Why Repubs are so afraid of EARMARKS -- and we shouldn't be.

[pnwmom]

As long as Obama is in office.

:)

Earmarks have a long history in good old-fashioned political compromise. Otherwise known as horse-trading. This is how Presidents in the past have built their winning coalitions, and Obama can, too.

For example, some of the Blue Dog Democrats and moderate Republicans live in conservative districts that may be largely opposed to the stimulus bill. For a couple percent of the budget, the bill can be written to include popular earmarks for those key districts -- keeping those constituents and their representatives happy.

Earmarks are still legal. Obama and the Democrats should feel free to use them, no matter how much screaming the Repubs will do.

[Vinca]

1. Except that Republicans aren't afraid of earmarks.

Oops, excuse me, I take that back. They only cram worthy items into bills that are not, technically, earmarks. So sez Jon Kyl.

[BlooInBloo]

2. They aren't afraid of them. They just use the issue to try to hammer Democrats....

Naturally, when they get them for themselves, they run back to their home state braying about how awesome they are for bringing home the money.

Most republicans are from welfare states (receive more in federal funding than they pay in taxes, per capita), so earmarks are the LAST thing they would *truly* be afraid of. If anything, it's exactly the opposite.

[AZ Criminal JD]

4. Is D.C. one of the "welfare" states?

Or because it is a district you leave it off your list even though it is number one in receiving federal funds.

[BlooInBloo]

11. Huh?

It's not "my" list.

And the measure you stated is clearly and explicitly NOT the measure I said.

EDIT: But yes, according to the measure and I stated, DC is #1 - and for rather obvious reasons.
Linky: http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2004/09/red_states_feed.html

8 of top 10 are red states.

[AZ Criminal JD]

13. What's the obvious reason?

You don't state it because it is the SAME reason as the federal spending in what you call the "red" states. It is money being spent on federal property, lands and infrastructure. If the federal government would give up their land the "welfare" as you call it would disappear.

[pnwmom]

6. They are afraid of them in Obama's hands.

Except when they aren't afraid.

:)

[AZ Criminal JD]

3. Obama opposed them in the campaign and he was right.

Your are wrong and are part of what is wrong with this country. When he signed the bill Obama said "The future demands that we operate in a different way than we have in the past," Obama declared. "So let there be no doubt: This piece of legislation must mark an end to the old way of doing business, and the beginning of a new era of responsibility and accountability that the American people have every right to expect and demand. . . . That's the government I promised. That's the government I intend to lead." He also said, "earmarks have been used as a vehicle for waste, and fraud, and abuse." Is Obama a Repub now?

[pnwmom]

7. No, but I hope he can be as successful as LBJ was in passing his civil rights

legislation. He used earmarks. And as successful in FDR in building his coalitions. He used earmarks, too.

I agree -- don't allow earmarks to be involved in waste, fraud, and abuse. But feel free to use non-wasteful earmarks -- earmarks for projects that are important to key constituencies -- in building a winning coalition.

[EFerrari]

8. He didn't oppose them. That's not accurate. He opposed

"waste, fraud and abuse" which is another matter.

Earmarks, while they have been somewhat misused, are a red herring. On the "waste, fraud and abuse scale" they aren't right up there with other forms of abuse like the gigantic boondoggle known as the Pentagon's budget. You know? It's a shiney distraction -- like all the hullabaloo about union wages for autoworkers coming out of the bailout while theses lying, thieving assholes at AIG are getting millions in bonuses.

[Naturyl]

10. Ah, the tired old "waste, fraud and abuse" sawhorse.

And we all know who is doing all the "waste, fraud, and abuse," right? Always individual recipients of government assistance with low means. NEVER corporations or Wall Street. When rich people waste, defraud, and abuse, we bail them out with enormous sums of taxpayer money.

[EFerrari]

15. You bet we do and it's bullshit. Agreed. n/t

[AZ Criminal JD]

12. He did oppose them in the campaign.

Not just for fraud, etc. You may be dismayed by that but it is true. What are you receiving?

[EFerrari]

14. Wrong - o. But thanks for the projection. lol

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8263891

[AZ Criminal JD]

20. "We are going to ban all earmarks" -- Obama

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28525113/ I love with someone puts a link to DU quoting a blog as a source.

[EFerrari]

22. LOL! First, we were talking about the campaign.

Second, you put down "blogs" like the one that broke the Downing Street Memos over Authorize Propaganda -- who sold you two George Bush "elections", WMD and Bruce Ivins.

I love that.

[AZ Criminal JD]

23. And I love your straw men

[EFerrari]

24. I don't think that term means what you think it means.

:)

[AZ Criminal JD]

25. You don't think, that is the problem

[EFerrari]

26. Thanks, daddy. It's not fallacious to point out you moved the goal posts

any more than it is a fallacy that you privilege the AP, lol, over better, more accurate sources.

But, whatever ups your pleasure.

[AZ Criminal JD]

27. So you are actually saying Obama did not make those statements?

It made up I know. Pass the tin foil.

[EFerrari]

28. I seriously hope you're not a practiciny attorney. n/t

[AZ Criminal JD]

29. My clients would disagree with you

[LiberalFighter]

18. An example of fraud is having a lighthouse museum in a district without an ocean or lake.

Where is this? NE Indiana.

[DJ13]

5. The overusage of earmarks by the Democrats would be a strategic mistake

The general populace has seen earmarks as the ultimate in wasteful spending long before the Democrats gained control of Congress.

In fact many new Democratic Congress members campaigned against the incumbent Republican in their contest by campaigning against the number of "wasteful" earmarks that Congress person was responsible for.

If the Democrats begin to abuse earmarks they run the risk of a voter backlash in the next election.

When you have a majority there should be less need to insert earmarks at the last minute.

The Republicans hope we use alot of earmarks, dont fall for that trap.

[terisan]

9. I prefer honest, and transparent government. Earmarks have grown enormously

in the past 2 decades and it is a sign of the the level of corruption in our government. More reps than Duke Cunningham need to be arrested, convicted, and jailed.

[iamthebandfanman]

16. "as long as obama is in office"

yup, thats the only reason republicans care about earmarks.

they never cared before.



i got a feeling that republicans and conservatives in general are just going to always say and do the opposite of obama or democrats just to get in the way and try to make policies fail for their own political benefit.

its really sad what the republican party has become.

no new ideas, and no clue what they stand for...
they only know what they dont stand for...which is anybody and everything that doesnt agree with them...and of course anything that cant further their ego and wallet..


at any rate, what people are failing to understand is that not all 'earmarks' are bad things... yah, there are some dumbshit ones that should be rooted out... but a holy crusade against any and all is kinda silly.

i mean, thats why those people were elected after all... to get a piece of the money to bring back to the locals...

just gotta make sure its for useful things and not silly things

[LiberalFighter]

17. WH should put out a graph showing how much in earmarks each state receives.

And focus additional work on those districts that representatives make a big stink about them by asking whether mayors and city councils are against the earmarks in their district.

[zulchzulu]

19. 6 of the top 10 senators with MOST earmarks are Republicans!

I know... facts... ewww...

Republican Sen. Thad Cochran of Mississippi tops the list, with $470 million in earmarks for himself and his colleagues. Next up is Cochran's seatmate—Republican Roger Wicker, hitting the scales at $390 million. Two Democrats—Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Tom Harkin of Iowa—come in at Nos. 3 and 4, before Republican David Vitter of Louisiana rounds out the top five. Of the top 10, six are Republicans.

http://www.usnews.com/blogs/john-farrell/2009/03/05/republican-hypocrisy-on-earmarks-ask-senators-cochran-wicker-and-vitter.html

[Phx_Dem]

21. They're not afraid of them, they love them! GOP had more

earmarks in the budet bill that they pissed and moaned about so much, than the Dems did!

The deal with Republicans is that they're HUGE HYPOCRITS, and liars.