Perhaps the easiest way to identify the politician for CHANGE is to view his stance on earmarks, or as we affectionately say between our tightly gritted teeth, pork barrel spending. We know, that in recent years, politicians have been lining their pockets with our money in ever expanding billions. If they were in private industry, it would be considered embezzlement.
While the country is in financial difficulty, wouldn't you think it would be a good idea to put a moratorium on earmarks? But, no, it hasn't stopped some of our politicians from spending. Instead, they have become blatant in their total disregard for our deficit troubles, or for their ethics, as they rape our federal government into bankruptcy.
This problem is not strictly Republican or Democrat. We all know that. It is a problem of both parties and it continues to escalate. When McCain said this government is in trouble he is speaking from knowledge and experience. He has tried to stem this gross abuse of power by the Senate.
What is absolutely mind blowing, is our elected officials attempts to keep these earmarks secret. Obviously, they know that spending the peoples' money on frivolous pork is wrong, yet they continue to do it and will stop at nothing to hide their bad habit, as if addicted to it.
According to CAGW (Citizens Against Government Waste), Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.), has recently attempted to give earmarks contained in committee reports the force of law, even though President Bush specifically directed Congress against this.
"On January 29, 2008, President Bush issued an Executive Order instructing government agencies not to fund any earmarks contained in report language, or based on any non-statutory source, such as phone calls from members of Congress."
"In a brazen attempt to gut the executive order, Sen. Levin inserted a provision (Section 1002) into the defense reauthorization bill that would incorporate the earmarks listed in the committee report into the statute itself, making the earmarks “a requirement in law. The earmarks would be “binding on agency heads in the same manner and to the same extent” as if they were written into the bill. "
What does this mean? That earmarks will be easier to hide and will be difficult to eliminate. "It will prevent open debate and votes on earmarks and reduce transparency and accountability. The “incorporation” language sets a precedent for other fiscal year 2009 legislation. If it is not removed from the bill, it would demonstrate that the Democratic leadership of Congress has no intent of ever getting earmarks under control."
"The earmarks in S. 3001 total $5.9 billion, and include the following: $6.5 million for expandable light air mobility shelters, $5 million for a hydrokinetic power, and $2 million for thin film amorphous solar arrays. While earmarks generally are a waste of tax dollars, they are most outrageous when included in a bill that is intended to defend the national security of the United States."
http://www.cagw.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=11600
So, let's put the record straight. According to the CAGW, for 2008, John McCain has ZERO, yes, that's zero, zip, nada, niente, NO EARMARKS.
Barack Obama has $97.4 million and Biden has $119.7 million.
How funny (ha ha), and woefully ignorant, that the media is bringing up the "Bridge to Nowhere." It appears Obama's and Biden's earmarks for 2008 total $217.1 million, or pretty close to the $223 million for the bridge.
Yes, this "Bridge to Nowhere" earmark has again sparked controversy. Although it was granted to Gov. Palin's home state of Alaska, she had nothing to do with it. According to the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste (CCAGW), "As a candidate for governor, Sarah Palin expressed a mixture of support and doubt about the bridge, particularly about how the project would be funded. As governor, she submitted her budget on January 17, 2007 without any money for the bridge."
On July 17, 2007, the Associated Press reported that “The state of Alaska on Friday officially abandoned the ‘bridge to nowhere’ project that became a nationwide symbol of federal pork-barrel spending.” Governor Palin said in a statement that “Ketchikan desires a better way to reach the airport, but the $398 million bridge is not the answer.”
“Media reports that Congress killed the Bridge to Nowhere are not accurate,” said Schatz (CCAGW President Tom Schatz). The 2006 transportation appropriations bill allowed Alaska to decide whether or not to move forward. Governor Murkowski said yes; Governor Palin said no. Any discussion about the project should begin with facts.”
(http://thinkprogress.org/2006/04/24/cochran-pork/)
So, there we have it. CHANGE. We need to elect someone who has a proven track record of change in government.
