More Pork

"Lawmakers asked for nearly $20 billion in earmarks or "pork-barrel projects" in their homes states in 2009, a nearly 15 percent increase in funding from last year, according to a prominent taxpayer interest group."

"While the number of earmark projects requests decreased by 12 percent last year from 11,610 to 10,160, the amount of money going to the projects increased by more than $2 billion to 19.6 billion for FY 2009.

"Despite repeated claims by members of Congress that earmarks have been reduced, the Pig Book belies that claim," said CAGW President Tom Schatz, who noted that this year's spending bill also included 221 anonymous earmarks amounting to $7.8 billion of the spending that no lawmakers took credit for."

"The book highlights a number of "egregious" projects, including $1.8 million for swine odor and manure management in Ames, Iowa, $3.8 million for the Old Tiger Stadium Conservancy in Detroit, $1.9 million for a water taxi service in Connecticut and $380,000 for a fairgrounds area in Kotzebue, Alaska."

""This Pig Book is more than just a list of projects. It shows why taxpayers are frustrated, why tomorrow when people have to send in their taxes, why there is this high level of frustration. It's no coincidence that there are going to be tea parties across the country," Williams said. "There is growing divide between members of Congress and the people that pay taxes and this divide is getting bigger and bigger."

Oink! Group Calls Out Top Congressional Porkers - Presidential Politics | Political News - FOXNews.com


This countries "leaders", from both parties, are the only thing wrong with this country right now

I have no problem with "pork". Without it, I seriously question if most in Southwest Virginia would have things such as high speed internet or clean drinking water.

I don't think he knows what a pork-barrel project is.

Yeah, alot of folks freak out over pork...but they don't realize that is the way small town America gets a good sum of Fed money for local projects.

I agree that some pork spending is much needed but there are many that are BS. Here are just a few; $219,000 teach college students to watch TV, 1.2 mil. to study breeding habits of the woodchuck, $150,000 to study the Hatfields-McCoy fued, 1.7 mil. for pig odor research in Iowa, $200,000 for tatoo removal research, and the list goes on. How hard would it be for the politicians in Washington to be able to vote down some of the nonsense pork spending? If they would just use a little common sense which I'm sure they have but don't use. Then it seems it always goes back to the bickering between (R) and (D) parties and thats when they get nothing accomplished that can truely help Americans.

The problem is that pork is put in bills to secure the vote of the congressman representing the area the pork $$$ are heading to. Without it, many good bills would fail. The best way to trim a bill is through a line item veto...but if I'm not mistaken, the President doesn't have that power now days.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Milk3

"Lawmakers asked for nearly $20 billion in earmarks or "pork-barrel projects" in their homes states in 2009, a nearly 15 percent increase in funding from last year, according to a prominent taxpayer interest group."

"While the number of earmark projects requests decreased by 12 percent last year from 11,610 to 10,160, the amount of money going to the projects increased by more than $2 billion to 19.6 billion for FY 2009.

"Despite repeated claims by members of Congress that earmarks have been reduced, the Pig Book belies that claim," said CAGW President Tom Schatz, who noted that this year's spending bill also included 221 anonymous earmarks amounting to $7.8 billion of the spending that no lawmakers took credit for."

"The book highlights a number of "egregious" projects, including $1.8 million for swine odor and manure management in Ames, Iowa, $3.8 million for the Old Tiger Stadium Conservancy in Detroit, $1.9 million for a water taxi service in Connecticut and $380,000 for a fairgrounds area in Kotzebue, Alaska."

""This Pig Book is more than just a list of projects. It shows why taxpayers are frustrated, why tomorrow when people have to send in their taxes, why there is this high level of frustration. It's no coincidence that there are going to be tea parties across the country," Williams said. "There is growing divide between members of Congress and the people that pay taxes and this divide is getting bigger and bigger."

Oink! Group Calls Out Top Congressional Porkers - Presidential Politics | Political News - FOXNews.com


This countries "leaders", from both parties, are the only thing wrong with this country right now

---

Hope we don't get any for the schools. Since the kids that have paid a dollar and a quarter in taxes are crying.

Supreme Court ruled against line item veto beast, and I agree that would be the best way to cut out a lot of this.

Funny thing is that Rudy Guilani pushed for the line item veto to be taken from Clinton, who used it fairly effectively...and the Court, in their infinite wisdom (SARCASM) did take it away. But, it may have been a blessing in disguise since Bush never had the chance to abuse it. Anyways, given the current economical mess we're in, IMO the President should have it on a limited basis....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crackersneckian

I agree that some pork spending is much needed but there are many that are BS. Here are just a few; $219,000 teach college students to watch TV, 1.2 mil. to study breeding habits of the woodchuck, $150,000 to study the Hatfields-McCoy fued, 1.7 mil. for pig odor research in Iowa, $200,000 for tatoo removal research, and the list goes on. How hard would it be for the politicians in Washington to be able to vote down some of the nonsense pork spending? If they would just use a little common sense which I'm sure they have but don't use. Then it seems it always goes back to the bickering between (R) and (D) parties and thats when they get nothing accomplished that can truely help Americans.

---

Links to that? I'd say most of the "bad" pork you see, is twisted to sound completely dumb. Like the teach college students to watch TV is something like more TV's for a local college...you can twist those to make it look like what you mentioned when it's really not that stupid. I'm glad for pork projects around here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Burton13

Links to that? I'd say most of the "bad" pork you see, is twisted to sound completely dumb. Like the teach college students to watch TV is something like more TV's for a local college...you can twist those to make it look like what you mentioned when it's really not that stupid. I'm glad for pork projects around here.

---

The first thing to do is use your search on yahoo or what ever you use and look up pork barrel spending list. I thought you had enough sense to do that. The second thing is I never said I was against pork spending around here. It is very much needed in alot of ways. It doesn't matter what I say anyway cause you will whine or grip no matter what, your reputation on here proves that. Your always right and everyone else is wrong.

I don't have to look anything up, you made the claim so you should be able to back it up with some info. Not only the "claim" of these things you mentioned, but also the link to college where these "teaching to use a tv" class is taught. And my reputation is and proves what?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sup-rbeast

The problem is that pork is put in bills to secure the vote of the congressman representing the area the pork $$$ are heading to. Without it, many good bills would fail. The best way to trim a bill is through a line item veto...but if I'm not mistaken, the President doesn't have that power now days.

---

Same ole shit

Line-item veto can & should pass constitutional muster

Q: What about the line-item veto?

GIULIANI: The line-item veto is unconstitutional. I took Bill Clinton to the Supreme Court and beat him. It's unconstitutional. What the heck can you do about that if you're a strict constructionist?
ROMNEY: I'm in favor of the line-item veto. I had it, used it 844 times. I want to see Libby Dole's line-item veto put in place. I'd have never gone to the Supreme Court and said it's unconstitutional.
Q: Do you believe it is?
ROMNEY: I believe the line-item veto, if properly structured, passes constitutional muster. I'm in favor of the line-item veto to make sure that the president is able to help cut out pork and waste.
GIULIANI: You have to be honest with people. The line-item veto is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court has ruled on it. I am in favor of a line-item veto, except you have to do it legally. If I had let Pres. Clinton take $250 million away from the people of my city illegally and unconstitutionally, I wouldn't have been much of a mayor. Source: 2007 Republican debate in Dearborn, Michigan Oct 9, 2007 Mitt Romney on Government Reform E-mail | Save | Print | http://images.usatoday.com/marketing/_images/rssbox.gif
http://images.usatoday.com/news/_pho...06/24/bush.jpghttp://images.usatoday.com/_common/_images/clear.gifhttp://images.usatoday.com/_common/_...de/enlarge.gif EnlargeBy Mandel Ngan, AFP/Getty Imageshttp://images.usatoday.com/_common/_images/clear.gifPresident George W. Bush gives a speech in Budapest earlier this week.



