Anyone know where to find a comprehensive breakdown of the earmarks included in the upcoming federal budget? I’m curious as to how many legislators will be taking their principled stand against the budget, all the while knowing that their pet projects will glide through uncontested. I’m hearing reports that Republicans are responsible for roughly 40% of all earmarks - and that the top Repub is earmarking over twice as many dollars as his Democratic counterpart - but can’t find confirmation.
Also, the Administration’s response has been to label it “last year’s business.” Can anyone clarify what, exactly, that means, and what the justification is for passing an earmark-loaded budget now, and not in the years to follow (as I presume their statement would indicate). I’ve yet to hear any analysis of how the budget proposal came to be, or why (if) this is a valid explanation.
I could be wrong but I think you are mixing two separate issues or bills.
First the bill that is “Filled with pork” and is being called “Last years business” is the 2009 omnibus spending bill. Apparently this is full of earmarks ranging from 4200-9000 of them depending on who you talk to and is a 410 Billion dollar Bill.
The omnibus bill has Byrd (D) with the most Earmarks for 123M, Second was Shelby (R) 114M, then Bonds (R) 86M.
The administration is calling this bill “Last years business” and will not veto it due to the earmarks because it was pretty much put together last year with the prior congress. In short, they don’t want to “upset the apple cart”.
The “Budget” is an entirely different subject that is all Obama’s baby. I’ve not seen much on “Earmarks” if any on that.
I read in this morning’s paper a list of the five top trough feeders, which included Republicans and Democrats. I can’t remember their names, except that Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas) was at the top of the list. This was suspect considering he is the majority member on the Appropriations Committee.
Things that make you go hmmmmmmmm…
**I’ve not seen much on “Earmarks” if any on that. **
Huh. So, there are no reported earmarks in Obama’s budget request (has it even reached that stage yet?), or you haven’t heard reports about earmarks one way or the other? I’ve found very little information, only talking-head rumination.
The administration is calling this bill “Last years business” and will not veto it due to the earmarks because it was pretty much put together last year with the prior congress. In short, they don’t want to “upset the apple cart”.
Is the omnibus bill expected to gain bipartisan support, or is this more typical “no thanks, but thanks” gaming of the system?
Huh. So, there are no reported earmarks in Obama’s budget request (has it even reached that stage yet?), or you haven’t heard reports about earmarks one way or the other? I’ve found very little information, only talking-head rumination.
I’ve not heard much reported about earmarks nor information on “Earmarks” other than the administration’s claims of there not being any. Of course as we’ve discovered in other threads, one man’s “Earmark” is another mans “Budgetary spending”
Is the omnibus bill expected to gain bipartisan support, or is this more typical “no thanks, but thanks” gaming of the system?
Why wouldn’t it garner bipartisan report when both parties are getting huge goodies from it? Of course the Reps are in a position to do exactly as you say…and frankly I’d laugh my but off if they did. Just more BS politics I guess. Call me completely disenfranchised with the entire situation if you will.
Why wouldn’t it garner bipartisan report when both parties are getting huge goodies from it?
For the obvious reason, I’d imagine: “conservative” Representative X votes against Big Government and Wasteful Spending, with full knowledge that the bill will pass with their pork and without their vote. Kinda like gorging on corn chips with Olestra fat substitute - all the reward, none of the guilt (and just a smidgen of anal leakage).
