ARRA: This post expands on prior post 6 days ago - Comments Regarding New House Earmark Rules By Adam Putnam, Chair US House Republican Conference: WHAT THEY’RE SAYING about Democrat Earmark Abuses
Chicago Sun-Times: “Democrats in the House seem to be blowing their first opportunity to demonstrate they mean business … More openness is supposed to make lawmakers propose only those earmarks that are easy to defend, or force them to withdraw projects that don't stand up to public scrutiny. If the House Democratic plan does anything to reduce public scrutiny, then it represents a step backward in the battle against pork.” (Editorial, 6/8/07)
Pensacola (FL) News Journal: “Democrats have not done themselves proud on earmarks. Despite their promises to smash open the pork barrel and stop hiding members' projects, the Democrats are bypassing their own House rules to let earmarks remain shrouded in the technical mists of the budget … [I]t sounds as if the pressure from members eager to feed at the trough is causing the reform to be sidetracked … The Democrats promised much, but so far have delivered less.” (Editorial, 6/5/07)
Lincoln (NE) Journal Star: “Those optimistic souls who trusted that ethics would make a dramatic appearance in Washington after the Democrats won control of Congress have had their faith tested . . . Rep. John P. Murtha, D-Pa., who had a temper tantrum after a Republican member unearthed an earmark Murtha had inserted into the intelligence authorization act … That dust-up was emblematic of the way that reform has languished in the House since newly elected Speaker Nancy Pelosi promised to ‘drain the swamp’ and end ‘the culture of corruption’ . . .” (Editorial, 6/4/07)
Baltimore Sun: “Favor czar … a Democratic effort to bring these goodies out of the closet has run wildly awry. Overwhelmed by more than 30,000 requests from his 434 colleagues, the chairman of the House Appropriations Comm., David R. Obey . . . and his staff alone will sort the worthy from the unworthy, the election-year booty from the lobbyist payoff …” (Editorial, 6/11/07)
St. Louis Post-Dispatch: “. . . Democrats pledged to end, or at least curb, earmarks … But, in a slick maneuver, Appropriations Comm. chairman David Obey, D-WI, will keep earmarks off bills now, but attach them at the last minute before passage this fall. That will keep them hidden from public scrutiny until it's too late for spoilsport good-government types to raise a stink.” (Editorial, 6/11/07)
The Press of Atlantic City (NJ): “But they’ve done a shameful and shocking about-face. . . . Democrats are following an order by the Appropriations Comm. chairman, Rep. David Obey, D-WI., to keep the earmarks out of spending bills entirely until the last moment - when bills come up for final action and cannot be amended, and when it will be too late to oppose specific projects as wasteful or questionable. Congressional watchdog groups are justifiably outraged …” (Editorial, 6/8/07)
Wisconsin State Journal: “Obey is now dodging the very reforms he helped to generate … His solution was to wait until the end of the lawmaking process, where earmarks would be submitted in closed-door sessions of the committee that negotiates the differences between House and Senate versions of bills. With this maneuver, Obey would enhance his own power but prevent the public and most lawmakers from questioning earmarks until it is too late.” (Editorial, 6/7/07)
Cleveland (OH) Plain Dealer: “… Democrats promised to reduce the practice [of earmarking], in part, by shining light on it. But now Appropriations Chairman David Obey has decided that he will review all earmark requests and add them during conference committee deliberations to reconcile House and Senate spending bills. That's a secretive process, and its final product gets a yes-or-no vote in each chamber. This means earmarks will sail through before the press or even most members of Congress can examine or challenge them. There's nothing inherently wrong with Congress making minute spending decisions, but do it openly.” (Editorial, 6/10/07)
Mobile (AL) Press-Register: “Democrats work ATM … But now that they control the ATM, the Democrats are finding all sorts of excuses to keep the earmark dispenser open for business … Democrats are reneging on their vows of fiscal responsibility just a few months after they won their chance to load the ATM.” (Editorial, 6/8/07)
Charleston (SC) Post and Courier: “. . .Rep. David Obey, D-WI, has decreed that earmarks won't be considered in budget bills until they reach conference committee. . . . Critics justifiably contend that the idea would sharply diminish the needed level of public review, particularly since conference committees are held behind closed doors … Former congressional aide Winslow Wheeler . . . put it more broadly . . .‘The rhetoric has changed but not the behavior, and the behavior has gotten worse in the sense that while they are pretending to reform things, they are still groveling in the trough.’” (Editorial, 5/26/07)
Tacoma (WA) News Tribune: “Pork reform? Some say Democrats doing the opposite …, Rep. David Obey, D-WI, has said the earmarks will be added when House-Senate conference committees meet to hammer out the final versions of the bills. . . . Obey is maneuvering to ensure earmarks added to the spending bills can’t be challenged. The final version of an appropriations bill can’t be amended when it comes to the House floor. . . . Obey isn’t going to disclose the names of those who requested the earmarks until the final version of the bill is written.” (Op-Ed by Les Blumenthal, 6/11/07)
Tags: Congressional Pork, corruption, Dave Obey, earmark reform, earmarks, Nancy Pelosi, pork, US House To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
0 comments:
Post a Comment