Senate Votes to Keep Earmarks; Eight GOP Senators Join Democratic Majority (Update: GOP ‘Young Gun’ Reacts)
I have a great deal of respect for Sen. Inhofe, especially for his history of battling with the EPA and the global warming doom mongers, but on earmarks he’s unpersuasive. He is right that earmarks themselves amount to just a small percentage of the overall federal budget. But I think he’s understating their overall impact. Earmarks have a way of obtaining votes for legislation that might not otherwise pass, and in turn commit dollars that probably wouldn’t get spent otherwise. Say a congressman has been trying to get a few million dollars in federal funds for some project in his district, but hasn’t been able to make that happen on its own merits, for the simple reason that congressman outside that district don’t see the need for their own constituents to pay for that project. Along comes the chairman of thus-and-such committee with a multi-billion dollar piece of legislation that’s completely disconnected from the congressman’s pet project, and which the congressman opposes on principle. But the chairman needs the congressman’s vote and the congressman wants to attach his project to something, anything, that gets passed, so the horse trading over the bad multi-billion dollar legislation begins. And pretty soon the few million dollar project that the congressman wants buys his vote on massive legislation that he otherwise opposes. So here we have two projects that get through the sausage factory and the taxpayers get stuck with the tab even though, on their own merits, both projects would have and probably should have failed.
That’s the kind of daily, year in and year out corruption that earmarks enable on bill after bill after bill, exploding the debt and imperiling the nation. And that’s why they need to go.
Here’s the thing that all of these GOP senators and the rest of the caucus in both houses need to keep in mind. The midterms showed definitively that the electorate is in a fighting mood. That hasn’t abated since Election Day; if anything, it’s increasing. If the midterms sent a message to Obama that his policies and tactics are out of kilter and offensive to the majority of Americans, the earmark vote was a chance to show that the Republicans have gotten the message that they’re with the people. Most Republicans either were already there or got that message, and even a few Democrats got there. But eight Republicans didn’t.
So here’s a message for them from the folks: We’re paying attention.
Update: Rep-elect Bill Flores (TX-17), who comes in with the freshman class in January and is one of the NRCC’s “Young Guns” of 2010, tells PJM today that that the earmark system will be smashed. I just received this statement from Flores’ camp:
The Democratic majority in the Senate has once again shown that they are out of touch with the will of the American people. The earmark process is broken and must be fully dismantled to stop vote trading, corruption, and deficit spending which plagues this Congress.
Some people might need to take a deep breath and think before doing something that will cause a lot of harm. The Republicans are still the only game in town. Our political system is premised on the Electoral College. We cannot abandon the GOP and seek a third party alternative. Anger towards weak kneed Republican legislators must be be translated into action in the primaries and conventions.
Maybe you’re talking to the wrong crowd. By actions like these the GOP are de-facto making it’self the “3rd party”. What good is the only game in town if it’s always rigged in favor of the house?
Lessor of two evils doesn’t cut it anymore, if these fools don’t see that by now show them the door.
The game is not rigged! We are paying the price of indifference. Conservatives have a sad reputation for not getting involved in the mechanics of the Republican Party. By the way, that has changed in most of the South. The GOP now controls the state governments. In Texas Democrats, for instance, are definitely on the outside looking in.
The game certainly is rigged, every election the GOP trots out the “next in line” guy who’s paid his dues.
And now you are the one telling conservatives to be indifferent as GOP senators dirty their hands just like the socialists. Well, we aren’t going to be “indifferent” anymore.
If the 17th Amendment were repealed most of our problems would go away.
Ditto;Just Al.Its Time To Seperate The Wheat From The Chaf,The Weeds From The Garden,Nothing Grows Or Prospers Under The Tree Of Life,Until We Do;We Need To Reclaim The(CONSERVATIVE)Republican Party From The Liberals(TROJAN HORSES)Who Stole It,Raped,And Pillaged It.And Left The American(Taxpayer)Citizen,To Pay The Damages.Jimmy Joe/The Liarfryer”
Looks like McCain got away for another FOUR LONG YEARS
Senators aren’t chosen by the Electoral College. People can easily vote for a third party conservative senator (and I am on record as not being a fan of third parties from way back) and not involve the Electoral College in any way, shape, manner, or form.