WASHINGTON (AP) ? President Bush is pushing Congress to give him more authority to slice and dice the budget, an idea that's popular with conservatives who think the White House needs more muscle to restrict federal spending.
"Under the current system, many lawmakers are able to insert funding for pet projects into large spending bills," Bush said in his Saturday radio address.
Bush says this leaves lawmakers with two bad options: They can vote against an entire bill even though it contains worthwhile spending, or they can vote for a bill even though it includes money for special-interest projects.
"The president is left with the same dilemma ? either he has to veto the entire bill, or sign the bill and approve the unnecessary spending," Bush said, adding that governors in 43 states have line-item veto authority.
On Thursday, the House passed a watered-down version of a more sweeping line-item veto law that the Supreme Court struck down in 1998, saying it took too much spending authority away from Congress.
The House bill, which passed 247-172, would let the president try to kill individual items contained in spending or tax bills that he otherwise signs into law. Congress would be required to vote on those specific items again. A simple majority in both the House and the Senate could override the president's objections.
Bush said a line-item veto would reduce the incentive for Congress to spend wastefully because lawmakers would be less likely to slip pet projects into large spending bills if they knew they could be held up to public scrutiny.
"A line-item veto would give the president a way to insist on greater discipline in the budget," Bush said.
The measure must still pass the Senate, and that's by no means a certainty.
Democrats generally oppose the measure. And not all Republicans are excited about the idea, although some embrace it as a way to demonstrate election-year resolve to rein in federal spending.
Lawmakers from both parties who have reservations about the line-item veto contend it shifts too much power to the president, allowing him to try to cut projects proposed by his political enemies, or to use the threat of cutting projects in exchange for favorable votes on legislation the White House desires.
Copyright 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast,
USATODAY.com - Bush touts line-item veto

Wonder if Bush would have vetoed the building in Iraq that leaked sewage from the 2nd floor to the first or the bridge to nowhere?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Burton13

I don't have to look anything up, you made the claim so you should be able to back it up with some info. Not only the "claim" of these things you mentioned, but also the link to college where these "teaching to use a tv" class is taught. And my reputation is and proves what?

---

I don't know why you can't look things up? I told you where to look but you refuse to look I guess because you afraid to see the truth. Even if I told you the site you'ld end up saying it was bias because you've alresdy done that before. I didn't say nothing about colleges needing more TV's( you said that)nor did I say "teaching to use a TV"(it said something about watching TV, I didn't say that some politician did). I repeated what I read and you always seem to twist words to suit yourself. You try to make others out to be villians because I guess to make you feel smart or like your above everyone else. Don't fool yourself into believing that you know it all, from what I've seen you got a long way to go. All I was saying is that there was some dumb pork barrel spending and I don't see how you can deny that.

I'll take that as you don't know where to find it or don't want to show where it came from. I typed it in and couldn't find it, but I do believe you heard/read it somewheres. I'm not going to believe something that ridiculous unless I see it, what I mean is..seeing that college and that class. Again I think most of it is spun so it sounds idiotic, when it probably is something completely different and possibly beneficial. I think it is at Clintwood(a student I go to school with told me this) that they spend an entire 6 weeks( 1/3 of the semester) learning/practicing with the TI-83-or whichever newer model- calculator. Again, this is what he told me. Now I could say that Boucher was getting money for a class at a local school to teach students how to use a calculator...that sounds kind of dumb when its put like that, doesn't it? It's not when you go to college and everyday in your calculus class or whatever, you must you those calculators and if you know what I'm talking about..you know how difficult they are to use sometimes. What about the computer/keyboarding classes schools around here have? "Boucher is asking for money for a class at a local school to teach kids how to use the internet", again sounds kinda dumb when put like that. So, I don't believe these projects are as bad and ridiculous as some sound...though there may be a few that are.


As for the "tattoo removal research", I have heard something similar. It was tax money to help former gang members/prisoners get their tattoos removed. I know that was their choice and it was stupid, but if a person wants to do something with their life..it's kinda hard to get a job with Latin Kings or Nazi tatts all over you. I would rather tax dollars go to something that would help them stop being a drain on society, than paying for their stay at a state prison. The tax money is going to go some wheres, rather it be there. Now again that doesn't sound as bad when it's spun.

Found one site that is Specific Examples of Pork Barrel Politics and whether these are legit who knows. I also found something mentioning it in a column out of a Wisconsin paper. It was called the Dunn County News. Part of it reads as follows :[ Wisconsin's own William Proxmire made quite a name for himself by calling attention each month to frivolous spending by the U.S. Government. Through his "Golden Fleese" awards, he publicized the horror of spending $150 for hammers or $200,000 to teach college students to watch TV.] This guy is now dead but this was one of the examples of absurd spending. Since he is dead I'm sure this is an old spending item. You mention the classes about using calculator, computer or the internet and I agree those are needed for both kids and adults. I'm not against pork spending, I just think that pork needs to be reviewed before its approved so that the things that are not going to benefit the people are not funded.