[slimfifa]

NY Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/20/us...er=rss&emc=rss

Freshman House Republicans who rode a wave of voter discontent into office last year vowed to stop out-of-control spending, but that has not stopped several of them from quietly trying to funnel millions of federal dollars into projects back home.

They have pushed for dozens of projects in their districts, including military programs opposed by the president, replenishing beach sand lost to erosion, a $700 million bridge in Minnesota and a harbor dredging project in Charleston, S.C. Some of their projects were once earmarks, political shorthand for pet projects penciled into spending bills, which Republicans banned when they took over the House.

...

Lawmakers like Representative Tim Scott, Republican of South Carolina, who advocated for the harbor dredging project with other members of the South Carolina delegation, insist their requests are neither earmarks nor wasteful. “This was a merit-based project that was open and transparent,” said Mr. Scott, who helped secure $150,000 for the first phase of a harbor-deepening project in Charleston, his hometown. The project is expected eventually to cost as much as $300 million. Mr. Scott, a favorite of the Tea Party movement, said he is opposed to earmarks and that dredging the port was in the national interest because it would accommodate bigger cargo ships and help create trade opportunities and jobs.

The Obama administration did not agree and did not include the project in the Army Corps of Engineers budget. As a result Mr. Scott and Senator Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican, who tried to earmark financing for the project last year, threatened in April at a news conference in Charleston to tie up the government unless the project was approved. Mr. Graham also pledged to hold up President Obama’s nominees in the Senate. After the threat by Mr. Graham and lobbying by Mr. Scott and other members of South Carolina’s Congressional delegation, the corps agreed to pay for the dredging.

...

Steven M. Palazzo, a Mississippi freshman, told voters that he favored banning earmarks, saying it would “help restore the people’s faith in their government.”

But once in office, Mr. Palazzo voted with other Republicans to slash millions of dollars from the military bill, only to add an amendment later to restore the money. Mr. Palazzo’s amendment put back about $150 million for a combat ship that would be built at Ingalls Shipbuilding in his Pascagoula district. He also secured $10 million to buy land for training facilities for the Army National Guard, and $19.9 million for the ship’s preliminary design and feasibility studies. Several of these programs were earmarks of Mr. Palazzo’s Democratic predecessor.

[rNr5Di3S]

I'm not sure some of these people can even spell the word "hypocrisy."

[Zdfjpbth]

I don't know that they teach that word in home-school curricula. Or curricula, for that matter.

[Obsententicab]

I'm sure they do, in the unit on the Democratic Party, particularly in the Obama chapter.

[Longwow]

The frustrating part is, their constituents probably don't see the hypocrisy either. As long as they're benefiting, their representative is helping the community, but when the money goes to someone else it's "wasteful." People are generally selfish, and that's probably not going to change.

[Jifyicyfuhpop]

Well, that's the conundrum of the Tea Party protests during the health care debate. Many of them were on Medicare while holding signs warning of the what would happen if the government administered their health care (Medicare is a government-run system) or worse, paid for by taxpayers and then provided by the government to the people (Medicare is exactly that) because that would be "Socialism." The poor, confused people were so misinformed by the GOP and Fox News that they were actually protesting against their own health care plan.