Tuesday, June 13, 2006

Big Spending on Earmarks, The GOP Way


We all know that the Republican led federal government has been spending like there is no tomorrow. We also know that Congress has almost always had tons of earmark/pork spending attached to almost every bill and budget.

One thing that I don't think most people realize is just how much the earmark/pork spending has gone up under the Republican leadership. In a press release by Congressman Mark Kennedy (D-Minnesota), he reveals that in 1996 there were only 958 appropriation earmarks. In 2005 there was a record 14,000! That amounts to an over 1300% increase in earmarks under largely Republican rule.

Another thing that most people don't know is that these types of appropriations can be done anonymously. So no wonder it has gone up so much! A member of Congress can in effect bestow federal money on any pet project back in their home districts and never be held accountable for the spending spree.

I have a question here. Mark Green has been in Congress since 1998, what has he ever done to curb this free for all? What about F. Jim Sensenbrenner? Has he been part of the problem or part of the solution? In an effort to gain a prominent position Paul Ryan is lecturing others on spending. What legislation has he ever authored to stop this abuse of the American Taxpayer? This massive increase in spending has been under Republican rule, the onus is on them. How long will it take them to get their act together? Perhaps a better question is how long will it take for Taxpayers to revolt?

6 comments:

Troy Fullerton said...

Might want to do your homework on Paul Ryan's efforts to stop pork-barrell spending. He has introduced several bills, including the recent Legislative Line-Item Veto Act of 2006.

I expect your apology is forthcoming, and that next time you'll maybe do a little research before just blindly attacking Republicans??

Cory Liebmann said...

ryan seems to be a recent convert (the line item veto act) as he seeks this new powerful position. what other legislation has he offered? or have you not done your homework? if there is something else that i missed,then he has failed to get it through a republican congress.

if i don't attack republicans, who have run the entire federal government for several years now, then who should i attack? this all happened on their watch and at their hands.

the republican party owes the people of this country an apology.

Epilogue said...

You could attack the Democrat controlled Congress of 1974 that passed the budget rules that are still in place today. Yes, the Republicans seem to be abusing the system, but that change who instituted the system.

Last year, Paul Ryan introduced the Family Budget Protection Act that would have targeted earmarks and made budgeting more transparent. He also introduced a Social Security reform measure: say what you will about Social Security reform, but somehting has to be done - and reforming entitlement spending will go a long way towards reigning in the prolific spending in Congress.

Troy Fullerton said...

Glad you asked what Rep. Ryan has done, Cory...and yes, on this issue I've done my homework.

In 2004 he offered an amendment to HR 4663 that would have given the President the authority to single out wasteful pork items in bills, an amendment he co-authored with Rep. Stenholm, a Dem from Texas.

He also, as epilogue noted, introduced the Family Budget Protection Act in both 04 and 05 that would have addressed this runaway spending, and also the insane budget rules that state, if an individual item is removed from the budget via the amendment process--say, a $50 million rain forest museum in Iowa--they have to find another place to spend the money as the overall amount cannot be reduced by removing items.

The Republicans are certainly not purists when it comes to fiscal doctrine, but at least our Party can claim leaders like Paul Ryan, Mike Pence, etc. who are trying to reform the system and ease the burden on the taxpayers. What can the Democrats offer except, "We'll spend even more, but we'll waste it on different things."?

Troy Fullerton said...

Glad you asked what Rep. Ryan has done, Cory...and yes, on this issue I've done my homework.

In 2004 he offered an amendment to HR 4663 that would have given the President the authority to single out wasteful pork items in bills, an amendment he co-authored with Rep. Stenholm, a Dem from Texas.

He also, as epilogue noted, introduced the Family Budget Protection Act in both 04 and 05 that would have addressed this runaway spending, and also the insane budget rules that state, if an individual item is removed from the budget via the amendment process--say, a $50 million rain forest museum in Iowa--they have to find another place to spend the money as the overall amount cannot be reduced by removing items.

The Republicans are certainly not purists when it comes to fiscal doctrine, but at least our Party can claim leaders like Paul Ryan, Mike Pence, etc. who are trying to reform the system and ease the burden on the taxpayers. What can the Democrats offer except, "We'll spend even more, but we'll waste it on different things."?

Troy Fullerton said...

Glad you asked what Rep. Ryan has done, Cory...and yes, on this issue I've done my homework.

In 2004 he offered an amendment to HR 4663 that would have given the President the authority to single out wasteful pork items in bills, an amendment he co-authored with Rep. Stenholm, a Dem from Texas.

He also, as epilogue noted, introduced the Family Budget Protection Act in both 04 and 05 that would have addressed this runaway spending, and also the insane budget rules that state, if an individual item is removed from the budget via the amendment process--say, a $50 million rain forest museum in Iowa--they have to find another place to spend the money as the overall amount cannot be reduced by removing items.

The Republicans are certainly not purists when it comes to fiscal doctrine, but at least our Party can claim leaders like Paul Ryan, Mike Pence, etc. who are trying to reform the system and ease the burden on the taxpayers. What can the Democrats offer except, "We'll spend even more, but we'll waste it on different things."?