Announcement

**insidethe8thpol** · 02-01-2008, 03:02 PM

(CBS) At age 90, Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia has been in the Senate longer than anybody else. And he's spent much of that time as head of the most powerful spending committee, with extraordinary control over earmarks - grants of your tax dollars without the normal public review, CBS News investigative correspondent Sharyl Attkisson reports for Follow the Money.

Byrd was the first senator to rack up a total of $1 billion in earmarks for his home state.

That was in 1999. Today he's past the $3 billion mark.

In his famously colorful Senate speeches, Byrd has repeatedly defended his earmarks.

"Hear me!! Some members have asserted that all, all, all earmarked funding is wasteful spending or an abuse of power," Byrd said. "Hogwash!"

And though tradition frowns on sitting members of Congress funding projects in their own name, they don't seem to have a problem with it in Byrd Country. West Virginia is full of ventures paid for with your tax dollars but named after him.

You can take the Robert C. Byrd Highway to the Robert C. Byrd Locks and Dam, explore space through the Robert C. Byrd Telescope, and work at the Robert C. Byrd Hilltop Office Complex.

In all, we found more than 40 projects bearing the Byrd name. Many of them sound perfectly reasonable, but the problem is other needy communities never get a crack at the money.

"He's unabashedly unapologetic about his earmarking," said watchdog Leslie Paige, who calls the earmarks "Byrd droppings."

"It's always been 'to the victor goes the spoils' with these earmarks," said Paige, who works for Citizens Against Government Waste. "Which means if you've got a member who sits on a powerful committee, you're gonna get the lion's share of that money."

But it's made Byrd a hero back home.

"Yeah man, you're lookin' at Big Daddy. Big Daddy!"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read more about Byrd's pet projects at Couric & Co.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's Byrd at the opening of the Robert C. Byrd Biotech Center, to which he generously gave $35.6 million of your tax dollars.

"Our effort to construct this facility and create a stronger foundation for the biotech industry here in West Virginia began where? With a visit to my office. Yeah. Yeah man," Byrd said. "A visit to my office, yeah."

Byrd wouldn't agree to an interview with CBS News.

His five decades in office have been money in the bank for West Virginians. So much so, they might consider some sort of monument in Byrd's name.

**insidethe8thpol** · 02-01-2008, 03:09 PM

According to the Chinese calendar, 2007 is the Year of the Pig. Fortunately for American taxpayers, it will be a smaller pig than usual. The 2007 Congressional Pig Book has not been this little since 1999, as only two of the 11 appropriations bills were enacted by Congress and the remaining nine were subject to a moratorium on earmarks. There are no indoor rainforests, National Peanut Festivals, mariachi music grants, or teapot museums to be found.

This year’s Pig Book breaks a run of seven consecutive years of record dollar amounts of pork, culminating in $29 billion in the 2006 Congressional Pig Book. This lesser barrel of pork can be attributed to the efforts of Senators Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) and Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), who prevented the enactment of nine appropriations bills in December, 2006, and the subsequent moratorium on earmarks announced and enforced by the House and Senate Appropriations Committee Chairmen David Obey (D-Wis.) and Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) in H. J. Res. 20, the bill that funds the government for the remainder of fiscal 2007.

There is still enough pork to cause concern for taxpayers, as 2,658 projects were stuffed into the Defense and Homeland Security Appropriations Acts, at a cost of $13.2 billion. Pork identified in the Pig Book since 1991 totals $252 billion. Defense had 2,618 projects, or 204 less than in 2006, at a cost of $10.8 billion, or 28 percent less than the $14.9 billion in 2006. For homeland security, the totals were $2.4 billion, or 10 percent less than the $2.7 billion in 2006, and 40 projects, or five more than in 2006.

While only two bills were enacted, the states of Alaska and Hawaii, which have been the top two states in pork per capita every year but one since 2000, were served more then their fair share of bacon by Senators Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) and Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii). In the defense appropriations bill alone, Alaska received $209,900,000, a 127 percent increase over the total of $92,425,000 in 2006.

Based on historical figures, the enactment of H. J. Res. 20 eliminated more than 7,000 earmarks and saved between $12-$15 billion in pork-barrel spending. Unfortunately, in this Year of the Pig, taxpayers are not getting a pork dividend. Instead, Congress took the savings and spent it on other programs.

Despite the moratorium on earmarks, the siren’s song of pork is too tempting for some members of Congress, who have called federal agencies to pressure them to divert money to pet projects that were included in committee reports. The Bush Administration told agencies to ignore such oral communications.

While taxpayers should celebrate a reduction in the number and cost of pork-barrel projects, there is still much work that needs to be done to ensure that members of Congress do not return to their piggish ways in the future.

The 24 projects, totaling $2.4 billion, in this year’s Congressional Pig Book Summary symbolize the most egregious and blatant examples of pork.

As in previous years, all of the items in the Congressional Pig Book Summary meet at least one of CAGW’s seven criteria, but most satisfy at least two:

Requested by only one chamber of Congress;
Not specifically authorized;
Not competitively awarded;
Not requested by the President;
Greatly exceeds the President’s budget request or the previous year’s funding;
Not the subject of congressional hearings; or
Serves only a local or special interest.

I. DEFENSE

Efficient and effective operation of the Department of Defense (DOD) is critical to ensuring the security of our nation and the safety of our troops. While American military forces fight for peace and democracy in the Middle East, Pentagon officials struggle to create a lean, mean, war-fighting machine; the good news is that appropriators are winning fewer battles over defense priorities. From fiscal 2006 to fiscal 2007, the number of porkbarrel projects decreased by 7 percent from 2,822 to 2,618, while the total cost went down 28 percent, from $14.9 billion to $10.8 billion.

$1,190,000,000 for full funding of 20 F-22A fighter jets; this barrel of pork is so big that Congress will not even spend it all in one year. The bill funds 20 F-22s per year until 2009. The F-22 was originally designed as an air superiority fighter for use against the Soviet Air Force. Before Congress put the ink on the check, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) sent a 13-page letter on June 20, 2006 to then-House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman C.W. (Bill) Young urging Congress to stop funding this program due to its high cost and the fact that the aircraft is out of date. The GAO said, “DOD has not demonstrated the need or value for making further investments in the F-22A program.” The GAO also noted that the F-22s “are not sufficient to be effective in the current and future national security environment.” There are 22 test F-35 aircrafts that are more modern, effective, and cheaper. In 2003, Popular Science reported the F-22 had a price tag of $120 million each while the F-35 cost $35 million. In June 2006, the GAO report raised the F-22’s numbers, concluding that the multi-year contract would drive per-plane costs up to $183 million from $166 million. The F-35 made its maiden flight in December 2006. Apparently, the F-22 will be stopped only when pigs can fly.

$319,655,000 for projects in the state of then-Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee Ranking Member Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), including: $20,000,000 for the Army Compatible Use Buffer Program (ACUB); $11,500,000 to fund Pan-STARRS to develop a large aperture telescope with the University of Hawaii to prevent space objects from colliding with Earth; $5,600,000 for the Center of Excellence for Research in Ocean Sciences, $4,500,000 for chitosan bandage component which utilizes natural compounds found in shrimp heads; and $1,000,000 for a wave power electric generating system. The ACUB works on “conservation planning at the ecosystem level to ensure that greater benefits are realized towards species and habitat recovery.” The Army’s objectives with this program include: “Reduce training restrictions, meet Endangered Species Act recovery responsibilities, prevent development along installation boundaries, and prevent future threatened and endangered species listings.” Thanks to programs like ACUB, the ecosystem for oinkers is thriving in Hawaii.

$209,900,000 added for projects in the state of then-Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), an increase of 127 percent over the $92,425,000 for Alaska in the fiscal 2006 defense bill, including: $59,100,000 for upgrades to the Pacific Alaskan Range Complex in Red Flag; $4,000,000 for the Northern Line Extension, and $3,200,000 for HAARP (High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program), which has received $109.1 million in pork since 1995. The Northern Line Extension will provide a direct route from North Pole (pop. 1,778 in 2005) to Delta Junction (pop. 840 in 2000), which is a whopping 82.1 mile drive on one highway between the two villages according to MapQuest. The Alaska Railroad Corporation said, “The proposed rail line would provide freight and potentially passenger rail services serving commercial interests and communities in or near the project corridor.”

