[xyupi]

"For a nonbinding resolution, Sen. Jim DeMint’s (R-S.C.) proposal that Republican senators give up earmarks in the 112th Congress is generating a lot of controversy. Politico reports that Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has been busy expressing his concerns with the idea in public and lobbying quietly to defeat the measure behind closed doors, risking open conflict with the Tea Party in the process.

Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), for one, is siding with McConnell. “They should quit worrying about this phony issue,” he told Politico.“The ban doesn’t accomplish anything.”

But if the issue is so insignificant, others on the right are wondering why McConnell is risking a fight over it so soon after the election of six new Republican senators, many of whom ran on an explicitly anti-earmark platform."

http://washingtonindependent.com/103...-vote-heats-up

"This debate doesn't save any money, which is why it's kind of exasperating to some of us who really want to cut spending and get the federal government's discretionary accounts under control,” McConnell said on CBS’ “Face the Nation”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/44888.html

Exactly how McConnell can see earmarks as anything less than THE Reason the government can so easily waste money!? Earmarks allow people to add things on to bill, that are not their own, which can be completely unrelated to the bill itself. It forces people to have to vote for things they don't want, in order to get what they do. A bill about a real political issue should not be held back because it's tied to a thousand dollar stadium, for one town.


Mitch McConnell awkwardly attempts to explain his pro earmark stance.

Everyone from staunch Conservatives like Marco Rubio, to moderates like John McCain are against earmarks, the only reason McConnell is against banning them, is because he takes so much advantage of them! The Tea Party would like them gone, and I couldn't agree more with them.


"The practice of earmarks in Congress is really one that lends itself to sort of corruption. It allows for all sorts of dealmaking like what they did with Obamacare to get it passed. But more insidious about it is the fact that these projects are funded without any public oversight, without the attention they deserve." - Marco Rubio

It's time to remove earmarks from the forever, fighting against this fact is going to show the Republican party who really won the Mid terms. I am hoping this will be a wake up call to people like McConnell that the American people are tired of being ignored!

[UHlVExs7]

Good post, at last.

[Hinigyday]

Good post, at last.

I think everyone can agree on this one.

[Nicihntm]

Earmarks are bad because they're not transparent, and they benefit tenured congressmen. They need to devise a more transparent process for earmarks, put them in bills at inception, make the transparent and open them to public scrutiny and congressional over site during debate of a bill, lastly they should be able to strike earmarks from bills in final debate.

[connandoilee]

Earmarks are bad because they're not transparent, and they benefit tenured congressmen. They need to devise a more transparent process for earmarks, put them in bills at inception, make the transparent and open them to public scrutiny and congressional over site during debate of a bill, lastly they should be able to strike earmarks from bills in final debate.

Why not just get rid of them altogether? If something is a good idea it can pass as it's own bill, by it's own merit.

[SzefciuCba]

Could someone explain to me how earmarks are bad? It just sounds like a negative condontation for public spending.

Ohnoes! Earmarks might go to curing cancer, supporting our troops, or helping little timmy get his lung transplant! SOCIALISM!!!

[seooptiman]

Why not just get rid of them altogether? If something is a good idea it can pass as it's own bill, by it's own merit.

We can't get 10% of the bills in committee through now. If the earmark is appropriate to the bill, it should be ok, it's when it has NOTHING to do with the bill it starts to get fucked up. They should just put them in at the start so everyone knows and can debate it, remove the secret backroom part of it.

[Qvqnubpj]

Could someone explain to me how earmarks are bad? It just sounds like a negative condontation for public spending.

Ohnoes! Earmarks might go to curing cancer, supporting our troops, or helping little timmy get his lung transplant! SOCIALISM!!!

Earmarks in their current form are bad because it gives too much leverage for politicians with tenure to sneak through appropriations to people that donate money to them, or pushing pork back home. The earmarks are usualy put on the bill after it's voted on, so most don't know they're voting for them because during debate, they aren't on the bill.

[Preegovesem]

We can't get 10% of the bills in committee through now.

That's because 90% of the bills are terrible.

[textarchive]

That's because 90% of the bills are terrible.

Remove earmarks and you put all federal spending at the descretion of the Executives, and agency heads.

[diutuartina]

Remove earmarks and you put all federal spending at the descretion of the Executives, and agency heads.

No, you could still spend money, it would just have to be a direct result of the original bill, instead of an add in later on.

I think we basically agree on this one. I would be very happy if they enacted the rules you are saying for earmarks, I just don't trust politicians to use earmarks correctly, so I think we should remove them completely, and just keep it simple.

[Tyncneiff]

RETIRE, JIM.

[CHyLmxDr]

I am very surprised to find out that Ron Paul is in favor of earmarks.

Paul said "It is the responsibility of the Congress to earmark. That's our job," Rep. Paul said. "We're supposed to tell the people how we're spending the money. Not to just deliver it in the lump sum to the executive branch and let them deal with it."

This is proof that all senators have become addicted to this practice.

[cypedembeda]

I am very surprised to find out that Ron Paul is in favor of earmarks.

Paul said "It is the responsibility of the Congress to earmark. That's our job," Rep. Paul said. "We're supposed to tell the people how we're spending the money. Not to just deliver it in the lump sum to the executive branch and let them deal with it."

This is proof that all senators have become addicted to this practice.

I think he agrees with the idea, not necessarily the process, I hope.

This is the classic study however. If congress has such a low approval rating, how do these guys keep getting re-elected? Because while people hate congress, they love their congressman because of the money they bring back to the state.

[johnuioyer]

I think he agrees with the idea, not necessarily the process, I hope.

This is the classic study however. If congress has such a low approval rating, how do these guys keep getting re-elected? Because while people hate congress, they love their congressman because of the money they bring back to the state.

I disagree with you there, what you said is true, but I think the reason they keep getting reelected is because there is no alternative. There is no way someone planning to do the right thing would ever be allowed to run for the Senate in the first place, by the two parties who control it.

[PyncGyncliacy]

I disagree with you there, what you said is true, but I think the reason they keep getting reelected is because there is no alternative. There is no way someone planning to do the right thing would ever be allowed to run for the Senate in the first place, by the two parties who control it.

And even if they did, they'd be impotent. What is a third party person going to do with no seniority in congress? What committee will he chair, what leadership will he be allowed? He'll be DUCK PONDED!

[orapope]

And even if they did, they'd be impotent. What is a third party person going to do with no seniority in congress? What committee will he chair, what leadership will he be allowed? He'll be DUCK PONDED!

Very true, and lets go further than that! Lets say we got so pissed off that we decided to vote all third party members into the Senate, I believe the Government would break the voting process to prevent this. There is absolutely no way the American people are going to get their way with this one. The ruling class is flexing their muscles and telling us that they are in charge, and therefore have the final say on everything.

[OWDavid]

McConnell wants to keep earmarks while OBAMA wants to get rid of them...

McConnell has just put himself lower than the dictator in chief!

[Attaniuri]

I disagree with you there, what you said is true, but I think the reason they keep getting reelected is because there is no alternative. There is no way someone planning to do the right thing would ever be allowed to run for the Senate in the first place, by the JEW parties who control it.

Fixed it fer ya.

[Lerpenoaneway]

Fixed it fer ya.

Ha Ha.