2009-03-04T21:30:23Z opencongress.org tag:opencongress.org,2007:/bill/comments/55209 2009-03-04T21:30:23Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-03-04:/comment/93506 rmcc4444 What ever happened to Obama's scalpel? 2009-03-12T11:47:36Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-03-12:/comment/95372 Snik I don't know why everyone is getting so upset about the earmarks....I think those were actually left in there purposely to distract people from what really happened. They just passed the biggest tax increase on the middle and lower income brackets ever in the history of our country, and we're talking about some insignificant earmarks. Oh, the tax increase goes under the better known name "Cap and Trade". 2009-03-31T23:05:51Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-03-31:/comment/100068 drktalley They haven't listen in 150 years, why start now? 2009-03-02T15:50:49Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-03-02:/comment/92713 mike7777 And another thing... Was in such a hurry I forgot this point: What about the PMA connections. Lobbying firm that the FBI shut down. But, their stuff is still in the Bill! I can't believe that the House pushed that embarrassment right on through. Have they no shame? **EVERYTHING** that has PMA's fingerprints on it should be removed from the Bill. No exceptions. Unreal. 2009-03-14T08:42:36Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-03-14:/comment/95813 mouseissue AMEN Snik!.. I would like to see these liberal's faces whan they look at their electric and gas bills AFTER "Cap and Trade" takes effect. If any of them were complaining about $4.00 a gallon gas, just wait and see how expensive it will get with this "Carbon Credit Crap". As a sidebar... When you consider the concept of "Carbon Credits", it's really a false ecomony designed to overlook pollution by those with lots of $$$ and really slam it everyone else. We better stock up on firewood and candles. We should also get those bicycles lubed and/or horses & mules ready. We are going back to the 1800's. 2009-03-31T06:02:31Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-03-31:/comment/99854 SCMomof2 When will the leaders of our Government LISTEN TO THE CONSTITUENTS?! <Another slap in the face to the citizens of this United States> 2009-03-31T22:45:01Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-03-31:/comment/100064 drktalley You are correct to a point, govt spening is good, however they must stop spending more than is collected directly from taxes. Congress' right to borrow money against the people of the United State should be abolished.. 2009-03-31T23:38:44Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-03-31:/comment/100069 drktalley You so close, it's sickening. Remember CDO's,all the mom & pop loan companies that popped up,mom&pop were able to borrow the money to loan and wall st. sold the CDO's to foreign entities. The housing boom.When those loans were not paid back, the CDO's became unsellable to foreign investors, the cash flow stopped and everyone who bought houses as investment property, got stuck with them and things got even worse. Revolving cash flow, it's how our economy operates!!! Please articulate this better than I can, signed Angry 2009-02-26T07:46:24Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-02-26:/comment/90969 slimgpd This bill is the most insane thing ever passed given the state of the economy. 9000 earmarks! What were they thinking? 2009-02-26T08:48:15Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-02-26:/comment/90993 Anonymous Earmarks are less than 2% in this bill. You can try to create drama by saying NINE THOUSAND but that is meaningless. And earmarks are way better than giving authorization for war so no it is not "the most insane thing" ever passed regardless of the economy. And if you do care about the economy, govt spending is GOOD which is effectively what earmarks are. 2009-02-26T09:45:31Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-02-26:/comment/91003 zanderman It's over 9000! Sorry... couldn't resist. But on a serious note, it's important to remember that this 9 spending bills. $410 billion is a huge price tag, but it funds a large portion of the bill for US government. And many of the earmarks are good. People have a kneejerk anti-earmark reaction, but many of them fund programs we all appreciate, such as ones to combat meth labs or ones that protect the Chesapeake Bay and its blue crabs. But some of them are pretty ridiculous. For some good examples, check out my blog at http://www.insidecongresstoday.com/2009/02/wednesday-a-day-in-which-many-billions-in-spending-are-approved-by-the-house.html 2009-03-02T10:42:10Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-03-02:/comment/92580 mike7777 1) The President made a campaign promise against earmarks. He should intervene and show leadership. 2) More than a few Obama Administration Insiders have earmarks in this bill: Vice President Biden has his name attached to $94.9 million in earmarks. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar sponsored or cosponsored a total of $227.4 million. Secretary of State Clinton, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, Labor Secretary Solis, and Chief of Staff Emanuel all have their names attached to at least one earmark. 3) I just heard Robert Gibbs on CSPAN say that the President just wants to look forward in regards to earmarks (this Bill is left-over business from before his Administration). What a cop-out. He's breaking his campaign promise and he should NOT get away with it. He's saying he'll let 9,000 (nine thousand) slip by this time... giving them a pass on this one. How pathetic. Americans have a reason to be outraged. This Bill needs to be STOPPED in the Senate. 2009-03-02T13:20:32Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-03-02:/comment/92672 rjacobs Exactly - those less than 2% earmarks are NOT the PROBLEM. The other 98% IS THE PROBLEM. At least one could make the argument that the 2% earmarks are going toward projects that are important to the residents of a particular congressional district. The sheer size and scope of government is the problem. Anyone that argues that government spending is GOOD may not understand basic economics. The source of all government income is taxes and other revenues that ultimately detract from productive activity. Government rape and pillage of the economy complicit with the big business interests (BANKS and THOSE BACKED BY BANKS) that benefit from the protection and largess of government spending is the cause of our current economic problem. As for the war, I agree that is a colossal waste of money and lives as well. What is a "withdrawal" from Iraq of "all but 50,000 troops"? That's called a LIE. 2009-03-04T19:20:55Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-03-04:/comment/93501 tbuser 1) He never said he would eliminate all earmarks, but I agree he called for reform and should do something about this. 2) According to Taxpayers for Common Sense, 6 of the top 10 senators solely responsible for the earmarks are Republicans. Also, Thad Cochran [R, MS] sponsored or co-sponsored earmarks totaling $470m. According to their calculations, Biden's name is attached to $52m not $94.9m and Salazar is responsible for $44m not $227.4m. See: http://is.gd/lwEp However, I think earmarks should total $0. The people at the bottom of the list with no earmarks should be commended: Coburn [R], DeMint [R], Feingold [D], McCain [R], and McCaskill [D]. 3) Although I agree it is left over business from previous administration, but I agree that was a bit of a cop-out. 2009-03-05T15:31:29Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-03-05:/comment/93669 zanderman Another shameless plug for my blog: http://www.insidecongresstoday.com/2009/03/their-incumbency-is-ended-but-their-earmarks-linger-on.html Over 400 earmarks in the bill are from people who are no longer in Congress. Interesting how that works, huh? 2009-03-05T18:44:43Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-03-05:/comment/93702 walkerusa I am not blogging anything here .. when we don't have money we should not be spending recklessly. I say hogwash on previous admin .. they are not around to sign; regardless of party, if the spend cannot be justified in clear current terms (job creation, etc) our current reps/senators should demand line item veto and get the waste out (they are free to fund it out of their own pockets if it is so important) 2009-03-10T05:21:39Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-03-10:/comment/94469 ams_fun Somone didn't take econ 101 and econ 102 in college. Governement spending is good in a shrinking economy, and Government spending is required to provide bacis services to the people of the our nation, such as Transportation, Environmental Safety, Food Safety, Defense, etc. So please go back to school and learn the fundamental of our government and economics. 2009-03-10T08:35:29Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-03-10:/comment/94503 crpa1971 No matter who was responsible for putting the earmarks in this bill, Obama promised to do a line review and eliminate wasteful spending. OBVIOUSLY this has not been done as promised. Just another empty promise made to get votes! I only hope that the Republicans continue to try to impede the advent of socialism until the next vote. 2009-03-14T08:31:37Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-03-14:/comment/95809 mouseissue The college you're describing must be "in the tank" with the "big government" tax and spenders (i.e. liberal Democrats). You (and your professors) need to study the true economic history of America. EVERY TIME our economy was down and gov't spending and/or taxes went up, the ecomomy slid further downward FOR YEARS. The reverse was always also true. Our current recession was brought on by: (1) A law passed years ago requiring lenders to finance mortgages to those who could not afford to repay, (2) greed and corruption on Wall Street, (3) greed, corruption, and lack of corporate oversight by government. CHECK FOR YOURSELF... Consider studying American economic history in books that were published prior to 1992. After that, they started to become very biased toward liberalism. 2009-03-29T21:35:38Z tag:opencongress.org,2009-03-29:/comment/99560 Nowabouthat Obama is earmarking corporations that accept federal funding. He is firing CEOs voted on by the corporation and excepting CEOs of US government corporations, like OPIC and MCC, that he appoints; they won't have performance pay capped or taxed or taken away through programs that measure performance that he is canceling. The US corporations are foreign aid, which is budget says he will double and that is what he is earmarking. Legislation for programs outside the US corporations is passed as a domestic program first and then the foreign aid programs are passed based on the US programs. Some of these are infrastructure(stimulus) programs that are not passed. Children's insurance and food security programs are already mirrored.