$102,000,000 for projects in the state of Senate appropriator Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.) and the district of House appropriator Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), including: $9,500,000 for the Extended ColdWeather Clothing System; $5,000,000 for the Energetics Technology Center, $3,250,000 for the Rotorcraft Survivability Assessment Facility; $2,500,000 for PEM fuel cell tactical generators; $2,000,000 for Life Shield® blast resistant panels, developed by Life Shield Engineered Systems in Maryland; and $1,000,000 for the SureTrak Program.

$72,720,000 added for projects in Nevada by then-Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), including: $7,000,000 for the SA-90 airship persistent surveillance program; $3,750,000 for a counter-drug program for the Nevada National Guard; $3,000,000 for large aircraft infrared countermeasures; $1,950,000 for heat dissipation for electronic systems and $1,300,000 for the study of the structural reliability of smart munitions and lightweight structures at the University of Nevada-Las Vegas. Sen. Reid bragged about securing millions of dollars for money-hungry programs by announcing funding for “Nevada defense projects including operating expenses at Nevada military bases, research projects at state universities, and grants to private companies developing high-tech defense systems in Nevada.” This occurred before the time when now-Majority Leader Reid attempted to block expanded earmark reform in the Senate in January 2007, and was embarrassingly defeated when a few Democrats and most Republicans stood up against him.

$59,000,000 for medical research projects ranging from cancer to diabetes to gynecological disease. As important as this research may be, there is no mention as to why these programs should receive money from the Department of Defense. One program which weighs heavily on taxpayers in this category is $1.35 million for the “Obesity in the Military Research Program.”

$35,000,000 for Impact Aid, which is described by the website of the Military Impacted Schools Association as “the federal government paying its ‘tax bill’ to local school districts as a result of the presence of a military installation.” The funding included $5,000,000 for Impact Aid for children with disabilities. It is the taxpayers who are impacted by this aid.

$18,300,000 added in the Senate for defense educational programs. Program funding includes $2,000,000 for “Mathematics and Technology Teachers Development” and “Cyber Curriculum for the Education of Children in the Military;” $1,100,000 for the “Reach Out and Read Early Literacy Program;” and $1,000,000 for the “Parents as Teachers Program,” which is “a parent education and early childhood development program serving parents throughout pregnancy until their child enters kindergarten.”

$8,000,000 added by the Senate for “special assistance to local education agencies.” This is a part of the educational arm of the Department of Defense also known as DOD Dependents Education.

$5,500,000 added by the House for the Gallo Center. According to its website, “The Ernest Gallo Clinic and Research Center (EGCRC) at the University of California, San Francisco (USCF) was established in 1980 to study basic neuroscience and the effects of alcohol and drug abuse on the brain.” There is no mention of any defense-related research. Apparently, they will serve no pork before its time.

$5,300,000 to study marine mammals, such as whales. The House added $3,500,000 for a program increase and a “marine mammal hearing and echolocation research” program. Scientific Solutions, based in Nashua, N.H., will receive $1,800,000 million to fund an “Integrated Marine Mammal Monitoring and Protection system.” The Navy claims to be the “world leader in marine mammal research, spending nearly $10 million per year on research to understand how marine mammals hear and how they are affected by sound.”

$5,000,000 added in the House for alcohol breath testers. According to the House fiscal 2006 Department of Defense Appropriations Report, “The impact of excessive alcohol use and driving under the influence continues as a leading cause of ground accidents, injury, death, and physical damage across the Services.” Out of the $5 million total, $4,500,000 will directly go toward the procurement of Breathscan® alcohol testers. They are already in use at Fort Bliss, Texas as the Army Surgeon General issued individual breathalyzers before the start of the 2006 holiday season.

