Memeorandum


Powered by TypePad

« We Shall See The Reign Of Witches Pass Over... And We Shall Investigate! | Main | OK, They Spelled The Names Right »

April 16, 2008

Comments

Jane

Good for him. Earmarks are my second most important issue. It's just congressional stealing from my perspective. McCain should have them all frog-marched from the Congress.

Miracle Max

The fantastical act of eliminating all earmarks will roughly offset the cost of repealing the gas tax this summer.

Meanwhile JMC's cornucopia of tax cuts will double the deficit hole created by G Bush. How will Johnny pay for Social Security and Medicare?

DebinNC

I'm one of the voters the Republicans lost in 2006 because of profligate spending. A look back to Aug. 2006, and Sen. Ted Stevens (R):

After much speculation, a staffer to Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, admitted to Cox Newspapers today that the senator is the lawmaker who placed a “secret hold” on legislation that would open up the obscure world of government contracting to public scrutiny. Until now, it was a political whodunnit as to who quietly blocked legislation introduced by Sens. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and Barack Obama, D-Ill., that would create a searchable database of government contracts, grants, insurance, loans and financial assistance, worth $2.5 trillion last year." ...The bill has support from heavy hitters like Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y. It was on the fast track for floor action before Congress recessed on Aug. 4 when Stevens put a hold on the measure."

DebinNC

From Hot Air: Criminal pork? from Mr. Bridge to Nowhere himself.

"In what may become the first formal request from Congress for a criminal inquiry into one of its own special projects, top Senate Democrats and Republicans have endorsed taking action in connection with the earmark that Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska), former chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, inserted into the legislation."

Words fail me.

Jane

I've got the words: Try him and if he is guilty, jail him for a long long time.

Cecil Turner

I really don't know much about this, but a couple things spring to mind. First, why is the Senate pushing this off to DOJ? Not sure whether the congressional privilege extends to this sort of thing, but it's hard to believe anyone who can even contend that it remotely relates to the Jefferson bribe (and there were many who claimed it did) . . . and yet doesn't cover this. In any event, it'd seem to be primarily a lawmakers' responsibility, and the only logical reason I can see why they wouldn't tackle it, is because it'd be perceived as partisan. Hence I suspect that's exactly what it is.

Second, the stories variously claim or suggest the earmark was "inserted" after the vote. But the contemporary coverage suggests it was already in the bill, and just changed afterward (i.e., to specify a certain interchange, instead of a generic statement about improvements along I-75). If it was what lawmakers had discussed (and hence more like a typo), then changing it might be technically improper, but it's hardly a big deal. Seems to me the devil's in the details, and those most actively finger-pointing are obfuscating the actual issue.

Bottom line: I need to see something more before getting too excited on this one.

battery

Bottom line: I need to see something more before getting too excited on this one.

sophy

I do not know how to use the wakfu money ; my friend tells me how to use.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame