Go Back   Matt-Hughes.com Official Forums > General Discussions > The Woodshed

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-24-2009, 04:37 PM
rockdawg21's Avatar
rockdawg21 rockdawg21 is offline
I'm kind of a big deal
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 5,584
Default Earmark Spending by our President

So much for no earmark spending.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...earmarks_N.htm

Quote:
WASHINGTON A $410 billion spending bill unveiled in Congress on Monday includes at least $3.8 billion worth of funding for the kinds of lawmakers' pet projects that President Obama has pledged to trim from future budgets.

The bill is meant to end a budget impasse left over from last year, after President Bush threatened to veto the Democratic-controlled Congress' plan because of its cost. It would fund most federal agencies through the end of the current fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30. Those agencies are operating under a congressional extension of last year's budgets that expires next week. Congress approved full-year budgets last fall for only three departments: Defense, Homeland Security and Veterans Affairs.

The bill introduced Monday includes 806 pages listing specific projects added to the spending bill by members of Congress. The $3.8 billion in the bill for legislative projects known as "earmarks" is down about 5% from the $4 billion in fiscal 2008, House Appropriations Committee spokeswoman Kirstin Brost said.

The House plans to vote on the bill this week.

Steve Ellis of non-partisan Taxpayers for Common Sense said the latest bill combined with $6.6 billion in earmarks already approved for Defense, Homeland Security and Veterans Affairs would bring the total cost of legislative projects to more than $10 billion for fiscal year 2009. Ellis said his group has yet to analyze the new bill, so he could not say exactly how much is for earmarks.

Obama and other critics say earmarks are often wasteful, and Obama has pledged to reduce the number and amount spent. On the White House website, Obama promises to "slash earmarks to no greater than 1994 levels" a campaign promise that he has said would cap earmarks at $7.8 billion.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs sidestepped a question about earmarks Monday, saying he hadn't discussed the bill with Obama. Gibbs suggested that Obama wants Congress to show restraint, saying that "everybody has to be involved in the sharing of pain" in the budget process.

Among them: $142,500 for a museum honoring the late House speaker Sam Rayburn, requested by Rep. Ralph Hall, R-Texas; $300,000 for a science camp curriculum in West Virginia requested by Rep. Alan Mollohan, D-W.Va.; and $150,000 for renovations to the Westwood Theater in Rexburg, Idaho, requested by Rep. Mike Simpson, R-Idaho.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-24-2009, 05:38 PM
Crisco
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

seems like the Republicans threw a few in there. It's not all Big O's fault
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-24-2009, 06:10 PM
NateR's Avatar
NateR NateR is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,734
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crisco
seems like the Republicans threw a few in there. It's not all Big O's fault
Well, Obama is the one who opened the floodgates and is allowing for all this spending. If this fails, the Obama could be regarded as the most fiscally irresponsible President in our nation's history.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-24-2009, 06:24 PM
bradwright
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NateR
Well, Obama is the one who opened the floodgates and is allowing for all this spending. If this fails, the Obama could be regarded as the most fiscally irresponsible President in our nation's history.
Really?,,do you realize that before Obama took office that your country had a 550 billion dollar deficit and was more then 10 trillion in debt?
and most of it racked up in the last eight years,,
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-24-2009, 06:27 PM
NateR's Avatar
NateR NateR is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,734
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bradwright
Really?,,do you realize that before Obama took office that your country had a 550 billion dollar deficit and was more then 10 trillion in debt?
and most of it racked up in the last eight years,,
Yes, but that was because we were fighting two wars, one of which is effectively over. It wasn't some Capital Hill, pork-barrel spending spree.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-24-2009, 06:38 PM
bradwright
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NateR
Yes, but that was because we were fighting two wars, one of which is effectively over. It wasn't some Capital Hill, pork-barrel spending spree.
this spending spree i think is necessary to stave off a complete collapse of your country financially,,

as far as this being a burden to the tax payers?well lets just say at 480 thousand dollars of debt per house hold pre Obama this latest spending wont really matter that much,,the people were already in way over their heads and most didn't even know it,,
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-24-2009, 06:46 PM
Bonnie Bonnie is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Where the bluebonnets bloom
Posts: 6,588
Default

Well, since we've never had a female president and most of Congress is made up of males, I feel totally okay with saying, "You men are total spendthrifts!".
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-24-2009, 07:08 PM
medic92
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonnie
Well, since we've never had a female president and most of Congress is made up of males, I feel totally okay with saying, "You men are total spendthrifts!".
If it had been a woman president we'd be in the same situation but every American would have a closet full of government-supplied shoes.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-24-2009, 07:12 PM
Moose
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NateR
Yes, but that was because we were fighting two wars, one of which is effectively over. It wasn't some Capital Hill, pork-barrel spending spree.
Which war is effectively over Nate?
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-24-2009, 07:14 PM
rockdawg21's Avatar
rockdawg21 rockdawg21 is offline
I'm kind of a big deal
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 5,584
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonnie
Well, since we've never had a female president and most of Congress is made up of males, I feel totally okay with saying, "You men are total spendthrifts!".
Don't be jealous Bonnie!

Besides, when the rest of the U.S. goes bankrupt, Texas will just concede. Our economy is only being dragged down by Washington.
__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.