The Place Where Ludington Talks
Anti-earmark Tea Party Caucus takes $1 billion in earmarks
While a few of the Tea Party Caucus lived up to their pledge to not take
any earmarks, it seems a majority of them asked for earmarks. I suppose
maybe the ones that did ask for the earmarks, asked before they took
the pledge not to ask for them... still makes them look bad though. They
best think seriously about what they want and if they want to keep
their jobs... listening to their constituents would probably be a good
start.
By National Journal national Journal – Thu Dec 2, 11:43 am ET
By Reid Wilson
National Journal
Members of the Congressional Tea Party Caucus may tout their commitment
to cutting government spending now, but they used the 111th Congress to
request hundreds of earmarks that, taken cumulatively, added more than
$1 billion to the federal budget.
According to a Hotline review of records compiled by Citizens Against
Government Waste, the 52 members of the caucus, which pledges to cut
spending and reduce the size of government, requested a total of 764
earmarks valued at $1,049,783,150 during Fiscal Year 2010, the last year
for which records are available.
"It's disturbing to see the Tea Party Caucus requested that much in
earmarks. This is their time to put up or shut up, to be blunt," said
David Williams, vice president for policy at Citizens Against Government
Waste. "There's going to be a huge backlash if they continue to request
earmarks."
In founding the caucus in July, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) said she
was giving voice to Americans who were sick of government overspending.
[How do deficit-cutters sell the U.S. on pain?]
"The American people are speaking out loud and clear. They have had
enough of the spending, the bureaucracy, and the government-knows-best
mentality running rampant today throughout the halls of Congress,"
Bachmann said in a July 15 statement. The group, she wrote in a letter
to House Administration Committee chairman Bob Brady, "will serve as an
informal group of Members dedicated to promote Americans' call for
fiscal responsibility, adherence to the Constitution, and limited
government."
Bachmann and 13 of her Tea Party Caucus colleagues did not request any
earmarks in the last Fiscal Year, according to CAGW's annual
Congressional Pig Book. But others have requested millions of dollars in
special projects.
Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.), for one, attached his name to 69 earmarks
in the last fiscal year, for a total of $78,263,000. The 41 earmarks
Rep. Rodney Alexander (R-La.) requested were worth $65,395,000. Rep.
Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.) wanted $63,400,000 for 39 special projects, and
Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah) wanted $93,980,000 set aside for 47 projects.
[With jobs at issue, what is Washington doing?]
Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.) takes the prize as the tea partier with his
name on the most earmarks. Rehberg's office requested funding for 88
projects, either solely or by co-signing earmark requests with Sens. Max
Baucus (D) and Jon Tester (D), at a cost of $100,514,200. On his own,
Rehberg requested 20 earmarks valued at more than $9.6 million.
More than one member can sign onto an earmark. Still, there are 29
caucus members who requested on their own or joined requests for more
than $10 million in earmark funding, and seven who wanted more than $50
million in funding.
Most offices did not respond right away to a request for comment. Those
that did said they supported Republicans' new efforts to ban earmarks.
[Will Obama's winning campaign plan be used against him in 2012?]
Alexander, for one, "stands with his fellow Republicans in the House in
supporting the current earmark ban. Since joining the Tea Party Caucus
in July, he has not submitted any earmark requests and has withdrawn his
outstanding requests that were included in the most recent Water
Resources Development Act," said Jamie Hanks, his communications
director.
Rep. Gregg Harper (R-Miss.), who requested 25 earmarks in the last
Fiscal Year at a total cost of just over $80 million, has agreed to
abide by the Republican earmark ban, according to spokesman Adam
Buckalew. "He supported the moratorium and the prohibition adopted
recently by the Conference on House earmarks for the 112th Congress,"
Buckalew said of Harper.
"It's easy to be a member of the TEA Party Caucus because, like them, I
agree that we're Taxed Enough Already and we've got to balance the
budget by cutting spending instead of raising taxes. Deficit spending is
not new, but the unprecedented rate of spending in Congress is,"
Rehberg said in a statement emailed by his office. "Montanans have
tightened their belts, and it's way past time for Congress to follow
their lead. The TEA Party Caucus is about listening to concerned
Americans who want to fundamentally change how Congress spends their tax
dollars. On that, we're in total agreement."
[For America's 10 wealthiest Congressional Districts, it will be more happy holidays]
Bachmann's office did not respond to emails or phone calls seeking comment.
Still, some Republicans -- albeit none who belong to the Tea Party
Caucus -- have said they will not abide by the voluntary earmark ban.
And, said CAGW's Williams, the anti-spending organization isn't waiting
with baited breath.
"Seeing is believing. It's going to take a lot more than rhetoric to convince us," he said.
A list of Tea Party Caucus members and their earmark requests in Fiscal
Year 2010, courtesy of Citizens Against Government Waste's Pig Book:
NAME EARMARKS AMOUNT
Aderholt (R-AL) 69 $78,263,000
Akin (R-MO) 9 $14,709,000
Alexander (R-LA) 41 $65,395,000
Bachmann (R-MN) 0 0
Barton (R-TX) 14 $12,269,400
Bartlett (R-MD) 19 $43,060,650
Bilirakis (R-FL) 14 $13,600,000
R. Bishop (R-UT) 47 $93,980,000
Burgess (R-TX) 15 $15,804,400
Broun (R-GA) 0 0
Burton (R-IN) 0 0
Carter (R-TX) 26 $42,232,000
Coble (R-NC) 19 $18,755,000
Coffman (R-CO) 0 0
Crenshaw (R-FL) 37 $54,424,000
Culberson (R-TX) 22 $33,792,000
Fleming (R-LA) 10 $31,489,000
Franks (R-AZ) 8 $14,300,000
Gingrey (R-GA) 19 $16,100,000
Gohmert (R-TX) 15 $7,099,000
S. Graves (R-MO) 11 $8,331,000
R. Hall (R-TX) 16 $12,232,000
Harper (R-MS) 25 $80,402,000
Herger (R-CA) 5 $5,946,000
Hoekstra (R-MI) 9 $6,392,000
Jenkins (R-KS) 12 $24,628,000
S. King (R-IA) 13 $6,650,000
Lamborn (R-CO) 6 $16,020,000
Luetkemeyer (R-MO) 0 0
Lummis (R-WY) 0 0
Marchant (R-TX) 0 0
McClintock (R-CA) 0 0
Gary Miller (R-CA) 15 $19,627,500
Jerry Moran (R-KS) 22 $19,400,000
Myrick (R-NC) 0 0
Neugebauer (R-TX) 0 0
Pence (R-IN) 0 0
Poe (R-TX) 12 $7,913,000
T. Price (R-GA) 0 0
Rehberg (R-MT) 88 $100,514,200
Roe (R-TN) 0 0
Royce (R-CA) 7 $6,545,000
Scalise (R-LA) 20 $17,388,000
P. Sessions (R-TX) 0 0
Shadegg (R-AZ) 0 0
Adrian Smith (R-NE) 1 $350,000
L. Smith (R-TX) 18 $14,078,000
Stearns (R-FL) 17 $15,472,000
Tiahrt (R-KS) 39 $63,400,000
Wamp (R-TN) 14 $34,544,000
Westmoreland (R-GA) 0 0
Wilson (R-SC) 15 $23,334,000
TOTAL 764 $1,049,783,150
any earmarks, it seems a majority of them asked for earmarks. I suppose
maybe the ones that did ask for the earmarks, asked before they took
the pledge not to ask for them... still makes them look bad though. They
best think seriously about what they want and if they want to keep
their jobs... listening to their constituents would probably be a good
start.
By National Journal national Journal – Thu Dec 2, 11:43 am ET
By Reid Wilson
National Journal
Members of the Congressional Tea Party Caucus may tout their commitment
to cutting government spending now, but they used the 111th Congress to
request hundreds of earmarks that, taken cumulatively, added more than
$1 billion to the federal budget.
According to a Hotline review of records compiled by Citizens Against
Government Waste, the 52 members of the caucus, which pledges to cut
spending and reduce the size of government, requested a total of 764
earmarks valued at $1,049,783,150 during Fiscal Year 2010, the last year
for which records are available.
"It's disturbing to see the Tea Party Caucus requested that much in
earmarks. This is their time to put up or shut up, to be blunt," said
David Williams, vice president for policy at Citizens Against Government
Waste. "There's going to be a huge backlash if they continue to request
earmarks."
In founding the caucus in July, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) said she
was giving voice to Americans who were sick of government overspending.
[How do deficit-cutters sell the U.S. on pain?]
"The American people are speaking out loud and clear. They have had
enough of the spending, the bureaucracy, and the government-knows-best
mentality running rampant today throughout the halls of Congress,"
Bachmann said in a July 15 statement. The group, she wrote in a letter
to House Administration Committee chairman Bob Brady, "will serve as an
informal group of Members dedicated to promote Americans' call for
fiscal responsibility, adherence to the Constitution, and limited
government."
Bachmann and 13 of her Tea Party Caucus colleagues did not request any
earmarks in the last Fiscal Year, according to CAGW's annual
Congressional Pig Book. But others have requested millions of dollars in
special projects.
Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.), for one, attached his name to 69 earmarks
in the last fiscal year, for a total of $78,263,000. The 41 earmarks
Rep. Rodney Alexander (R-La.) requested were worth $65,395,000. Rep.
Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.) wanted $63,400,000 for 39 special projects, and
Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah) wanted $93,980,000 set aside for 47 projects.
[With jobs at issue, what is Washington doing?]
Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.) takes the prize as the tea partier with his
name on the most earmarks. Rehberg's office requested funding for 88
projects, either solely or by co-signing earmark requests with Sens. Max
Baucus (D) and Jon Tester (D), at a cost of $100,514,200. On his own,
Rehberg requested 20 earmarks valued at more than $9.6 million.
More than one member can sign onto an earmark. Still, there are 29
caucus members who requested on their own or joined requests for more
than $10 million in earmark funding, and seven who wanted more than $50
million in funding.
Most offices did not respond right away to a request for comment. Those
that did said they supported Republicans' new efforts to ban earmarks.
[Will Obama's winning campaign plan be used against him in 2012?]
Alexander, for one, "stands with his fellow Republicans in the House in
supporting the current earmark ban. Since joining the Tea Party Caucus
in July, he has not submitted any earmark requests and has withdrawn his
outstanding requests that were included in the most recent Water
Resources Development Act," said Jamie Hanks, his communications
director.
Rep. Gregg Harper (R-Miss.), who requested 25 earmarks in the last
Fiscal Year at a total cost of just over $80 million, has agreed to
abide by the Republican earmark ban, according to spokesman Adam
Buckalew. "He supported the moratorium and the prohibition adopted
recently by the Conference on House earmarks for the 112th Congress,"
Buckalew said of Harper.
"It's easy to be a member of the TEA Party Caucus because, like them, I
agree that we're Taxed Enough Already and we've got to balance the
budget by cutting spending instead of raising taxes. Deficit spending is
not new, but the unprecedented rate of spending in Congress is,"
Rehberg said in a statement emailed by his office. "Montanans have
tightened their belts, and it's way past time for Congress to follow
their lead. The TEA Party Caucus is about listening to concerned
Americans who want to fundamentally change how Congress spends their tax
dollars. On that, we're in total agreement."
[For America's 10 wealthiest Congressional Districts, it will be more happy holidays]
Bachmann's office did not respond to emails or phone calls seeking comment.
Still, some Republicans -- albeit none who belong to the Tea Party
Caucus -- have said they will not abide by the voluntary earmark ban.
And, said CAGW's Williams, the anti-spending organization isn't waiting
with baited breath.
"Seeing is believing. It's going to take a lot more than rhetoric to convince us," he said.
A list of Tea Party Caucus members and their earmark requests in Fiscal
Year 2010, courtesy of Citizens Against Government Waste's Pig Book:
NAME EARMARKS AMOUNT
Aderholt (R-AL) 69 $78,263,000
Akin (R-MO) 9 $14,709,000
Alexander (R-LA) 41 $65,395,000
Bachmann (R-MN) 0 0
Barton (R-TX) 14 $12,269,400
Bartlett (R-MD) 19 $43,060,650
Bilirakis (R-FL) 14 $13,600,000
R. Bishop (R-UT) 47 $93,980,000
Burgess (R-TX) 15 $15,804,400
Broun (R-GA) 0 0
Burton (R-IN) 0 0
Carter (R-TX) 26 $42,232,000
Coble (R-NC) 19 $18,755,000
Coffman (R-CO) 0 0
Crenshaw (R-FL) 37 $54,424,000
Culberson (R-TX) 22 $33,792,000
Fleming (R-LA) 10 $31,489,000
Franks (R-AZ) 8 $14,300,000
Gingrey (R-GA) 19 $16,100,000
Gohmert (R-TX) 15 $7,099,000
S. Graves (R-MO) 11 $8,331,000
R. Hall (R-TX) 16 $12,232,000
Harper (R-MS) 25 $80,402,000
Herger (R-CA) 5 $5,946,000
Hoekstra (R-MI) 9 $6,392,000
Jenkins (R-KS) 12 $24,628,000
S. King (R-IA) 13 $6,650,000
Lamborn (R-CO) 6 $16,020,000
Luetkemeyer (R-MO) 0 0
Lummis (R-WY) 0 0
Marchant (R-TX) 0 0
McClintock (R-CA) 0 0
Gary Miller (R-CA) 15 $19,627,500
Jerry Moran (R-KS) 22 $19,400,000
Myrick (R-NC) 0 0
Neugebauer (R-TX) 0 0
Pence (R-IN) 0 0
Poe (R-TX) 12 $7,913,000
T. Price (R-GA) 0 0
Rehberg (R-MT) 88 $100,514,200
Roe (R-TN) 0 0
Royce (R-CA) 7 $6,545,000
Scalise (R-LA) 20 $17,388,000
P. Sessions (R-TX) 0 0
Shadegg (R-AZ) 0 0
Adrian Smith (R-NE) 1 $350,000
L. Smith (R-TX) 18 $14,078,000
Stearns (R-FL) 17 $15,472,000
Tiahrt (R-KS) 39 $63,400,000
Wamp (R-TN) 14 $34,544,000
Westmoreland (R-GA) 0 0
Wilson (R-SC) 15 $23,334,000
TOTAL 764 $1,049,783,150
Views: 32
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by XLFD on
-
The people have to hold their representatives feet to the fire, TEA party or not, and get earmarks under control. The difficulty is getting rid of an elected congressperson who brings home a lot of federal pork to his district. A fair segment of his constituents will see that as being successful at his job, rather than being a drag to the national recovery.
-
Permalink Reply by Sweater Cows! on
-
I thought a person went to Washington to get money and programs(earmarks) for their region and constituents. Isn't that the point of it all? Of course the country as a whole is part of it, but really it would seem the goal to bring home what is available.
-
Permalink Reply by Willy on
-
What really pis-es me off are these G-d d-mn politicians hijacking the Tea party movement by creating a caucus by that name. Since there is no authorized or organized Tea party I guess any sleazy politician can use the name to further their political career. I am so sick of the those Washington boneheads. We've got to get them all out before they destroy us. I'm sure looking forward to the next election.
© 2024 Created by XLFD.
Powered by