These eight, or the six (or maybe seven, if Bennett tries to regain his seat) that might be on the ballot in 2012, are begging to be defeated, either in the primary or the general.
Well, you can count on me voting for Inhofe again. Why disarm yourself? Earmarks are just a weapon much like a machine gun. One is used in politics and other is used in a different kind of war.
Earmarks, like a machine gun, can be used by the forces of good as well as those of evil. Earmarks can just as easily be used to secure(bribe) votes to cut spending as well as raise it.
There are those who have their heads in the clouds thinking that the nature of Man is somehow changed… those people would foolishly, and unilaterally disarm us conservative/libertarians.
Personally, I am proud of my Senator standing up to such nonsense.
Good for you. . . but it isn’t just your money, and it isn’t the way the framers meant for our money to be spent. Hanging onto corruption because it is effective is still hanging onto corruption.
Mmmmmmmmmm, no. Tea Partiers (like myself) seek clarity and transparency. Earmarks are inherently cloak-room, elitist, modus operandi. I realize that sometimes Republican conservatives can benefit by the option, but it is not enough to make up for all the pork-barralists who killing this nation.
Earmarks may be a weapon, but it is one that is inferior to alternatives. The real problem is that the regular process of spending is so dysfunctional that people go for the quick and dirty earmark shortcut. That’s got to stop.
The real problem is that earmarks are used to pay off political contributions which are used to buy off those who might otherwise oppose spending–the gateway drug as Tom Coburn has said.
The real problem is corruption, and if you’re proud of the fact that your boy is blind to that dynamic, then YOU are part of the problem.
Ahh, yes… we must keep up the same practices that got us into this horrible fiscal trouble, because they’re… well… they’re what we’ve always done!
That’s high principle for ya.
Unfortunately, Fantom, your senator isn’t using his own “ammo” to fire his weapon. He’s using taxpayer money from citizens across the 50 states: to Hell with by swine like him, and with his equally swinish supportive constituents, who think they have the right to hijack our substance in causes noble, base, or indifferent. In short, sir, get bent.
‘Get Bent’… LOL
There is no more noble tea party idea than the full embrace of the nature of man. I know, I am a tea partier… but not a head in the clouds fool.
Get bent indeed.
On a different note, the replies were milder than the ” kneejerk” reflexive expected of those who seem to think they have found the “holy grail” … THE ANSWER to all our problems. Kudos to you who could engage with reason… not ad hominem. To you folk I reply,
High principals, now there is a thought. What does it mean? In 1776 the British kept to ‘high principal’ … marching rank and file to battle, whilst our forefathers cut their officers down with accurate fire from a concealed position. High principals, hmmmnnn.. even in Camelot there was only one (1) Lancelot. And we know how that turned out.
Nay, adhering to the “Nature of Man” is the only realistic application I see of a ‘High Principal”. Our Forefathers engaged in it, the Romans did so too. It is how we humans do things… and it is only corruption when it is hidden.
Put it in the open, count the vote of those outraged… like with the Louisiana Purchase. But what we all consider earmarks are just the nature of man in public business. When you come to embrace that, you embrace a truth.
And , in my book, “Truth” in mans nature is the Highest Principal of all.
Ah, but how to refrain from ad hominem when the “homo” in question all but wears a sandwich board around his neck that proclaims “AD ME”! It’s more than the “nature of man,” I think you called it, can refrain from.
And I had no idea that the British troops you allude to lost in combat by not being cynical and corrupt enough–must send my old history professor a stern note about leaving me so ignorant. Nor was I aware that it stops being corruption when you let everyone SEE you jamming your greasy mitt into the till.
But I’ll meekly venture one historical quibble: I think you have the Romans confused with the Greeks, who were famous for shameless peculation and were struck by the Roman officials who could be trusted with large sums of money, simply because the latter had given their word. I suppose that average Greeks might have considered them prigs who failed to give the “nature of man” its due. In between bouts of wondering exactly how they had been surpassed and succeeded.