$3,335,000 added by Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) for the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, home of the “Hard Rockers” football team. The school received $2,000,000 for future affordable multi-utility materials for the Army Future Combat System; $500,000 for improvised explosive device simulation in different soils; $300,000 for a control system for laser powder deposition; $285,000 for shielding rocket payloads; and $250,000 for transparent nanocomposite armor. According to a July 12, 2006 press release, the School of Mines has received more than $70 million in congressional appropriations for projects and research since 2001.

$1,650,000 added by Senate appropriator Patty Murray (D-Wash.) to improve the shelf life of vegetables. According to the senator’s July 2006 press release, “This project will help our troops in the field get fresh tomatoes…” The funding would help “establish and evaluate variant populations of bell pepper, cantaloupe and strawberry.” The money is being directed toward Arcadia Biosciences, a company based in Seattle. In all, Sen. Murray claims to have “secured $55 million in federal defense work for Washington state companies in the Fiscal Year 2007 Defense Appropriations bill.” On Capitol Hill, Sen. Murray has already extended the shelf life of her own pork products.

$1,000,000 added in the House for the Allen Telescope Array in Mountain View, Calif. This “alien” project is part of SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence). SETI describes the telescope as “dedicated to astronomical and simultaneous search for extra-terrestrial intelligence observations.” No word on how it will help defend the world against an alien invasion.

$1,000,000 secured by now-Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to fund the Military Intelligence Service Historic Learning Center. In a September 2006 press release announcing her pork victory, she said the center will serve as an “education center and project to preserve the site of the U.S. Army’s first language school established in 1941.”

II. HOMELAND SECURITY

While only two appropriations acts were passed, appropriators squeezed all the pork they could into them. The fiscal 2007 Homeland Security Appropriations Act proved yet again that while the threat of terrorism and natural disasters still exist, so too does Congress’s penchant for pork. The number of projects in the bill increased by 14 percent from 35 in fiscal 2006 to 40 in fiscal 2007, while spending decreased 10 percent from $2.7 billion to $2.4 billion, after a 57 percent increase between fiscal 2005 and 2006.

$225,000,000 for port security grants, a 29 percent increase from last year’s total. Pork-barrel funding for this program has more than doubled in two years. Established in 2002, the grants are an opportunity for private companies and port authorities to apply for federal financing to improve security at ports. An audit performed by the inspector general of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in 2005 revealed that some of the grants “appeared to be for a purpose other than security against an act of terrorism.” According to the audit, 95 percent of all international commerce enters the United States through the nation’s 360 ports, but nearly 80 percent comes through only 10 ports. While Congress intended the grants to protect ports that have the highest volume of cargo, handle hazardous material, or are located near military facilities, the audit found DHS was distributing the funds in a broad, unfocused manner. As a result, the department “had no assurance that the program is protecting the nation's most critical and vulnerable port infrastructure and assets.” Although major ports received funding, so too did smaller ones, including ports in Ludington, Michigan; Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts; and six located in Arkansas, none of which appeared to meet grant eligibility requirements, according to the audit.

$78,693,000 for a replacement patrol boat to be used until the Fast Response Cutter (FRC) program becomes operational in 2018. The FRC is part of Deepwater, which is run by a joint venture between Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin called Integrated Coast Guard Systems. Deepwater is the Coast Guard’s 20-year, $24 billion plan to modernize its fleet, and has come under fire for significant design flaws that will likely increase maintenance costs, limit ships’ ability to travel far from port, and ultimately shorten their useful life. Furthermore, DHS Inspector General Richard Skinner stated in a January, 2007 report on Deepwater and its cornerstone ship, the National Security Cutter (NSC), that the Coast Guard had relinquished its oversight authority to contractors. The report’s executive summary stated: “The NSC, as designed and constructed, will not meet performance specifications described in the original Deepwater contract. Specifically, due to design deficiencies, the NSC’s structure provides insufficient fatigue strength … [which will] increase the cutter’s maintenance costs and reduce its service life.” All in all, Deepwater has proven to be a boondoggle a fact made worse by the critical role it plays in our national security.

