Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Anti-earmark Tea Party Caucus takes $1 billion in earmarks

  1. #1
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,550

    Anti-earmark Tea Party Caucus takes $1 billion in earmarks



    By Reid Wilson
    National Journal

    Members of the Congressional Tea Party Caucus may tout their commitment to cutting government spending now, but they used the 111th Congress to request hundreds of earmarks that, taken cumulatively, added more than $1 billion to the federal budget.

    According to a Hotline review of records compiled by Citizens Against Government Waste, the 52 members of the caucus, which pledges to cut spending and reduce the size of government, requested a total of 764 earmarks valued at $1,049,783,150 during Fiscal Year 2010, the last year for which records are available.

    "It's disturbing to see the Tea Party Caucus requested that much in earmarks. This is their time to put up or shut up, to be blunt," said David Williams, vice president for policy at Citizens Against Government Waste. "There's going to be a huge backlash if they continue to request earmarks."

    In founding the caucus in July, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) said she was giving voice to Americans who were sick of government overspending.

    "The American people are speaking out loud and clear. They have had enough of the spending, the bureaucracy, and the government-knows-best mentality running rampant today throughout the halls of Congress," Bachmann said in a July 15 statement. The group, she wrote in a letter to House Administration Committee chairman Bob Brady, "will serve as an informal group of Members dedicated to promote Americans' call for fiscal responsibility, adherence to the Constitution, and limited government."

    Bachmann and 13 of her Tea Party Caucus colleagues did not request any earmarks in the last Fiscal Year, according to CAGW's annual Congressional Pig Book. But others have requested millions of dollars in special projects.

    Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.), for one, attached his name to 69 earmarks in the last fiscal year, for a total of $78,263,000. The 41 earmarks Rep. Rodney Alexander (R-La.) requested were worth $65,395,000. Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.) wanted $63,400,000 for 39 special projects, and Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah) wanted $93,980,000 set aside for 47 projects.

    Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.) takes the prize as the tea partier with his name on the most earmarks. Rehberg's office requested funding for 88 projects, either solely or by co-signing earmark requests with Sens. Max Baucus (D) and Jon Tester (D), at a cost of $100,514,200. On his own, Rehberg requested 20 earmarks valued at more than $9.6 million.

    More than one member can sign onto an earmark. Still, there are 29 caucus members who requested on their own or joined requests for more than $10 million in earmark funding, and seven who wanted more than $50 million in funding.

    Most offices did not respond right away to a request for comment. Those that did said they supported Republicans' new efforts to ban earmarks.

    Alexander, for one, "stands with his fellow Republicans in the House in supporting the current earmark ban. Since joining the Tea Party Caucus in July, he has not submitted any earmark requests and has withdrawn his outstanding requests that were included in the most recent Water Resources Development Act," said Jamie Hanks, his communications director.

    Rep. Gregg Harper (R-Miss.), who requested 25 earmarks in the last Fiscal Year at a total cost of just over $80 million, has agreed to abide by the Republican earmark ban, according to spokesman Adam Buckalew. "He supported the moratorium and the prohibition adopted recently by the Conference on House earmarks for the 112th Congress," Buckalew said of Harper.

    "It's easy to be a member of the TEA Party Caucus because, like them, I agree that we're Taxed Enough Already and we've got to balance the budget by cutting spending instead of raising taxes. Deficit spending is not new, but the unprecedented rate of spending in Congress is," Rehberg said in a statement emailed by his office. "Montanans have tightened their belts, and it's way past time for Congress to follow their lead. The TEA Party Caucus is about listening to concerned Americans who want to fundamentally change how Congress spends their tax dollars. On that, we're in total agreement."

    Bachmann's office did not respond to emails or phone calls seeking comment.

    Still, some Republicans -- albeit none who belong to the Tea Party Caucus -- have said they will not abide by the voluntary earmark ban. And, said CAGW's Williams, the anti-spending organization isn't waiting with baited breath.

    "Seeing is believing. It's going to take a lot more than rhetoric to convince us," he said.

    A list of Tea Party Caucus members and their earmark requests in Fiscal Year 2010, courtesy of Citizens Against Government Waste's Pig Book:

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_exclus...earmarks/print
    Last edited by intelligentjetsfan; 12-02-2010 at 04:18 PM.

  2. #2
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,062
    For the record though IJF, please tell us if YOU support the existence and use of Earmarks by Congress or not?

    If you do (and I'm confident you do), you're as big a hypocrite as they are.

    Hypocricy is bad. Burn them all.

  3. #3
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,814
    I have respect for the Tea party caucus members who did not ask for a cent, ie Bachman, but 1 billion and you run on the Tea Party platform? That is comical.

    Tea Party = GOP

    P.S.
    When I refer to the Tea Party it is about the actual persons in power, not the followers.

  4. #4
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,550
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    For the record though IJF, please tell us if YOU support the existence and use of Earmarks by Congress or not?

    If you do (and I'm confident you do), you're as big a hypocrite as they are.

    Hypocricy is bad. Burn them all.


    The article is about politicians who are hypocrites because they speak out against certain practices only to do the same thing once elected. Whether or not I am personally for or against earmarks has, as usual, nothing to do with the discussion.

  5. #5
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,062
    Quote Originally Posted by intelligentjetsfan View Post


    The article is about politicians who are hypocrites because they speak out against certain practices only to do the same thing once elected. Whether or not I am personally for or against earmarks has, as usual, nothing to do with the discussion.
    It does, actually.

    If you're "calling out" a politician for enjoying a policy you yourself support, then you are as hypocritical as they are.

    And clearly, given your reply, you are in fact a proponent on Earmarks. So you, and the earmark lov'in Tea Party pols, make a great match.

  6. #6
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,550
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    It does, actually.

    If you're "calling out" a politician for enjoying a policy you yourself support, then you are as hypocritical as they are.

    And clearly, given your reply, you are in fact a proponent on Earmarks. So you, and the earmark lov'in Tea Party pols, make a great match.
    This isn't hard: I am "calling out" politicians for acting like hypocrites. If a politician campaigns as a crusader against issue Y and then after the election supports issue Y, he/she is a hypocrite. That is the point of the thread. For the purposes of this particular thread, the issue is politicians who say one thing and do another. If you would like to start a thread discussing the practice of earmarks, I would love to participate.

  7. #7
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    23,165
    Quote Originally Posted by intelligentjetsfan View Post
    If a hypocrite campaigns as a crusader against issue Y and then after the election supports issue Y, he/she is a politician.
    Fixed.


  8. #8
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    5,550
    Quote Originally Posted by PlumberKhan View Post
    Fixed.



    very true.

  9. #9
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    38,062
    Quote Originally Posted by intelligentjetsfan View Post
    This isn't hard
    Nope, it isn't hard at all.

  10. #10
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    50,788
    Throw the bums out!

    Put in new bums!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us