Earmarks explained. sm
Posted By: LVMT on 2009-03-11
In Reply to: Oh? and he has his greedy little paw right in there, doesn't he? - Mrs. Bridger
The ones who vote for the spending bills are the bad guys. Ron Paul votes against all huge spending bills. The bill passes anyway and since it passes, he makes sure all his constituents requests are in there and by earmarking he is tagging the money and keeping track of where it goes. If it is not earmarked, it goes back to the executive like a blank check. By earmarking, he is maintaining a certain degree of transparency and accountability plus giving money the government looted from his constituents back to them.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
he explained his
position when asked -- oh horrors!!!
you explained quicker than i did :)
I was about to but you beat me! lol
Don't need to explain to you, you explained yourself in your last sentence.
t
It has been explained fully many times
in this post and you are obviously unwilling to accept anything we say.
Yes and 60% of the earmarks
were from the dems. Both sides suck as far as I am concerned! If you are going to comment and bash the pubs for their 40%....at least be thorough and report the dems and their 60%. Now we have President Obama who said that he would not sign anything with earmarks in it and that he would read every line, etc........now that he is pres.....he seems to be whistling a different tune.
There are 8,500 earmarks in that bill costing us around 810 billion dollars. As far as I am concerned.....both dems and pubs know where they can go because I tired of this crap! They are all crooks. They are all out for their own special interests. They are hurting us more than helping us.
So it is 100% earmarks? NM
x
You know your candidate....look up his earmarks...
A million to the hospital his wife works for after they nearly doubled her salary. Yep, he is against those pesky earmarks. The bridge to nowhere was a huge one. He is Washington politics as usual. There is no change there.
Yes, he is careful with his votes. Voted against the Infants Born Alive act twice. Managed, with the 130 presents, to show up for what was important to him..denying medical care for an infant who managed to survive an abortion. yeah, there's something to be real proud of.
Look into Obama's earmarks...
particularly the one for Michelle's employer after they doubled her salary. No one in Illinois benefitted from that one other than the Obama family and her employer.
Just like O saying "no earmarks," right? nm
xxx
Interesting comment on earmarks...
*** Edited by Moderator***
Please post URLs, not copyrighted materials or content from any other site.
wanna talk about earmarks?
Sarah Palin just this year sent 31 earmarks totaling $197 million (more per person than any other state submitted)... she requested even more than that in 2007. And she is one that is running on a ticket talking about NO PORK BARREL!
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2008154532_webpalin02m.html
You need to understand the difference in earmarks and...
pork barrel, first. Every state asks for earmarks. Pork barrel are earmarks that don't come through the normal channels...that congresspeople try to slap in the middle of a bill that will pass in order to get their "pork" through. Congress are the ones who do pork earmarks, and last time I looked, Sarah Palin has never been in Congress. Obama has, and Joe Biden has, and boy howdy...let's talk about earmarks. By the way, John McCain has asked for zip, zilch, nada.
Obama asked for a big one and his wife's employer and her salary got doubled. Coincidence? LOL. I think not.
Definition of Pork aka Earmarks
Just so we all know what pork (aka "earmarks") actually is:
http://www.earmarks.omb.gov
/earmarks_definition.html
From the Office of Management and Budget:
OMB defines earmarks as funds provided by the Congress for projects or programs where the congressional direction (in bill or report language) circumvents Executive Branch merit-based or competitive allocation processes, or specifies the location or recipient, or otherwise curtails the ability of the Executive Branch to manage critical aspects of the funds allocation process.
In other words, provisions added to a bill after the president has ratified the bill that direct funds to certain districts in exchange for promises made beforehand by the representatives from those districts to vote yes on said bill. These are the earmarks (or "pork") that McCain and Obama both campaigned against. This bill contains no pork (yet) because they just passed it.
The GOP's definition of earmarks aka "pork": "Stuff we don't like."
Technically, the provisions in the bill that the GOP and others are calling pork (or earmarks) are not pork.
But he just signed a bill filled with earmarks???
x
8600 earmarks = 6 BILLION DOLLARS!
to that line by line lie Obama told when he wanted to be elected? He hasn't looked at one page, let one line by line...... thanks to all who put such a thug and liar in office! 
Ron Paul on EARMARKS.....please don't miss his point
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fq_5H1XKVww&eurl=http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/
No, the issue of transparency with earmarks did not escape me
but his reasoning was, at times, questionable. It appears as though he is going to take the money and run unlike some of his compatriots who are "attempting" to refuse stimulus money.
Earmarks Include:
- Add-ons. If the Administration asks for $100 million for formula grants, for example, and Congress provides $110 million and places restrictions (such as site-specific locations) on the additional $10 million, the additional $10 million is counted as an earmark.
- Carve-outs. If the Administration asks for $100 million and Congress provides $100 million but places restrictions on some portion of the funding, the restricted portion is counted as an earmark.
- Funding provisions that do not name a recipient, but are so specific that only one recipient can qualify for funding.
Stop the spending on stupid earmarks,
give the middle class some real tax cuts, and have some patience. Things aren't going to change overnight and they're not going to change by continuing to throw money at it every day.
Obama has no room to talk about earmarks....and neither he nor Biden...
have much room to talk about flip flopping. Ahem.
Obama lied to the country. "No earmarks"
nm
|