Which one of the candidates doesn't play by the rules of the "good ole boys"? Which one will work to alter the irresponsible spending and curb the abuse of power going on in Congress? There is only one guy that I know who is committed to change, who has a track record of change, and I hope you know, too.
While the country is in financial difficulty, wouldn't you think it would be a good idea to put a moratorium on earmarks? But, no, it hasn't stopped some of our politicians from spending. Instead, they have become blatant in their total disregard for our deficit troubles, or for their ethics, as they rape our federal government into bankruptcy.
This problem is not strictly Republican or Democrat. We all know that. It is a problem of both parties and it continues to escalate. When McCain said this government is in trouble he is speaking from knowledge and experience. He has tried to stem this gross abuse of power by the Senate.
What is absolutely mind blowing, is our elected officials attempts to keep these earmarks secret. Obviously, they know that spending the peoples' money on frivolous pork is wrong, yet they continue to do it and will stop at nothing to hide their bad habit, as if addicted to it.
According to CAGW (Citizens Against Government Waste), Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.), has recently attempted to give earmarks contained in committee reports the force of law, even though President Bush specifically directed Congress against this.
"On January 29, 2008, President Bush issued an Executive Order instructing government agencies not to fund any earmarks contained in report language, or based on any non-statutory source, such as phone calls from members of Congress."
"In a brazen attempt to gut the executive order, Sen. Levin inserted a provision (Section 1002) into the defense reauthorization bill that would incorporate the earmarks listed in the committee report into the statute itself, making the earmarks “a requirement in law. The earmarks would be “binding on agency heads in the same manner and to the same extent” as if they were written into the bill. "
What does this mean? That earmarks will be easier to hide and will be difficult to eliminate. "It will prevent open debate and votes on earmarks and reduce transparency and accountability. The “incorporation” language sets a precedent for other fiscal year 2009 legislation. If it is not removed from the bill, it would demonstrate that the Democratic leadership of Congress has no intent of ever getting earmarks under control."
"The earmarks in S. 3001 total $5.9 billion, and include the following: $6.5 million for expandable light air mobility shelters, $5 million for a hydrokinetic power, and $2 million for thin film amorphous solar arrays. While earmarks generally are a waste of tax dollars, they are most outrageous when included in a bill that is intended to defend the national security of the United States."
http://www.cagw.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=11600
So, let's put the record straight. According to the CAGW, for 2008, John McCain has ZERO, yes, that's zero, zip, nada, niente, NO EARMARKS.
Barack Obama has $97.4 million and Biden has $119.7 million.
How funny (ha ha), and woefully ignorant, that the media is bringing up the "Bridge to Nowhere." It appears Obama's and Biden's earmarks for 2008 total $217.1 million, or pretty close to the $223 million for the bridge.
Yes, this "Bridge to Nowhere" earmark has again sparked controversy. Although it was granted to Gov. Palin's home state of Alaska, she had nothing to do with it. According to the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste (CCAGW), "As a candidate for governor, Sarah Palin expressed a mixture of support and doubt about the bridge, particularly about how the project would be funded. As governor, she submitted her budget on January 17, 2007 without any money for the bridge."
On July 17, 2007, the Associated Press reported that “The state of Alaska on Friday officially abandoned the ‘bridge to nowhere’ project that became a nationwide symbol of federal pork-barrel spending.” Governor Palin said in a statement that “Ketchikan desires a better way to reach the airport, but the $398 million bridge is not the answer.”
“Media reports that Congress killed the Bridge to Nowhere are not accurate,” said Schatz (CCAGW President Tom Schatz). The 2006 transportation appropriations bill allowed Alaska to decide whether or not to move forward. Governor Murkowski said yes; Governor Palin said no. Any discussion about the project should begin with facts.”
(http://thinkprogress.org/2006/04/24/cochran-pork/)
So, there we have it. CHANGE. We need to elect someone who has a proven track record of change in government.
Which one of the candidates doesn't play by the rules of the "good ole boys"? Which one will work to alter the irresponsible spending and curb the abuse of power going on in Congress? There is only one guy that I know who is committed to change, who has a track record of change, and I hope you know, too.
No comments:
Post a Comment