Hey, Fantom… if you’re truly a Tea Partier, as you say, you should be aware of the Heritage Foundation. Here’s a short piece from them about the hidden costs of earmarking.
“In 1776 the British kept to ‘high principal’ … marching rank and file to battle, whilst our forefathers cut their officers down with accurate fire from a concealed position.”
Fantom, that’s a myth…that doesn’t hold up under scrutiny. There were only 2 battles of importance where the American forces “fought from behind rocks and trees”. The first of course being Lexington/Concord, and the 2nd being Kings Mountain.
The reality is that American forces drilled hard to fight in the “european” manner just like the British. Furthermore, following the winter at Valley Forge, wherein “Baron” von Steuben trained the core of the Main Army to fight just like the British. Afterward, while we still lost battles, it was mostly through inept leadership in the middle (Washington’s Lt’s—i.e. Charles Lee, Gates, etc).
But back to the matter at hand. Earmarks are a symptom of what is wrong in Washington and must be eliminated. Any pay off political supporters and contributors in an extra-constitutional manner. Be that as it may, using other people’s money to reward your supports is wrong and must be stopped. I suspect that those GOP Senators who voted FOR continuation of earmarks will end up seeing a strong challenge in their next election.
Voters are watching:
http://thevailspot.blogspot.com/2010/11/gop-were-watching-you.html
Wrong!
the GOP seems to be working very hard at making itself a third party.
political parties have died out before in this country and they can again.
Third party candidates usually only help Democrats win elections! As matter of fact, leftists love finding a “pure” conservative to run such a race. They have literally funded a number of such well meaning but destructive individuals. The ruinous Health Care bill would have never passed had it not been for third party candidates. Third party presidential candidates can syphon off enough votes to guarantee a Democratic Party victory. Remember a guy named Ross Perot?
Why is anyone talking seriously about third party options? This is utterly absurd. Most of the Southern states have now virtually ridden the Democrats out on a rail. You people in the other states should do likewise.
Here here!!!
Where? Where?
Well, David, wasn’t it You who brought up third party here? Yes everyone remembers Ross Perot, who only came to the forefront because the GOP incumbent was an elitist who raised taxes, and didn’t finish the job in Iraq. The “third party” candidates in the mid terms were the old guard RINO’s who lost the primaries, yet the good ole’ boy network still gives the “third party” candidate from Alaska her seniority.
This isn’t a game, the “we’re slightly better than them” crowd had better learn it, and so should their supporters. If it takes another term of His “O”lliness to convince them then so be it.
As Lincoln said, “I prefer my despotism pure. . . without the base alloy of hypocrisy.” If your heroes in the GOP want to stay in power they are going to have to earn it, every day, every vote, no more hiding behind the “lessor evil” defense.
Ditto Again;Just Al.But “Know Them By Their Fruits”Those Who Constantly Say;”We Need A Bigger Party,Not A Pure Party”Which Is Political Spin For Character,Honor,Truth,And The Constitution Doesn’t Matter,Only Opinion Polls.These Are The Very One’s Abe Lincoln,And Our Founders Warned Us To Weed Out.They Are About Eye On The Prize,For Money,Power,Perks,Popularity,Votes,And Legacy.Not Duty To Country.They Are Status Quo Social Liberals,Inspite Their Record,And Promises For Fiscal Conservative Economics.Their Immoral,And Unethical Natures.Will Still Prop-Up And Allow Marxist Communist Liberalism To Reign Supreme Over Our Country
Then I’ll bet you’ll be working yourself blind to make sure the Establsihment Republicans don’t make themselves so hateful that their constituents see schism as reasonable… right?
You HAVE already called Dick Lugar’s officed and complained that he’s working to make a 3rd Party run inevitable… right?
Sure, I’ll take a “weak-kneed” (or, more specifically, “pork-minded”) Republican over a wild-eyed-pinko Democrat as a rule of thumb. BUT, I would much rather have a strong conservative option in the primary. I have been fed up with Dick Lugar for, well, years and years, and I pray that Indiana will toss this dinosaur out in the next election.
You pretty much just paraphrased the Buckley Rule. I don’t have the exact wording, but it’s essentially “vote for the most conservative candidate who could win.”