$12,000,000 for intercity bus security grants for the improvement of ticket identification, installation of driver shields, enhancement of emergency communications, upgrading facility security, and further implementation of passenger screening. The Intercity Bus Security Grant Program is one of five grant programs that make up the DHS fiscal 2007 Infrastructure Protection Program, designed to offset the cost of protecting the nation’s critical infrastructure. For the third year in a row, this program shows up in the Pig Book. Money continues to be directed to profitable, private companies that should be able to fund these measures themselves.

$12,000,000 added by the House for the Rural Domestic Preparedness Consortium in the district of then-House Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Harold Rogers (R-Ky.). This program is supposed to help protect citizens living in rural areas by training rural emergency responder teams. The funding is to be distributed to an assortment of universities that are not yet known. Meanwhile, funding for the program has increased by 20 percent from last year’s level.

$12,000,000 for trucking security grants to continue the HighwayWatch Program, designed to enhance security on the nation’s highways. According to the Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs website, the HighwayWatch Program, which is managed by the American Trucking Association, “recruits and trains highway professionals to identify and report security and safety situations on the nation’s roads.” What happened to the good old-fashioned Highway Patrol? $4,500,000 added in conference for the Secure Border Coordination Office, designed to implement the integration of border security and immigration enforcement. The office is also charged with implementing the Secure Border Initiative (SBInet), a multi-year plan to improve border security with a combination of personnel, infrastructure, and technology, that has come under criticism. In May 2006, then-House Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Harold Rogers (R-Ky.) stated, “What we need is a sound, comprehensive strategy that allows us to measure progress. Without a strategic border security plan we are simply planning to fail.” Also in May, then-Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee Ranking Member Martin Olav Sabo (D-Minn.) wrote to DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff, “I am deeply concerned that the SBInet solicitation is so broad that the government will, in effect, be turning over its responsibility to secure our borders to the private sector.”

$3,000,000 added by the House for the Office of the Federal Coordinator (OFC) for Gulf Coast rebuilding. Since Hurricanes Katrina and Rita ravaged much of the Gulf Coast in 2005, the recovery progress has been abysmal. Through the Road Home Program, OFC Director Donald Powell is hoping to “get residents of Louisiana back into their homes as quickly and fairly as possible.” However, in a letter to Sudhakar Kesavan, CEO of ICF International, the contractor running the program, Powell expressed concern that the speed of payments to individuals who lost their homes has been sluggish. In December 2006, Powell stated, “As I write this letter, only 92 homeowners have received financial assistance out of over 80,000 applicants, or .1 percent of applicants. This rate must drastically improve.” The Road Home Program has considerable problems; appropriating more money will not provide solace to homeowners or taxpayers.

$2,500,000 added in conference for the U.S. Secret Service National Special Security Events Fund. The purpose of the fund is to help plan and coordinate major events, such as national political conventions, international summits, presidential inaugurations, the Super Bowl, and even the Olympics when hosted by the U.S. These events take years to organize; the funding should be treated the same way. If money needs to be allocated, it should be requested in advance, included in the budget, and authorized.

**insidethe8thpol** · 02-01-2008, 03:17 PM

Many members of Congress will be surprised by their 2006 Council for Citizens Against Government Waste (CCAGW) vote rating. One would have thought that after the scandals involving two former representatives, Randy “Duke” Cunningham and Bob Ney, along with disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff, members would have been leery of supporting pork-barrel spending in 2006.

But when they had an opportunity to vote for amendments that would have removed blatantly parochial and special-interest projects and demonstrate that they were finally addressing spending and ethics problems, the vast majority of representatives and senators voted “no.” As a result, the House average dipped to a new low of 29 percent. That was a drop of 16 percentage points from the average of 45 percent in the first session of the 109th Congress. The Senate average was 44 percent, two percentage points lower than the 46 percent average in 2005.

For 2006, CCAGW considered 44 votes in the House and 21 in the Senate. Of the total number of House votes, 19 votes were amendments offered by Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) that would have removed pork-barrel projects from appropriations bills. On average, 68 members voted for Rep. Flake’s amendments, which would have saved taxpayers a total of $35.3 million. In the Senate, Sens. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.) offered five amendments to cut pork. All of those amendments failed.

