White House: Earmark Reform Coming (Just Not With This Omnibus Spending Bill)

1. Ear Marks are here to stay, until, there is a Damn Democratic Vote in the Senate & Congress and the President Signs Off on it.

2. The Omnibus is from last year and has already been signed off on.

3. Earmarks make up only 3-4% of the Omnibus.

4. Republican-Democrat, take your Damn Pick...

That's the Biggest Hustle there is Today....

Thinking Politicians are Different...

They are All Capitalist and they Must Bring Home Pork...

I mean Bacon to their States.

The Jokes on You, if you Think Political Parties are Different.

They are all part of the Same Club, Fraternities, Sororities, Country Clubs, Churches and gated Communities, as well as Secret Organizations...

I live with it...

Open Your Damn Eyes !!!

Open them WIDE !!!

O, I try to find an underlying general point to your multiple posts here, but for the life of me, I cannot. First you insist, in post after post, that earmark spending is no big deal because it is a small percentage of the bill. Leave it alone, you say, and don't expect O. to be upset about this silly nonsense. You get on your soapbox, as usual, about how the president is just fresh in the ofice and we are rushing to judgement.

Then you offer a long message copied from Taxpayers for Common Sense (without attribution, I might add), making the point that Republicans earmark just as much as, if not more than, Democrats. (I'm shocked, I tell you, to learn there is gambling in Casablanca) So are earmarks okay or not? Are Republican earmarks evil but Democrat-sponsored ones okay? Are we to think that Obama is doing the Republicans a favor by ignoring earmarks, and so is doing his bipartisan best to reach out to them? What is your point?

My point is consistent and clear-- earmarks are an inappropriate way to fund projects. They are often a form of pork, but earmark and pork are not synonyms. Both Democrats and Republicans should be committed to eliminating both earmarks and wasteful spending from the federal budget. During the campaign, Obama promised to be a part of that effort, co-opting a McCain issue (as he also effectively co-opted many of Hillary's issues). Now that he's been elected and must govern, he is ignoring the messy details and kicking the can down the road. Not change, just business as usual.

Hey, Jake....

Red Republican States get the Elephant's Share of Earmarks !!

If it's budget time, it's good to be a red state. And it's very good to be Mississippi.

According to an analysis by the nonpartisan Taxpayers for Common Sense, Mississippi has won the Earmark contest in the Omnibus Budget Package.

Mississippi Republican Sen. Thad Cochran led his colleagues by raking in more than $470 million in 204 earmarks.

Mississippi's junior Republican, Roger Wicker, pulled in more than $390 million.

The totals can't be added together because the figure includes earmarks each received solo and with others, so the same earmark could be in both senators' column. Cochran, on his own, pulled in roughly $76 million and Wicker brought home $4 million.

Political Armageddon: Ending Special Interest Influence in Washington DC

by Bernie Horn

There's no question that this is the battle of a lifetime.

The end of the world is near -- the Reagan world, that is. In one gigantic political battle, we can end the world of tax cuts for the rich, federal government-led attacks on organized labor, mindless deregulation, subsidies for wealthy corporations, war against science and preemptive war in Iraq.

The old political world will end on October 1, 2009 (the beginning of the next fiscal year) -- if we just win the battle to enact President Obama’s budget.

Anyone who didn’t see or hear Obama’s Weekly Address on Saturday should go to the White House website and watch it. It is a declaration of war against the special interests:

I realize that passing this budget won’t be easy. Because it represents real and dramatic change, it also represents a threat to the status quo in Washington.

"We need earmark reform and when I’m president, I will go line by line to make sure we’re not spending money unwisely." - Obama the liar during the Presidential debates.

It's a shame so many useful idiots fell for Obama's "words, just words". The man is a fraud, a strutting showboat narcissist.

After 8 long years of Bush, we get another 4 years of the same kind of a-clown in Obama. He and Bush are two peas in a pod. Two lying ideologues who think they know everything and want to jam their far right or far left ideologies down American's throats.

It's really too bad the Democrat party got hijacked by the far left loons and they got the poseur Obama elected. Hillary would have made a far superior President for most Americans.

Jake...

Most Red Republican, Southern, Rural, Mountainous and Appalachian States get [[Government Earmark Money]]

In any Rate, the earmarks Constitute Less than 5% of the Omnibus...

Give it a Damn Rest...

Call me when the Omnibus or the Stimulus Package is 30-40% Pork...

Until then, this News is

[[Chicken Nuggets]]

Let hem have their Baby Back Pork Ribs

Earmarks typically represent less than 3% of a budget. So, they should be easy to get rid of, no? Well, no.

I'm confident that Obama will try hard to work with the anti-earmarking crowd against the practice. Why? Well, first off, he opposes it. But remember, Obama is a canny political pragmatist. In truth, earmarking is an inside baseball political tool used to jockey and bargain in Congress (and for political goodwill in your home state). As President, Obama doesn't need this, and stands to gain more from opposing the practice.

Will he and McCain succeed? No. Republican and Democratic wheels are greased by this. In fact, MOST earmark money goes to "red" states, certainly on a per-capita basis. But of course, GOP lawmakers protest that their pork isn't actually pork. Riiiiight.

Personally, I think earmarks are fine. 3% is a small number, and most of the projects are totally fine. Plus, it gets McCain out of bed in the morning.

Mr. Tully, What on earth inspired you to criticize Mr. Tapper for doing his job? He is supposed to ask questions that elicit answers from the administration. That's his beat. He has to deal with Mr. Gibbs' daily joke of a press briefing. If I were to ask Mr. Tapper a question about his dealings with Mr. Gibbs, it would be-- how do you keep a straight face throughout the whole proceeding? Some of Mr. Gibbs' answers are on point and useful, but some of them are, variously, opaque, convoluted, and/or waspish. Of course, we know that press secretaries are wont to try to spin every White House pronouncement and decision in a positive way-- that's their job. But Gibbs seems not really ready for prime time sometimes.

Let Jake do his job. He does not seem to me to be bearing a particular grudge. He asks good questions, for the most part, and tries to insist on clear answers, following up when necessary to point out evasiveness or points of discrepancy between the answer being given and previous statements.

Keep it up, Mr. Tapper. Since I've seen you accused of both being a shameless shill for the president and of being in league with the Republicans to bring the president down, you must be doing something right.

"You do know the difference between Obama's stimulus bill, the Omnibus spending bill (leftover from '08) and the Obama admininstrations Budget Proposal... don't you?

If you don't, please educate yourself."

Why yes! The stimulus bill is the one with all the wasteful spending programs designated by legislators for pet projects which are not earmarks. The others are the ones with wasteful spending programs designated by legislators for pet projects that are earmarks.

Hey Jake, how about an article on the secret Bush memos that Obama just released. They are very interesting.

Dear Mr. Jake Tapper,

I hope that you'll resolve whatever lingering burr in your knapsack remains from Mr. Robert Gibbs' early and often well-done retorts to your-day in and day out-(a little over three weeks, folks) inane questions these past few weeks.

Please stop Mr. Tapper-
You're hurting America

Obama is spending us right into a depression.

What an incredible hypocrite. Probably the next bill won't have any earmarks that are CALLED earmarks. But like the stimulus bill, it will have all kinds of earmark spending, with a different name. Kind of like his pledge to leave Iraq, except for 50,000 troops that just won't be CALLED combat troops. But they'll still have bullets coming at them.

For some reason, I am reminded of St. Augustine's prayer from his Confessions: "Lord, give me chastity and temperance, but not now."

Willem, don't be silly. As I am sure you know, the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 had FOUR principal cosponsors and a total of 46 sponsors. Yes, freshman senator Obama was one of the four lead sponsors and JOHN MCCAIN was another. However, Tom Coburn was the principal sponsor, so the credit must be shared. Saying, "It was Obama who introduced" the bill, as your only piece of evidence for your claim that Obama had somehow done more than McCain on the issue, is grossly misleading. Oh, and this was such a controversial and groundbreaking piece of legislation that it passed unanimously by both the House and the Senate and signed by President Bush. Yep, that's leadership on an issue, alrightee.

It's one thing to say that Obama, like McCain, opposes earmarks. I would have let that pass. But to claim some mantle of superiority for his efforts on the issue is not credible.

The earmrakds, regardless of which party owns them, are a problem. The congress has to demonstrate that they are serious in confronting our economic problems and adding earmarks to spending bills isn't the way to do it.

I also am looking for the administration to take on their own voting blocks. For example, with health care reform, do we get tort reform on malpractice suits? With education spending, do we take a serious look at the outrageous teachers pensions in my state and roll them back and put them on social security and 401Ks like everyone else?

Can we admit as a country, we can not provide access to government services to people here illegally?

I wish both parties can see that some people will not have any confidence in them until campaigns are shortened and contributions are limited.

Oh So Democrats are not the Only Ones into Pork hummm Hipocrite Republicans!

Obama has already done more against pork barrel spending in his short career in the Senate and the WH than McCain, despite all HIS years railing against them.

It was Obama who introduced the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006.

I used to support Obama, but now i m for Palin

Posted by: sandy
============================================

She of the $398 MILLION in taxpayer money for a Bridge to Nowhere?

Bwahahahaha.

Isn't this a 50% reduction in earmarks from last year? Last year was 18 Billion which was already a substantial reduction from the years before, especially when Republicans in Congress and the WH appropiated the monies.

sandy,

Speaking of Palin, has she paid back Alaska for the money she cheated them out of yet?