I agree. Dick Lugar used to be both smart and reasonably conservative, but that was many, many years ago. I recently read a column that said Sen. Lugar doesn’t fear the Tea Party and is confident he’ll be re-elected in ’12 (apparently he won 70% of the vote in the last election). If SOMEONE in Indiana isn’t looking for an electable conservative to challenge Lugar in the primary (and NOT 6 conservatives to challenge him, either, as that virtually guarantees his surviving the challenge), then we deserve his RINO presence for 6 more years (or until he “dies with his boots on”).
Why do these old men not tire??? Must be that the job’s just not that difficult.
I would like to hear a “public explanation” from the senators in question.
Bob Bennett is out of office due these type votes.
This vote makes us want to align closer with the tea party backed candidates and donate/work more for them in the near future.
If the people demand, things will be changed. Again, these senators owe us a public explanation,
I have a check in hand to contribute to the campaign of the conservative who will challenge Mr. Lugar in the primary.
these people need to be made aware of how the public is viewing/reacting to their vote.
GOP at home needs to make some NOISE!!!!!! to the voters!!
‘agree with lincoln (4) also.
Pence! Pence! Pence! Pence!
Jeanette;Right On,Right On,Right On;
Let the primary challengers to the disreputable 8 begin their campaigns.
The 8, indeed all Republicans were warned, and they have to pay for not heeding the warning.
Inhofe’s argument in favor of retaining earmark power boils down to this:
Why? Because instead of reducing the federal budget, it will empower Obama administration bureaucrats to spend the funds members of Congress would have sent home through earmarks. Also, last year’s earmarks accounted for 1.5% of discretionary spending. Where’s the focus on the other 98.5%? Earmarks are nothing more than a distraction from the real spending and debt crisis facing our nation.
Cochran’s and Shelby’s positions amount to the same logic. All three are champion earmarkers.”
Excusing theft by pointing to a bigger thief isn’t much of a defense. The focus on the “other 98.5%” is what these clowns were elected to achieve, focus and eliminate, not excuse and imitate. I was a big fan of Inhofe till this, he lost a lot more than he can recover over this one stupid position.
and angle, o’donnell, and miller were insufficient how?
a d. lincoln just surmised— time to put some heat on the wishywashies
Can Senators be recalled? That seems to be the quickest option of dealing with the disreputable 8.
Plus, even though earmarks are, as some purport, roughly 1% of spending, belt tightening has to begin somewhere.
Why don’t they look North to Ottawa turning down a spending request from Edmonton regarding bidding for the 2017 World’s Fair (which will be the 150th anniversary of Confederation). Given the backing Edmonton gave the current government, it would be akin to Washington turning down a request for money from the most Republican county.
Senators can be recalled in 18 states: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, North Dakota, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington and Wisconsin.
there is not one state that will make the effort no matter what these people do. It takes time and initiative. People just like to complain.
An Alternative Answer;David W.Lincoln Is For The Next Congress.To Enact Legislation To;Dance With The One’s Who Brought You,Not With The One’s Who Bought You Act;Anyone Who Runs Against The Issues They Ran On.Who Seeks To Switch Parties,Or Caucaus,Before The Next Election,With Any Other Than The Party,And Caucaus,They Swore An Oath To Represent.And Against The Voters,Laws,And U.S.Constitution,Declaration For Independence,And The Bill Of Rights.They Swore To Protect,And Defend,Against All Foreign Invaders,And Enemies Foreign,And Domestic.They Must Immediately Step Down.Be Replaced,By The State Delagates Of That Party,Until The Next Voting Election.While The Violator Accused Faces Charges From Perjury,For Lying Under Oath,And Whatever Other Charges,That Can Be Pursued.Such As Aiding,And Abeiting Fugitives From Justice,Enemies Foreign,And Domestic,Embezzlement,Extortion,Ponzi’Schemes Etc;The Same Action Would Be Taken Against Any Of Us Guilty Of The Same.Except If You Are A Liberal,A fugitive From Justice(Illegal Alien)Or A Terrorist.
“Earmarks are nothing more than a distraction from the real spending and debt crisis facing our nation.”