Considering the scandals that abounded in the 109th Congress, these earmark votes went to the heart of the matter. Representatives, in particular, turned a deaf ear to the taxpayers, and continued to vote for more spending. One argument heard throughout the debate over Rep. Flake’s amendments - as well as during other discussions of pork-barrel spending - is that such expenditures represent a small fraction of the entire budget and are ultimately not responsible for the nation’s $8.8 trillion debt. But such proponents of pork would be wise to pay attention to the parable, “Whoever can be trusted with very little can also be trusted with much, and whoever is dishonest with very little will also be dishonest with much.”

After all, if members of Congress cannot control themselves and continue to use federal tax dollars to fund the “small stuff” - like dairy education in Iowa; hydroponic tomato production in Ohio; the city pool in Banning, Calif; or the National Grape and Wine Initiative - there can be little confidence in their ability to address the larger fiscal issues facing the nation, such as Medicare and Social Security.

Lack of fiscal discipline was also on display in the failure to approve any of the six amendments offered by Rep. Joel Hefley (R-Colo.) that would have cut spending across-the-board by 1 percent in appropriations bills. Surely anyone could find a penny’s worth of savings for every dollar they spent - anyone, apparently, except members of Congress.

There were a few bright spots in the House. Members passed a legislative line-item veto, a tax reconciliation bill that would extend about $70 billion in tax cuts over five years, and a budget that would have saved $6.8 billion over five years by reducing the rate of growth in mandatory spending. Bills were also adopted that would significantly reduce the estate tax, allow for oil exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and prevent efforts to add onerous regulations to telecommunication services by enforcing “net neutrality.”

The only representative to receive a “Taxpayer Super Hero” award with a grade of 100 percent was Rep. Jeff Flake. There were 40 “Taxpayer Heroes,” House members who had a grade of 80 percent or above. In 2005, there was one “Taxpayer Super Hero” and 52 “Taxpayer Heroes.” On the lower end of the scale, there were 9 House members, all Democrats, who received a score of zero. In 2005, there was only one House member with a zero rating.

CCAGW also broke down ratings based on party affiliation and membership in the two fiscally conservative groups, the Republican Study Committee and the Blue Dog Democrats. The average scores were: House Republicans - 46 percent, down 27 percentage points from their 73 percent score in 2005; House Democrats - 9 percent, down 4 percentage points from their 13 percent score in 2005; House Republican Study Committee - 56 percent, 23 percentage points down from their 79 percent score in 2005; and House Blue Dog Democrats - 20 percent, down 4 percentage points from 24 percent score in 2005.

On the Senate side, there were some victories, but mostly disappointments. Efforts to control spending by adopting measures such as reducing spending in appropriations bills, earmark reform, capping damage awards in medical liability lawsuits, and repealing the estate tax failed.

In 2005, one Senator was a “Taxpayer Super Hero” but no Senator received that status in 2006. The closest to that level were Sens. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), James Inhofe (R-Okla.), John Sununu (R-N.H.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.), all of whom had the highest score of 95 percent. On the other end of the scale, Sens. Mark Dayton (D-Minn.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), and John Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) all received a score of zero percent. In 2005, the lowest score was 4 percent.

CAGW also broke down party averages. For Senate Republicans, the average was 68 percent, the same as it was in 2005. For Senate Democrats, the average was 15 percent, 3 percentage points lower than in 2005. The entire Senate had a score of 44 percent, two percentage points lower than in 2005.

Taxpayers have every reason to be disappointed with Congress’s performance in 2006. The House and Senate failed to adopt a joint budget resolution for fiscal 2007, a far cry from fiscal 2006, during which a budget was approved that saved tax dollars by slowing the growth in entitlement programs while cutting or freezing most domestic discretionary spending, forcing agencies to go after wasteful spending. In May 2007, Congress, under new management, did agree to a fiscal 2008 budget resolution. Unfortunately, this budget increases spending by $205 billion more than the president’s budget request over five years, is on track to raise taxes by $736 billion, and does nothing to address the $69 trillion long-term budget crisis that the nation faces.

