Politics and Religion

Who are the Pigs in Congress who are Wastefully Spending TaxPayers' Money? (a must-read)
jw_blue 3322 reads
posted

***This is based from the Citizens Against Government Waste's report. You can also find the related link below. (IMO, we need to have congress publicly list out the highest earmark spending senators and congressmen/women every quarter, so the taxpayers will know who the real pigs are.) Here's the report:

In its new report, the (nonpartisan) Council for Citizens Against Government Waste gave the Republican presidential nominee a 100 percent rating for his votes in the Senate last year, and a lifetime score of 88 percent.

By comparison, the nonpartisan, nonprofit group, which is the lobbying arm of Citizens Against Government Waste, gave the Democratic presidential nominee a 10 percent score last year and a lifetime score of 18 percent. Biden, Obama’s running mate, scored 0 percent last year and an overall score of 22 percent.

Higher scores mean stronger resistance to federal earmarks. Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the Republican vice presidential candidate, was not included because the ratings only evaluate members of Congress.

“In spite of a growing recognition that earmarks are a problem, Congress still spends more than is necessary,” CCAGW President Tom Schatz said in a written statement. “Taxpayers would be wise to hang onto their wallets and demand that Congress refocus its priorities and cut wasteful spending.”

The Democratic ticket has repeatedly criticized Palin for seeking earmarks for her city and for her state, including her initial support for Alaska’s infamous “Bridge to Nowhere.”

But mayors and governors do not fund these projects - members of Congress do. In 2005, Obama and Biden both voted for the “Bridge to Nowhere,” defeating a bill to spend that money on Hurricane Katrina relief instead.

The group has analyzed roll call votes since 1991 to distinguish members of Congress whom it describes as taxpayer advocates from those it says favor wasteful programs and pork-barrel spending. In the last year, the group rated 100 House votes and 35 Senate votes.

McCain scored 100 percent, but he did not earn the Taxpayer Super Hero Award because he was present for only 11 of the 35 Senate votes.

Members of Congress are considered “superheroes” if they score a 100 percent rating; “heroes” earn between 80 and 99 percent; “friendly” members score between 60 and 79 percent; “lukewarm” lawmakers get between 40 and 59 percent; “unfriendly” members score between 20 and 39 percent, and “hostile” representatives and senators are measured between 0 and 19 percent.

Three GOP congressman — Reps. Jeff Flake of Arizona, Jeb Hensarling of Texas and James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin — all earned superhero status.

The rankings were based on several tax-related and spending bills. Obama and Biden scored low for voting against banning the use of earmarks for a spending bill on bicycle paths or trails (McCain did not vote); and against extending Bush’s tax cuts while McCain voted in favor of it.

Obama voted against prohibiting Congress from borrowing from the Social Security Trust Fund to finance other government programs (Biden and McCain did not vote). Obama and Biden voted against barring non-defense earmarks in spending bills for ongoing combat operations while McCain voted in favor of it.

Since taking office, Obama has requested $740 million in federal earmarks for Illinois, including $750,000 for a visitors center, $713,000 for soybean disease research, $401,000 for a juvenile delinquent prevention program and $250,000 for obesity prevention.

At the Democratic National Convention last month, Obama promised to take action against wasteful spending.

“I will also go through the federal budget line by line eliminating programs that no longer work,” he told 84,000 people at Invesco Field in Denver.

But this year, Obama voted against cutting $23 billion in federal programs rated ineffective by the Office of Management and Budget. His campaign said there were programs he didn’t want to cut.

“He’s been completely transparent about the earmarks he’s requested and about earmarks he’s received and he didn’t even ask for any earmarks last year because he knows that this system is broken,” Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton said.

Last year, Biden requested $120 million in earmarks for Delaware, including $2 million for an oyster bed revitalization effort, $656,000 to retrofit apartments with sprinklers, $500,000 for a nutrition program and $246,000 to renovate an opera house.

“Democrats won in part in 2006 saying that earmarks were part of a culture of corruption,” Schatz said, referring to the 2006 elections that gave Democrats a narrow majority in Congress. “But they view it as a currency of re-election or they’d be getting rid of them. So until they say no, they’re just as bad, if not worse than what the Republicans did when they were in charge.”

-- Modified on 9/11/2008 10:10:04 AM

McCain has definitely had a better position on earmarks.  Way better than Obama, way better than Biden, way better than Palin.  They all have horrible records on Federal earmarks.

That's not enough to sway my vote, but I totally agree with you.

Your basing your entire decision for who should lead your country for 4 years on earmarks?

The rest of the issues mean nothing to you?

Tusayan1505 reads

Since when do juvenile delinquency prevention program and obesity prevention qualify as wasteful spending?

jw_blue1540 reads

"Since taking office, Obama has requested $740 million in federal earmarks for Illinois, including $750,000 for a visitors center, $713,000 for soybean disease research, $401,000 for a juvenile delinquent prevention program and $250,000 for obesity prevention."


Those 2 might not be, but if you put too much money in it like $400K and and $250k respectively the watchdog might consider it wasteful. $750k on a visitors center and $713k on soybean disease research is definitely wasteful.

Ok, juvenile delinquency and obesity are problems, but ask yourself this - why in holy hell should I, a taxpayer in Missouri - foot the bill for a juvenile delinquency problem in Illinois?

Some earmarks may actually have merit. Without knowing any facts, I would say that the Oyster bed revitalization project mentioned for Delaware may actually have merit. If the purpose of this project is to save the jobs of those who harvest oysters, then perhaps that is a justifiable use of federal dollars. Solving local problems - like obesity and juvenile delinquency shoult NOT be the job of the federal gov't.

The real problem here, is that the vast majority of these earmarks have absolutely NO merit whatsoever. Their only purpose is to grease the skids to get bills passed, and so congressmen can write home to their districts and brag about how they bring home the bacon when it is time to run for re-election. Well, it is time for Congressmen to stop measuring their success on how fat they've gotten off the public trough. We simply can't afford it anymore.

Register Now!