Yes. Yes. We must join forces with Obama, Limbaugh and Levine to cut the federal government in half.
Over paid, incompetent creeps.
That will fix everything…
what are you talking about? obama, limbaugh, levine…???
meltdown
This isn’t an isolated group of eight weak-kneed senators. If those eight changed their minds, there would be other Republicans to vote against the ban. This is because of the “year in and year out corruption that earmarks enable”. This type of corruption is widespread and not limited to any political party. The only reason more Republicans didn’t vote against the ban is that they knew the Democrats would do their dirty work for them.
The hack pols of America’s Otherparty are a couple of degrees hackier than Lieberals and Demonocrats ever need to be. The latter do not start by proclaiming themselves fourth- or fifth-raters who cannot flourish in the Secret Sector, as every proper selfservative plainly ought to.
But the selfservative hacks’ plight is worse still, since as Fedguv Senators or Congresscritters, they get their paws on a certain amount of radically unrepublicaniac Power. This power they are not just tempted to use, but in effect MUST use, because if they did not, even Wally Wombschool an’ Cindy from Wasilla would work out sooner or later that the Otherpartisans are just pretendin’ to be “an American political party” (in the same sense that General Jackson’s donkeys are one, that is — not to quibble about words, please.)
There would be no point in VOTIN’ for such neoheroes, once their game was thoroughly exposed.
I suppose the thing to do would be take out an annual subscription, or whatever it is that one does with the CCUSA. On the other hand, we already have one CCUSA and do not obviously need a second.
So I guess that (in strict logic) all the epigones of Grant an’ McKinley an’ Hoover includin’ the whole House of Taft might as well just toss themselves in the Potomac an’ get it over with.
Happy days.
“Also, last year’s earmarks accounted for 1.5% of discretionary spending. Where’s the focus on the other 98.5%? Earmarks are nothing more than a distraction from the real spending and debt crisis facing our nation.”
I like how politicians in Washington consider billions of dollars as merely chump change and should be spent regardless of whether or not the money needs to be spent. What’s 1.5% of discretionary spending when it translates into billions of dollars, right? This is why there is a very real possibility of a serious third party being created. With logic like this on the parts of both Democrats and Republicans, you can see why people are so angry. They really think it’s their money and that it doesn’t belong to us. That’s why if this next Congress doesn’t really cut out the pork spending, there will be a new third party starting in 2012 election.
Hey, I slipped only 3 g of potassium cyanide—I thought it was sugar, honestly—into the senator’s chocolate! Where’s the focus on the other 197 grams of yummy goodness?
My beef is, earmarks are a bribe.
If you cannot vote for something on merit, what the hell good are you?
they pass lousy bills just to get a few goodies on the side.
DWL,
Only 6. Remember, two were not re-elected.
Point taken, Don. The ethically sickly six had better update their resumes,
because given what is taking place over in Europe, and Dennis Gartman forecasting a Northern Euro and a Southern Euro, if the US gets its act in shape in a hurry, it is in the cat bird seat regarding money flowing from Europe to North America.
I agree. There ought to be no such thing as an animal like the European Union. It has taken away the individual identity of great nations. It has spread corruption wider than the Democratic party could have hoped for. I went to Europe before the transition,and after the operation.The difference is astounding,people want to hang onto their roots but the union says NO. Nowadays people can travel across borders without papers(just like southern America)and with them go criminals and terrorists.I think the idea was great but the proof is in the pudding.They must disband and become their own peoples again to enable PRIDE for which they will fiercely fight.
Inhofe takes the wrong side of the coin – why worry about the 1.5%? What we, the public, see is the tip of a spear of corruption – the earmarks are repulsive personal uses of tax payer monies in each instance and regardless of how small the amount. Then – how and why should we trust them on bigger issus?
The Earmark pork is just a blaring example of the Lame Duck 111th Congress which will exist until January; therefore, the 112th Congress may have better results with the earmark ban than the horrible 111th Congress which usurped in ObamaCare, Porkulus, & more power grabs.
I ain’t holding my breath. 6 of those 8 will be back for the 112th Congress.
Looks like 8 Republicans that are volunteering to retire/or be retired in their next election.
“Because instead of reducing the federal budget, it will empower Obama administration bureaucrats to spend the funds members of Congress would have sent home through earmarks.” I’ve heard this argument but have no idea what the hell they are talking about. If the President can just write in appropriations how does your adding pork to the bill stop him? My understanding is Congress writes the bill, how can Obama spend the money?
Earmarks is how Career Politicians buy the votes back home. They bring the money back to their cronies in their districts/States, enriching them and getting their vigorish, then sell it to the voters as bringing home the bacon. They do not want to end it, because it is how they buy votes.
It’s the corruption, stupid.
No one said this would be easy. It is not like flipping a lightswitch.
“No one said this would be easy. It is not like flipping a lightswitch.”
Hmm, really? Now THAT is change you can believe in.
Voinovich has disappointed too many times. Glad he’s gone, almost.
He doesn’t speak for this Ohioan/Slovenian
sure might only be 1.5 discretionary spending but this was a perfect opportunity to demonstrate principles
now, we get the 7/8 “brave and courageous” libs that voted against earmarks
who still managed to vote on everything that is crippling our country
and the 7/8 repubs that are essentially libs
how in the hell are we going to demolish the EPA, NEA, Dept of ed, Dept of energy, et al… when we have all these wuss-a-holics?
i guess the only positive is the amount of scrutiny on every single issue that gets voted on in congress and the names of all these people that are going to get spammed via e-mails and phone calls from the citizenry— 2 more years of this is bound to have some good effect
Yes, earmarks are only 1.5% of Discretionary Spending, but that 1.5% greases the skids for another 30% of the spending that needs to be halted.
Earmarks are the bribes for votes on bills that should never see the light of day, to get that support for overspending that needs to be halted.
So while the price is 1.5% the cost is 30%.
And Alaskans can point with pride to the RINO big spender they just sent back to the senate. I hope they are all very happy now.
Hey, Alaska, look at California, that’s your future!
I saw a video, procured by Joe Miller and shown on, I believe, Mike Huckabee’s show, where a contractor stood in the back of a pickup truck addressing a multitude of what appeared to be Alaskan construction workers. He pointed out that Lisa was on the all-important appropriations committee (where she’s able to direct lots o’ funds to Alaska), Joe Miller would be unlikely to achieve that position, and therefore, unless we all want to be unemployed, we’ll write in Lisa Murkowsky’s name. He said, “I’m not telling you who to vote for, but in case you want to write in her name, here’s some cards….”
Pork? He!! yes! And if the $$ come from the lower 48, Alaska need not join California. Perfect logic, no? Explain why Lisa voted against any bill that banks earmarks? Uh, I suspect so.
The problem is bigger than Alaska, the national GOP said in advance they would leave the RINO crook on the comittee before the election, thereby sabotaging the official GOP candidate.
A fish rots from the head. That is the “nature” of fish. . . and of some “men”.
they still haven’t learned from this last election.It will probably take two or three more election cycles to rid ourselves of these types. The entire political system reeks from the stench of this discretionary spending of our tax dollar.Graft is graft, i.e. Charlie Rangel. In their eyes, they are above and beyond reproach. Voting them out of office will teach them accountability.
Are earmarks peer reviewed or they slipped in without scrutiny? What are the limits defining earmarks? Are we to expect congress to act in the best interest of the nation?
The main issue, Congress, is the earmarks that are in the defense budget and our security budget. This started in 1996 and it siphons money from O&M and R&D budgets that have played by the rules and done their homework in deciding what projects and systems should be supported.
\
Let these pork barrel senators earmark the FHA and DoT budgets to death but stop taking money from the troops for ridiculous crap like studying the viability of macadamia nuts in MREs (Sen. Inouye) or the late Ted Stevens’ hibernation genomics research or the late John Murtha’s National Institute of Drug Justice (funded inexplicably by DoD) and his Murtha Industrial Park of Pork.
Earmarks are not “peer-reviewed” in the traditional sense. They have to go through multiple committees – for the defense budget they go through SAC and HAC (and two other major committees – can’t remember right now). Senators and Congressmen then do side deals with members from the committee to get their favorite project. People like Sen. Murkowski say this is small potatoes and that she knows best but they the means by which Senators and Congressmen wield influence into other areas of politics. We should put Rep Flake in charge of the HAC and push for Sen. Udall for the SAC.
Addition to my last – the other two major committees which deal in Defense pork are the SASC (Senate Armed Services Committee) and its counterpart the HASC.
Ok slow down.
This is the lame duck congress. Things will START to be different in January. You can’t burn down the GOP yet. Give the new blood a chance to shake thing up. In 2012 vote in more conservatives.
Hasn’t Inhofe ever heard of the “Broken Windows Theory” of criminology, which posits that preventing minor vandalism and theft (i.e., earmarks) may help to stop an escalation into more serious crime (i.e., the huge deficit spending Inhofe says he opposes)? Earmarks reflect the much too blase attitude Congress has towards responsible stewardship over the public’s money. When it comes to spending, Inhofe needs to take a lesson from billionaire Warren Buffett, who lives modestly and spends modestly despite his enormous personal wealth. Indeed, if Congress can’t or is unwilling to reach a consensus on the supposedly “minor” amount of spending represented by earmarks, what chance of success is there in finding common ground when it comes to reining in any of the major spending programs?
As for JimH’s remark that earmarks go through multiple committees, that can’t always be the case since a few years ago my former university department was on the receiving end of a very large earmark that was engineered (very deftly, I might add) by one of our Senators to come out of the DoD budget. Perhaps things have changed in the interim, but that earmark was not reviewed by any committee before it was imposed (unwillingly I’m led to understand) on the DoD.
Inhofe has been a good Conservative in most instances and deserved my vote. He’s not a terribly likable man like Senator Coburn. Inhofe has done yeoman’s work on exposing the global warming fraud and I thank him for that.
So here is what I think is happening knowing the man’s history. Inhofe is 76 years old, and it seems like I just cast my vote for him two years ago. So he will be 80 at the next election cycle and won’t seek reelection.
Inhofe will be replaced with another fire breathing conservative Republican Senator, as Oklahoma is now the reddest of red states. Liberals here are persona non grata and the one remaining Dimocrat is more conservative than many Republicans.
We don’t concern ourselves local liberalism anymore, and many of us work very hard to run the few remaining elsewhere – there’s bigger fish to fry like Obama and sharia law.
Senator Lugar will be 80 years old in ’12, when he will run for reelection. And he expects to win. And though there are people looking for a candidate to challenge him (for the first time ever), there’s a good chance he WILL win. Arghh.
I hope you’re not counting on Senator Inhofe’s age to stop him.
i am feeling the beginning of a citizenry take back of public offices
the thing that career politicians fear the most is a citizenry that realizes its own power…
every single vote in congress is going to get more and more people fired up and the results will make the tea party look like and old ladies tennis match…
One Item for One Bill for One VOTE . TEA are WATCHING ,, No 3rdX CHANCE .
Look what TEA did in 2010 ,, Two more Years ,, and TEA will OWN 2012 .
The 535 is the problem. They think themselves better than the citizenry and its up to the People to show them a comeuppance that they won’t soon forget. After a march on Washington by the People they would dare to vote for bribe money! Now there is a list of those who have shown themselves to be profligates in time of economic peril for this country. There is not one politician that can’t be replaced tomorrow by someone out of the phone book that couldn’t do as well or better job. The Constitution made a provision for term limits, I suggest we use this provision in the next election 2 years from now.
“Today, eight Republicans in the Senate joined the Democratic majority in voting to keep their earmark spending power.”
I wrote in a post a week or so ago that Murkowski was no longer a Republican. That she surrendered that relationship when she entered her ‘Write In’ candidacy.
Murkowski was elected by Democrats. Murkowski votes Democrat. Murkowski is no friend of conservatism.
Murkowski should be left to caucus with Democrats. Or alone.
Hey guys, lighten up. Let’s see what the 2011/12 Senate does about earmarks. Remember, it will have more tea-party members than the current one does.
The U.S. Senate doesn’t get it but will they be confronted in a public forum? NO! The media is too busy taking shots at Governor Christie and Governor Daniels for trying to balance their state budgets but because a child may be left behind or some 20 years of service union person may not get 80% of their pay for retiring at 55 the “lack of investigative” journalists are in an uproar. The election map shows that by surface area of the USA 95% of us know we need to change, the U.S. Senate including people like Murkowski and Start and Dream Act creator Lugar are lost to the prior generations of lobbyist paid politicians.
I’m no fan of the handful of GOP Senators who voted for earmarks, but too much attention is being focused on them and not enough on the 40+ dems who also voted for earmarks, without whom the bill would not have passed. The more conservatives and GOP beat up on the few holdouts, the more they actually help the liberal media keep the focus on a handful minor GOP infractions while ignoring the systeming Democrat corruption. The message needs to be not that “8 GOP senators voted against the earmark ban, it should be “a majority of GOP senators voted to end earmarks, a majority of of dem senators did not”. This fratricide is doing the Liberals’ work for them, perpetuating the myth that both parties are just the same, so why not vote for the nice guy giving us handouts insetead of the big meanie who insists we work for our money?
This entire Food Safety Bill is dead in the water as the senate cannot initiate appropriations of funds via taxes or other means, which is part of what the bill tries to do. It is dead on arrival in the house. I’m surprised at PJM for not making this known in their article.
As a Tea Party member from the start of the movement we need to remember this vote. We have taken the names of these GOP “Pork Barrel” lovers and they will be targeted in 2012, but first things first. We have to find and completely vett new conservative Tea Party candidates to replace these RINO’s. If no one can be found then these RINO’s need to be supported so we don’t have a fiasco like the Delaware situtation.
I am fed up with this crap that “It’s only (fill in the blank)% of the overall budget so it does not really matter”. Well ” The longest journey begins with a single step” or so said Confucious. If Congress won’t cut the small stuff how will they ever take on the big ones? Who ever said democracy was the greatest form of government?
With his vote against the earmark bill, Lugar either just committed political suicide….or he just gave Hoosier conservatives the finger – or both. Either one should doom him in 2012.
Evan Bayh, Indiana’s recently retired Democrat senator, saw the rising wave last year after his ridiculous vote for Obamacare and decided (correctly) that he couldn’t survive the 2010 political storm. It’s hard to see how Lugar could reason he will fare any better in the next primary.
Hoosiers need to hold the state GOP’s and Mr. Lugar’s feet to the fire in 2012 by supporting a legitimate candidate that represents fiscal sanity.
How could Lugar believe he’ll survive the next primary? Well, do you remember how young Barack was elected in 2008? That’s how. Almost NO ONE pays attention to–or even KNOWS–a candidate’s history.
Obviously the MSM won’t reveal RINOs’ (or Dems’) past records, but I’ve often marveled at the inadequacy of Republicans’ political ads to inform voters.
This is indeed a list of Republicans we don’t need in Congress. Inhofe’s excuse is lame and ludicrous, since there isn’t any money sitting around to spend. This exercise was for the purpose of reducing the amount that is spent, but now we know who doesn’t belong on the A-team. Take notes and remember.
Any representative – especially Republicans – who voted against the earmark ban should receive thousands of calls and e-mails denouncing their vote. Let them understand that we are a people intent on self-governance. Denounce them and then fund their opponents. This government is a reflection of us; it is our government, and we are responsible for the actions it takes.
I’m infuriated and frustrated. Like you, I’m grateful Voinovich is on the way out the door but would have welcomed (relished?) the opportunity to kick him to the curb, ESPECIALLY after his vote today.
This vote on earmarks has received disappointedly low coverage. The significance of it is the tone-deaf attitude of the Republican senators that voted against banning earmarks. It opens the new list of targets for the Tea Party in 2012 but only one political site has a piece with names and photos of this sorry bunch. See it at http://www.robbingamerica.com
I’m a Christian, and left the Republican Party six years ago due to the God-hating homosexual infusion (intrusion?) in that party. An active member of the Constitution Party (www.constitutionparty.com) since then, I also actively support Tea Partiers where there is no CP candidate on the ballot. Allen West in Florida is the kind of candidate I will consistently support!
Tea Partiers and Grassroots Conservatives are making a list and checking it twice.
Make no mistake about that.