While the new leadership promised to bring “the most honest, most open and most ethical Congress in history” the results to date are bleak. House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.) announced in May that more than 36,000 earmarks have been submitted to his committee, which was apparently too many for his staff to review before the fiscal 2008 appropriations bills are considered in the House. Never mind that this is similar to years past, when the earmarks (by the thousands) were inserted without much trouble into the bills as they made their way through the House and Senate. Instead, Mr. Obey declared that all earmarks would be added in the conference between the House and Senate Appropriations Committees. This would have made Chairman Obey the judge and jury of earmarks and subvert new House earmark transparency rules. Conference reports, the compromised bill created from the different House and Senate versions, cannot be amended, therefore eliminating any ability to challenge even the most egregious pork-barrel project other than defeating the entire bill.

This declaration caused quite a conflagration on the House floor. House Republicans instigated a variety of parliamentary maneuvers to force Mr. Obey and the new majority to live up to its promises of earmark reform and transparency. Thanks to the Republicans’ effort, Democrats agreed that earmarks must be made public before passing any remaining appropriations bills and a point of order will be allowed on any appropriations conference report that contains earmarks placed in the conference committee. If the Republicans had not prevailed, members such as Rep. Flake would not have been able to oppose specific pork projects when the appropriations bills are first individually considered on the House floor.

The results of CCAGW’s 2006 Congressional Ratings would be not be shocking to President James Monroe, who argued in 1822 that federal money should be limited “to great national works only, since if it were unlimited it would be liable to abuse and might be productive of evil.” Nor would they astound Thomas Jefferson, who told James Madison in a 1796 letter that his plan to ask Congress spend federal money on post roads would lead to “a scene of eternal scramble among the members, who can get the most money wasted in their State; and they will always get most who are meanest.”

Members of Congress who are dismayed by their abysmal rating may wish to keep those thoughts in mind when they vote on spending bills in the 110th Congress, especially those who believe that earmarking has been going on “since we were a country,” as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said. Earmarking is a modern invention, not a historic practice. Such expenditures, along with other wasteful programs, must be curtailed. CCAGW and the millions of taxpayers who pay for the government will be watching and rating the votes.

**Celtics86** · 02-02-2008, 04:05 PM

More cut and paste without crediting your propaghandizing right wing, media whore, website..... Are you serious? You're going to cut and paste from CNSnew.com.... Boy, you are fucking lost....... They've got you concerned about a $300,000 earmark..... And we're spending OVER a billion a day in Iraq, FOR NOTHING. That is where we are going bankrupt 5 times over..... And who's getting the money.... Weapons manufacturers who have bought the republican party, and Haliburton, who is our vice prez......But you're not upset about that because Rush told you we must fight the "terrorists" over there.... I will stop argueing with you..I know you guys are never allowed to change your minds about anything, that would make you a flip-flopper, like John Kerry.. SOB costs us the Vietnam war, don't you think?.... If he just would have gotten out of going over there, like Bush and Cheney and Rush and everybody else that got us into this current war, Vietnam would have gone much better....

Throw in a little gay bashing, immigrant bashing, BAM, we've got another little hateful republican on our hands...... Dude, you're brainwashed like the rest of them... Time to eat your dog terds. Good luck.

**jordanrules23** · 02-02-2008, 04:17 PM

Originally posted by Celtics86

More cut and paste without crediting your propaghandizing right wing, media whore, website..... Are you serious? You're going to cut and paste from CNSnew.com.... Boy, you are fucking lost....... They've got you concerned about a $300,000 earmark..... And we're spending OVER a billion a day in Iraq, FOR NOTHING. That is where we are going bankrupt 5 times over..... And who's getting the money.... Weapons manufacturers who have bought the republican party, and Haliburton, who is our vice prez......But you're not upset about that because Rush told you we must fight the "terrorists" over there.... I will stop argueing with you..I know you guys are never allowed to change your minds about anything, that would make you a flip-flopper, like John Kerry.. SOB costs us the Vietnam war, don't you think?.... If he just would have gotten out of going over there, like Bush and Cheney and Rush and everybody else that got us into this current war, Vietnam would have gone much better....

