President Bush to Take on Earmarks in the State of the Union
Tags: Government, Tax and Spend Liberalism.
Click here to get Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority by Matt Margolis and Mark Noonan.
From the Wall Street Journal:
As every reformed addict knows, the road to recovery is long and hard. So it is for Republicans who became addicted to spending “earmarks” while running Congress, lost their majority in large part because of it, and are now struggling with mixed results to dry out.
Their latest halting effort in what appears to be at least a 12-step recovery plan will come tonight, when President Bush uses his State of the Union address to lay down his toughest anti-earmarking pledge to date. We’re told he will tell Congress that he will veto any fiscal 2009 spending bill that doesn’t cut earmarks in half from 2008 levels. He will also report that he is issuing a Presidential order informing executive departments that from now on they should refuse to fund earmarks that aren’t explicitly mentioned in statutory language.
Excellent – good government, excellent reform…and it jams Democrats up against a wall on this issue they pretended to care about in 2006 and 2007. They either have to go along with President Bush – and anger their narrow special interests – or oppose him, and anger everyone else. This is the sort of thing we’ll have to do all through 2008 – keep forcing Democrats to choose between the high-sounding rhetoric and their disgraceful reality.
Thank you for visiting Blogs For Victory. If you enjoy our content, please consider making a donation to help us cover the costs of our servers.Mark Noonan is co-author (with Matt Margolis) of Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority. He also blogs at Nevada News and Views. Follow Mark on Twitter.
28 Responses to “President Bush to Take on Earmarks in the State of the Union”
Caucus of Corruption
Earmarks where the hallmark of the Republican Congress. Now Bush is against them….
Or does that go, “He voted for them before he voted against them….”
Bush never met a hypocrisy he didn’t like.
LiberalMind,
All too true that we GOPers blew is horribly on earmarks…but what matters, now, is not what happened in the past, but what is proposed for the future. We’re proposing real reforms which the people care about…what are the Democrats proposing? To end the war in Iraq? We’ll see who wins…
You’re kidding, right? Whose rhetoric are we be talking about? Earmarks in 2007 were down 25-44% from 2006, even with 40% of last years earmarks coming from Republicans. We all agree that wasteful spending should be cut, it’s curious how the fiscal conservative drive of the GOP only comes out now, after Democrats have actually done something about the issue.
So…
In his last year in office, and facing an almost certain defeat for the republican party in the executive and probably the legislative branches, your hero George W Bush has a road to Damascus experience…
How typical.
the WSJ wrote: “So it is for Republicans who became addicted to spending “earmarks” while running Congress, lost their majority in large part because of it.”
as a centrist indie, I voted against the GOP in 06 due to:
1) Failure to balance any budget.
2) Failure to actually shrink the Fed govt.
3) Failure to stop continued scandals.
4) Failure to respect States Rights (10th admendment) in the continued sellout to the big govt, social rightwing.
5) Failure to provide adquate cks n balance to the executive branch.
They either have to go along with President Bush – and anger their narrow special interests – or oppose him, and anger everyone else.
This is what happens when you have a party that really has no core principles.
President Bush’s State of the Union Speech If it were not for the fact there is a writer’s strike, I don’t think even Barbara Bush would watch this debacle and almost certain revisionist history. I will have to use one of the typical Repug poster’s term on this one; crickets.
1/20/09
Jane, I highly doubt you even watch, or understand any SOTU speech.
Your posts are void of any reality or critical thought.
neocon, thanks for bringing actual debate instead of just insults. Oh wait… you did pull a typical neocon post. It was a simple insult. Thanks for not letting us down.
So Dems said they wanted to end earmarks before they were elected to the majority in ‘06. They did not do it, but they did drop the number and the dollar amount significantly. For 5 years of GOP rule, earmarks were spiralling out of control and everyone just let it go and accepted it… even after Dems brought up the insane spending of the bridge to nowhere and others.
And now you are trying to hold earmarks against the Dems??? Good Luck on that one. That will go over about as well as the Iraq disaster.
neocon, you can respond with your typical insults. We all expect them now.
From July 07, the US domestic sales averaged 388.6 million gallons of fuel per day.
The average tax per gallon that State and Federal Governments collect is about .45.
Thats about 174 Million dollars, per day, that we are soaked by politicians. Thats over 63.5 Billion dollars per year on average. Thats enough to pay for health care for every man, woman and child in this nation.
Thats about the volume per year Congress wastes on earmarks.
The Democrats ran on the last elections representing that they would halt these things.
It was a lie.
“That will go over about as well as the Iraq disaster.” Joe
BDS. Take your meds Joe. You mean the war that is lost, cut and run. The “Civil War”, cut and run. The unwinnable war, Cut and run? Vote for the war, against funding, cut and run?
Joe,
Insults? Claiming that Jane has no capacity for critical thought is an insult? It’s just fact. But facts are elusive to you, I know that now. Evidenced by your lack of understanding of government spending. It’s been a problem on both sides of the aisle for years now, if not decades. You might want to ask Murtha about earmarks though in 2007, he was the best at them.
Both parties will be held accountable for spending. And when the Dem candidates pander to their constituencies on UHC, and more bloated government programs, we can all see the seriousness of which they approach the problem.
I really am amused by your hyper-sensitivity Joey.
Since my last comment is awaiting moderation, here are the quotes:
For the first quote:
http://coburn.senate.gov/ffm/index.cfm?FuseAction=LatestNews.NewsStories&ContentRecord_id=1af9c397-802a-23ad-41d4-256d1248a85e&Issue_id=
For the second quote:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/30/eveningnews/main3559471.shtml
neocon, where are your facts?
Monday, January 14, 2008 12:31 PM
Democratic Rep. John Murtha led all House members in earmarks last year, procuring $162 million in “pork” for his congressional district.
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/Murtha_Earmarks/2008/01/14/64216.html?s=al&promo_code=42F8-1
I have a general policy of saying nothing if I cannot say anything good about a person. I have violated this policy a lot but I think I will stick with it and say nothing at all about george.
I think this comment really sums this whole topic up…
http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/1107/Budget_bills_contain_20_billion_in_pork.html
So there is no defense for the insane amount of earmarks and I think people on BOTH sides agree it should be shut down…….. or at least SERIOUSLY modify the procedure.
You’re right Joe. See post #12.
Both parties are guilty.
MS: I have a general policy of saying nothing if I cannot say anything good about a person. I have violated this policy a lot but I think I will stick with it and say nothing at all about george.
Actually, I think this (curtailing earmarks) is one topic on which both sides could get on board. Granted, one could justifiably complain that Bush was woefully slow off the mark on the issue while the GOP congress went hog wild (so to speak) for years. As a result, this was one of those things that was a softball pitched underhanded to the Dems in 2006. But likewise, one could justifiably complain that the Dems haven’t lived up to their presumed commitment on the matter either. They’ve done some, but they basically had to be shamed into it.
Either way, while pledges to curtail earmarks are nice, they don’t mean much. Nothing works like making the porkers hurt. There are several prime offenders in both parties. And the way to make a serious statement is to vote them out.
neocon | January 28th, 2008 at 7:48 am
Jane, I highly doubt you even watch, or understand any SOTU speech.
Your posts are void of any reality or critical thought.
You are such a thoughtful, kind Christian man – I am sure that you witness on behalf of Jesus on a daily basis. God Bless You.
There are several prime offenders in both parties. And the way to make a serious statement is to vote them out”
The problem with that, is that the people getting the earmarks are also the people voting them in.
Democratic Rep. John Murtha led all House members in earmarks last year, procuring $162 million in “pork” for his congressional district.neocon | January 28th, 2008 at 9:59 am
I went to Murtha’s district when the swift-boaters came to Johnstown in 2006. I have seen his district. I doubt the $162 even makes a dent in getting this rust belt steel region of the country moving again. But I saw a lot of hard working Americans working hard for a shot a brighter future.
For me earmarks are not the question so long as they are a sound investment in a Congressional district, out in the open for all to see and paid for with a real revenue stream; no promise of give me a tax cut today for trickle down tomorrow. Our country’s children can’t take on any more debt
Dubya’s last SOTU address.
The nightmare is almost over.
Thank God.
neocon | January 28th, 2008 at 7:48 am
Jane, I highly doubt you even watch, or understand any SOTU speech.
I’ll watch, but if he calls me a terrorist lover for wanting a FISA bill that does not provide immunity for law breaking telecoms, I will call him a lame duck 31%er that no one this side of Fox news listens too and turn him off.
It is my humble opinion POTUS should compare and contrast what the 31 year old trader M. Jerome Kerveil is being charged with by France who they have dubbed a rogue banker! Therefore, does this also mean that when money lenders and bankers in America played, HEDGED MONTE-CARLO, to the point that the debt was finally set on their books, as homeowners were scammed out of their home nationally? Also, the the Subprime Housing Market Guru, John Paulson in anyway related to the Treasury Secretary, for they appear to both have the same last name, and are set to get Alan Greenspan to take over taxpayer’s money in order to make bankers richer!
Sunny,
A belief in God does not mean I ignore the obvious. And your post is also evidence of a lack of critical thinking.
Liberals are just too childish, hyper-sensitive, and emotional to play on the big stage. They want government to take care of them much like their mothers use to. It’s pathetic.