|
Post by m52nickerson on Mar 3, 2009 22:26:54 GMT -5
The word it self has become like nails on a chalk board. Of course there are ear marks for small projects. Congress would get nothing, even less then nothing done if they had to vote and debate every small project that congressmen needed funding for local communities. I would be pissed if my elected elected officials were not getting some of my tax dollars back for my area.
|
|
Pookie
Junior Member
Posts: 55
|
Post by Pookie on Mar 3, 2009 23:20:56 GMT -5
I'd rather them say "ear marks" instead of "pork," because pork reminds me of Alaska's infamous bridge to nowhere.
Bridges to nowhere make me an unhappy panda.
|
|
|
Post by m52nickerson on Mar 3, 2009 23:29:38 GMT -5
....and the money still got spent. Not all ear marks are bad, not all are good.
You are right about pork, but for me it reminds me of McCain saying the word over and over........creepy!
|
|
|
Post by ausador on Mar 3, 2009 23:57:55 GMT -5
Well if they would shower more often before leaning their head against the bus windows they wouldn't be leaveing earmarks now would they...hmm?
Ohh..you meant?...oh goodness excuse me...I simply thought...err...nevermind!
|
|
|
Post by Green-Eyed Lilo on Mar 4, 2009 9:40:15 GMT -5
But you know, when it's their own party's "earmark" or the "earmark" benefits their own district, it suddenly becomes an "important project essential to our recovery." Just one more thing that makes me want to scream at the TV, "How fucking stupid do you think we *are*?"
|
|
Pookie
Junior Member
Posts: 55
|
Post by Pookie on Mar 4, 2009 9:57:18 GMT -5
But you know, when it's their own party's "earmark" or the "earmark" benefits their own district, it suddenly becomes an "important project essential to our recovery." Just one more thing that makes me want to scream at the TV, "How fucking stupid do you think we *are*?" That's how politics works though, because House Representatives are at the direct mercy of their constituency. If they don't do enough, they might lose their job, and like anyone else in the country they don't want that to happen. However annoying it is (and it IS annoying), most of the time these ear marks are politicians covering their own ass rather than deliberately trying to rob us. *shrug*
|
|
|
Post by headache on Mar 4, 2009 11:39:59 GMT -5
What is a budget if anything but a list of earmarks in some form?
|
|
|
Post by schizophonic on Mar 4, 2009 14:32:11 GMT -5
I'm really sick of Republicans whining about them under any name (Pork, earmarks, Sally), while reaping the benefits of them at the same time. I know I should be used to hypocrisy in Politics, but I'm just getting so freaking fed up with it.
|
|
|
Post by m52nickerson on Mar 4, 2009 17:20:24 GMT -5
What is a budget if anything but a list of earmarks in some form? .....don't tell them that......they will have nothing to whine about.
|
|
|
Post by MozMode on Mar 4, 2009 17:43:14 GMT -5
I'm really sick of Republicans whining about them under any name (Pork, earmarks, Sally), while reaping the benefits of them at the same time. I know I should be used to hypocrisy in Politics, but I'm just getting so freaking fed up with it. Fuck yeah. Especially seeing that ol' bloated fart John McCain going on and on and on about it.
|
|
|
Post by schizophonic on Mar 4, 2009 20:03:30 GMT -5
I'm really sick of Republicans whining about them under any name (Pork, earmarks, Sally), while reaping the benefits of them at the same time. I know I should be used to hypocrisy in Politics, but I'm just getting so freaking fed up with it. Fuck yeah. Especially seeing that ol' bloated fart John McCain going on and on and on about it. And he's shaming Obama for it. Like Obama has the power to stop them in the first place. I mean, seriously. The President's role in this is pretty simple: He can approve or reject the whole bill. Otherwise, he has to ask nicely and hope people don't do it.
|
|
|
Post by skyfire on Mar 4, 2009 20:10:07 GMT -5
Fuck yeah. Especially seeing that ol' bloated fart John McCain going on and on and on about it. And he's shaming Obama for it. Like Obama has the power to stop them in the first place. I mean, seriously. The President's role in this is pretty simple: He can approve or reject the whole bill. Otherwise, he has to ask nicely and hope people don't do it. The state of Texas has it that the governor holds limited line-item veto powers. Specifically, whenever the budget for the state comes across the governor's desk, said governor has the right to line out individual expenditures while still retaining the bulk of the budget. As a counter-balance, the legislature can vote the items back in place with a high enough majority. IMHO, a similar law should be considered for the nation as a whole: the President would have the ability to line-item veto expenditures that do not fall under an "exempt" category (such as law enforcement or health care). If Congress wants those items back in, they would have to take a vote on each and every one.
|
|
|
Post by SimSim on Mar 4, 2009 20:17:36 GMT -5
Skyfire, the line item veto would make sense for the president to have, in fact Clinton got that power in 95 or 96 to fight "pork barrel spending". But it was deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 98.
|
|
|
Post by Vene on Mar 4, 2009 20:19:31 GMT -5
I agree in theory, but I just don't see it being practical. There is already so much bureaucracy in place that stalls action. I can only see this making it worse.
ETA: I see simsim pointed out it was unconstitutional. I did not know this. I'd appreciate a citation.
|
|
|
Post by schizophonic on Mar 4, 2009 21:16:37 GMT -5
Skyfire, the line item veto would make sense for the president to have, in fact Clinton got that power in 95 or 96 to fight "pork barrel spending". But it was deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 98. Exactly what I was thinking. The model sounds very similar, in fact. I favor the concept of line item vetoes, but the fact remains the President doesn't have the power, so he either approves or denies the whole. Which is why I'm irritated with McCain, who was one of the people who reaped benefit from "pork" but rants about the evils of Obama signing the bill.
|
|