Throw in a little gay bashing, immigrant bashing, BAM, we've got another little hateful republican on our hands...... Dude, you're brainwashed like the rest of them... Time to eat your dog terds. Good luck.

Celtic....your party gives free programs, free fema cards, free everything...the ONLY reason you ppl support the illegals is to get their vote and dont kid yourself....like ive said b4 take all the Dems move them west of the Miss river and have all Repubs live east....Then we will tell Bush to put his Earthquake Machine on( which you Dems thinks he prob has) and we'll live on the east and you sorry save a tree ppl will have your own Island..Whatch how fast you BEG to be where the Repubs are, You can live with the rioting, Fruits and Nuts all you want...And The Illegals will be there as well for you to pay them your taxes to collect FREE money...But this time it will be you money not the American TAX PAYERS!!!!!!!!!!1

**grandmama** · 02-02-2008, 04:22 PM

jordan, I really don't hate you, but you really do not know what your talking about when it comes to politics, so I suggest you either do some research, or stop making post that makes you look stupid.

**Celtics86** · 02-02-2008, 04:26 PM

Originally posted by jordanrules23

Celtic....your party gives free programs, free fema cards, free everything...the ONLY reason you ppl support the illegals is to get their vote and dont kid yourself....like ive said b4 take all the Dems move them west of the Miss river and have all Repubs live east....Then we will tell Bush to put his Earthquake Machine on( which you Dems thinks he prob has) and we'll live on the east and you sorry save a tree ppl will have your own Island..Whatch how fast you BEG to be where the Repubs are, You can live with the rioting, Fruits and Nuts all you want...And The Illegals will be there as well for you to pay them your taxes to collect FREE money...But this time it will be you money not the American TAX PAYERS!!!!!!!!!!1

You are a HATEFUL- BITTER LITTLE PERSON..

**grandmama** · 02-02-2008, 04:28 PM

Celts, I really love how these pub kids cut and paste all the time. It's like they can't form their own opinion about anything. Same talking points I've heard 1000 times.

**Celtics86** · 02-02-2008, 04:32 PM

Originally posted by grandmama

Celts, I really love how these pub kids cut and paste all the time. It's like they can't form their own opinion about anything. Same talking points I've heard 1000 times.

If they could form there own opinion, they wouldn't be pubs... They let the TV do it for them..... You know, "the liberal media"......LOL

**jordanrules23** · 02-02-2008, 04:49 PM

Originally posted by Celtics86

If they could form there own opinion, they wouldn't be pubs... They let the TV do it for them..... You know, "the liberal media"......LOL

WHY DONT YOU SAY ANYTHING TO MONTE WHEN HE CUTS AND PASTE????
yOU dEMS ARE BRAINWASHED...GO BUY AND READ "hOW TO PROTECT OUR BORDER"

**jordanrules23** · 02-02-2008, 04:49 PM

Originally posted by grandmama

jordan, I really don't hate you, but you really do not know what your talking about when it comes to politics, so I suggest you either do some research, or stop making post that makes you look stupid.

NAME 1 TIME OR TOPIC THAT YOU THINK ISNT TRUE?

**jordanrules23** · 02-02-2008, 04:50 PM

we are just sating the facts...when we cut and paste......Now go say something to monte when he cuts and paste..be you wont

**grandmama** · 02-02-2008, 04:58 PM

most of what you say is garbage. you only hear what you want to hear. there are two sides to every story.

**jordanrules23** · 02-02-2008, 05:00 PM

what is garbage??? i state the truth and facts the the average person wont say b/c he's afraid of offending or hurt their feelings....u have valid points but in my mind i cant for the life of me understand how someone can back the Dem party........they're for everything but Americans!!!!!!!!!!!!

Announcement

Got Pork??

Got Pork??

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment