BRIAN ROSS REPORTS
- Like Jay-Z + the Beatles, But Worse
- Update: Help for Homeless Children
- Bush Era, Revised -- and with More Barbeque
- The Tax Woman Cometh
- Paging Mr. Stanford: Antigua Called
- Who Are You Calling Partisan?
- Update: IRS Won't Use Private Debt Collectors
- But Is It Art?
- PMA Scandal a Sore Point for Dems in 2010?
- Down in Flames
- A New Mystery for RNC Chief
- PMA Clients Were Big Givers
- Raided Lobby Firm Still a Force on Capitol Hill
- Stanford Update: Another $143 Mil Found
- Cheney, Hooked on Controversy
TOP BLOTTER CATEGORIES
- Abramoff Lobbying Scandal
- American Al Qaeda
- Avian Flu
- Beirut Hospital Out of Gas
- Cheney
- CIA
- CIA Secret Prisons
- D.C. Madam Affair
- FBI
- Federal Air Marshal Service
- Homeland Security
- Hurricane Katrina
- IRS
- Mark Foley Internet Scandal
- Millionaire Sex Scandal
- Nigerian E-mail Scams
- Norman Hsu, Clinton Fundraiser
- NSA: Wiretapping
- Osama bin Laden
- Payola
- Pharmacy Investigation
- PMA
- Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert
- Stanford
- Steele
- Terror
- Troopergate
- U.K. Airline Terror Plot
- U.K. Bombing Attempts
- Wen Ho Lee
- William Jefferson
- Zarqawi
« Previous | Main | Next »
Pet Projects, Yes; Gay Center, No
Email
Print
ShareJune 16, 2006 10:49 AM
Congress finds it nearly impossible to remove "earmarks" unless the money is going for a Gay and Lesbian Center in Los Angeles.
Just about every bill Congress puts its paws on ends up containing language or money for pet projects, what are known as "earmarks." They are particularly prominent in big money bills like the FY 2007, a transportation-treasury-housing appropriations measure which the House passed last Wednesday.
Rep. Jeff Flake (R-AZ), who likes to kill earmarks, says this bill is full of them. According to Congressional Quarterly (CQ.com) reporter Kathleen Hunter, Flake offered eight amendments to remove earmarks from the FY 2007 spending bill. All of them failed.
But when Rep. Steve King (R-IA) offered an amendment to rid the bill of one particular earmark, it passed very quickly. According to CQ.COM, there was no debate at all. The earmark was to spend $300,000 on a multipurpose facility at a Los Angeles gay and lesbian center.
June 16, 2006 | Permalink | User Comments (6)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
when will this repubilcan congress realise that gay and lesbian citizens are just that. citizens. citizens who pay taxes. citizens who contribute to charitable organisations. citizens who give back to society. citizens who have families. citizens who give their lives in battle. but at the end of the day, they are still citizens who are still actively discriminated against. we all share a blue passport, don't we? so why can't gays and lesbians be treated like productive members of american society? because in the end, it is the christian church who seem to be legistlating. and that, my friends, is exactly why this country was founded in the first place. to be a nation state free from the control of the church. alas, it is the citizens of this great land who seem to be forgetting what america is meant to be. when will we learn?
Posted by: trey | Jun 16, 2006 2:27:13 PM
LA gays and lesbians should and can raise their own money for a community center. They are the ones that are going to exclusively use it.
Why should all taxpayers be forced to fund a center for any specific groups social use?
Oh, and, stop with the whining victimization, this issue is about fiscal responsibilty, not gay bashing.
Posted by: penny | Jun 18, 2006 4:12:38 PM
So...no more federal money for facilities especially designed for the special needs of women or people of color? Don't be silly, this is exactly what you say it isn't, gay bashing in it's most repub-nant form.
Posted by: EthanQ | Jun 19, 2006 3:26:15 PM
Ah but this about discrimination - there are many, MANY earmarks that passed on with the transportation bill - most of which are for pet projects and special interest groups key to a congressman's given constituency, just not the gay one. It is sad that we can allow open discrimination to exist in the contry be it from blatant gay-bashing to approved exclusionary tactics by our representatives in Washington.
Posted by: Todd | Jun 19, 2006 3:29:04 PM
Why is this an issue? I honestly think it is time for a referendum vote on the whole gay/lesbian thing. Let the people decide whether to allow the "marriages". Let the people decide how they want to spend their tax dollars. Enough secrecy in government. Put it all to a vote, and put it all to bed.
Posted by: Bill | Jun 21, 2006 6:40:55 PM
If you have a good memory you will remember the people did VOTE for prop 22 - and stop being so super sentitive the whole world not made up of gay or not gay decisions. The people should not have to pay extra taxes for Special groups exculsive uses-not open to everyone--that's why we already have community center in every city!! DUH
Posted by: dorothy | Jun 22, 2006 12:02:31 AM
Post a comment
