarks themselves were around only 1% of the budget.

You make a different argument, and I certainly agree with you, but it is a different point.


Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.

30 posted on 11/04/2010 12:51:52 PM PDT by The Comedian (I really missed you. Next time, I'll adjust for windage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

This is why they don’t deserve the majority in the Senate.

This is why I wanted Castle to lose. They don’t need more buddies supporting this garbage in the Senate.


31 posted on 11/04/2010 1:21:18 PM PDT by Soul Seeker ( I was there when we had the numbers, but didn’t have the principles.---Jim that leans conservDeMin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Comedian

That’s easy enough to refute.

They do account for a small part of the budget. However, the fact they are so unimportant to the overall budget but clearly despised by the public and yet they can’t summon the will to do away with them gives the public every reason to reasonably project they can’t find the will to impose spending cuts that can slash 10% of the budget or more.

It’s a test of their will to do face the bigger challenges before them.


32 posted on 11/04/2010 1:25:05 PM PDT by Soul Seeker ( I was there when we had the numbers, but didn’t have the principles.---Jim that leans conservDeMin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Chet 99

Come on, Chet! They don’t have to spend that money, period.

The House of Representatives decides where that money is spent and if the Senate puts it in, the Reps can take it out.


33 posted on 11/04/2010 1:37:13 PM PDT by SatinDoll (NO FOREIGN NATIONALS AS OUR PRESIDENT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Mitchie Boy is part of the problem, not the solution.


34 posted on 11/04/2010 1:37:53 PM PDT by SharpRightTurn (White, black, and red all over--America's affirmative action, metrosexual president.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RinaseaofDs

He sounded tough today. We will see!


35 posted on 11/04/2010 3:54:43 PM PDT by SC_Pete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: namvolunteer

Last month job #1 was to derail Pelosi and Reed. One down, one to go.

This month, and for the next two years, job #1 is to derail Barry. From what I’ve seen, he cannot win an argument claiming he is constitutionally qualified to hold office. GOP care about what the media and Dems call them; I hold the constitution more dear than that.

The shortest distance between two points is a straight line in Euclidean space. That straight line, in regard to derailing Barry, is showing that he cannot demonstrate any qualifications — for the office he has currently usurped, and for the senate seat he formerly usurped.


36 posted on 11/04/2010 5:29:32 PM PDT by skookum55 ("We can give up on America or we can give up on this president ...." D. D'Souza)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: skookum55

Sure, in Euclidean space but are you sure that those 3rd graders, one in Hawaii and one in Indonesian, weren’t switched?”
In Banach spaces, like BHO, a large part of the study involves the dual space: the space of all continuous linear maps from the space into its underlying field, so-called functionals.
Think about it. :)


37 posted on 11/04/2010 6:59:40 PM PDT by namvolunteer (We draw the Congressional districts this time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: The Comedian

I didn’t hear Rush say it so I don’t know the context, but what I inferred from the original post was that Rush thinks there is no point in banning Earmarks because they are only 1% of the budget and it won’t serve the purpose of eliminating the deficits. This is the exact same arguement Obama made in the debates with McCain. I wasn’t arguing the direct cost of Earmarks to the budget, I was pointing out the indirect costs, such as Earmarks serving as bribes to get large comprehensive spending bills passed. Again, I did not hear Rush’s argument. If I inferred incorrectly, I apologize.


38 posted on 11/05/2010 6:33:07 AM PDT by wolfman23601
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: wolfman23601
only 1% of the budget

Based on FY 2009, that works out to about $35 Billion. That's about what we spent in procurement costs for the 187 F-22 fighters.

39 posted on 11/06/2010 1:07:13 AM PDT by Doe Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Doe Eyes

Surely we could find a few dozen other things to cut that are “ONLY” 1% or less of the federal budget.

One percent here, half a percent there, pretty soon you’re talking real money.

That’s how they sell us big government—a little her and a little there. We need to do it in reverse.


40 posted on 11/06/2010 1:15:49 AM PDT by Nickname
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: The Comedian
In an ordinary year earmarks are 1% - 2% of the budget. Since they add to or come out of discretionary spending which is about 1/3 of the budget they eat up 3 - 6% of available funds. Most Congressmen are modest in their requests but ultra liberal and ultra backward states make gluttons of themselves so the balance is skewed to the least responsible states.

We will be targeting earmarkers as if they were Democrats.

There are legitimate ways to fund worthwhile projects. Earmarking is corruption.

41 posted on 11/06/2010 2:27:34 AM PDT by MARTIAL MONK (I'm waiting for the POP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson