What about the PA congressman?

Search

Living...vicariously through myself.
Joined
May 20, 2005
Messages
8,456
Tokens
Thats was my best Doc thread title:

The media’s current fascination with Rep. John Murtha (D-Pennsylvania) completely ignores the decade of the ’90s when the congressman was a leading pork-barrel spender. Yet, maybe more curious, this love affair is thoroughly dismissing some rather recent earmarking that made the papers before Mr. Murtha became the media’s favorite anti-war spokesman.
Not the least of these articles was a front-page, 2,200 word expose in the June 13, 2005 Los Angeles Times by Ken Silverstein and Richard Simon. The headline set the tone: “Lobbyist's Brother Guided House Bill; A family member's ties to special interests raise questions in the case of Democrat John Murtha.” The crux of the article is that Murtha’s brother is a senior partner in a company called KSA Consulting. Said consulting firm received $20.8 million in defense contracts in 2004 (Times link expired):
“When Congress passed the $417-billion Pentagon spending bill last year, Rep. John P. Murtha, the top Democrat on the House defense appropriations subcommittee, boasted about the money he secured to create jobs in his Pennsylvania district.
“But the bill Murtha helped write also benefited at least 10 companies represented by a lobbying firm where his brother, Robert ‘Kit’ Murtha, is a senior partner, according to disclosure records, interviews and an analysis of the bill by The Times.
“Clients of the lobbying firm KSA Consulting -- whose top officials also include former congressional aide Carmen V. Scialabba, who worked for Rep. Murtha for 27 years -- received a total of $20.8 million from the bill.”
More recently, The Hill published an article on October 18, 2005 entitled “Defense cash focuses on lobbying: When industry does donate, Murtha is its favorite recipient.” In it, Congressman Murtha is depicted as the defense industry’s top target for campaign contributions:
“For the past three years, Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), the ranking member of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, has been the No. 1 beneficiary of defense campaign donations in the House and has not fallen below No. 3 for Congress as a whole.
“In fact, for just the 2006 cycle, Murtha ranks No. 1 overall, with $188,350 in donations from the defense industry. House Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) follows with $118,350.
“In 2004, Murtha ranked behind only President Bush and his Democratic opponent, Sen. John Kerry, in overall defense-industry contributions, with $284,750.
“During the 2002 election cycle, when Murtha was forced to campaign for his seat because of state redistricting that pitted him against a fellow congressman in the primary, he again scored No. 1 in all Congress, pulling in $309,299 in political donations from defense companies.”
Oddly, the only major media publication that appears willing to suggest that the emperor isn’t wearing any clothes is Investor’s Business Daily. In an editorial today entitled “Will the Real Murtha Stand Up?” the paper states what few news agencies seem willing to:
“Contrary to popular opinion, Rep. John Murtha, the decorated ex-Marine who called for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, is no hawk. He may also soon be probed for misusing defense appropriations.”
The article ends:
“The newspaper Roll Call reported that there might be a House ethics committee investigation of Murtha's apparent improprieties. But is that possible now that Murtha has become the media's ‘hawk with a conscience?’ Come to think of it, could Murtha have been thinking about a possible ethics investigation when he decided to throw himself into the public limelight last week?”
With the “scandals” involving Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Texas), Sen. Bill Frist (R-Tennessee), and “Scooter” Libby garnering huge publicity, one has to wonder why Congressman Murtha’s transgressions are largely getting a pass.
 

I'm still here Mo-fo's
Joined
Sep 20, 2001
Messages
8,359
Tokens
What about these guys, just a few short months ago...

Hey big spenders: The highways bill shows Republicans addicted to spending
Financial Times
^ | 8/10/05

Posted on 08/10/2005 12:37:37 PM PDT by Crackingham

There was a time when Republicans raged against wasteful federal spending and fought tenaciously to cut the size of government. Not any longer. The $286.5bn (£160bn) highways bill President George W. Bush will sign into law today epitomises the transformation of the party in Washington from an anti-government "insurgency" into a ruling majority unable to kick its addiction to spending.

To give Mr Bush his credit, he fought a rearguard action against his spendthrift allies in Congress, with some effect. But he did not follow through his threat to veto any bill that breached a $283.9bn spending limit. This was itself a big increase on the spending limit of $256bn he put forward a year earlier. Budget analysts estimate the true cost of the new law, which conceals some likely spending, may be as much as $11bn over the relaxed spending limit.

The quality of spending is also poor. The highways bill contains more pork than the state of Iowa. Members of Congress have earmarked money for almost 6,500 local projects, costing $24bn. These include such gems as $220m for a bridge to connect an island with a population of 50 people to the Alaskan mainland, $8.5m for seven local transport museums and $4m for a parking facility in Oak Lawn, Illinois.

Mr Bush's failure to stand by his veto threat is partly explained by his need to win support for the crunch vote on the Central America Free Trade Agreement. But it is of a piece with his own poor record on spending. After spending during his first term at a rate second only to Lyndon Johnson, Mr Bush promised to be much tougher in the second. But he has still not vetoed a single spending bill.

The highways bill is not the only fiscally irresponsible measure to win the president's approval in recent days. The energy bill, signed into law on Monday, contained lavish tax breaks for an oil industry which, with crude at a record price of more than $64 a barrel, is hardly short of funds or incentives to invest. Taken together, the highways bill, energy bill and other measures signed into law this year will add nearly $33bn to the deficit - 10 per cent of the expected deficit for the current fiscal year.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1460741/posts

:realtongu
 

I'm still here Mo-fo's
Joined
Sep 20, 2001
Messages
8,359
Tokens
Oops another porker(s), won the March contest.....

Sen. Craig and Rep. Simpson are March
Porkers of the Month

(Washington, D.C.) - Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) today named Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) and Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho) Co-Porkers of the Month for their editorial “Earnest Earmarks,” which portrays earmarking as a proper exercise of Congress’s constitutional spending power and a check on the growth of government.

Sen. Craig and Rep. Simpson argue that earmarks do not increase spending because Appropriations Committees must stay within the overall limits set by the budget resolution. But the budget resolution is nonbinding and Congress routinely exceeds its spending caps. Furthermore, lawmakers often vote for expensive bills in exchange for pork projects in their home districts. As Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) says, earmarks “are a gateway drug on the road to the spending addiction.”

The editorial contends that eliminating earmarks would equate to an unconstitutional delegation of spending discretion to the executive branch. Instead of decisions being made by “local officials,” tens of thousands of “nameless, faceless bureaucrats” would use their budgets to “grow their bloated bureaucracies.”

The Founding Fathers were careful to point out that the Constitution limits Congress’s spending power to matters of national importance. In 1796, Thomas Jefferson warned that a proposition for internal improvements to roads would be “a bottomless abyss of public money…it will be a scene of eternal scramble among the members, who can get the most money wasted in their State; and they will always get most who are meanest.” In 1822, President James Monroe warned that financial support from Washington should be granted “to great national works only, since if it were unlimited it would be liable to abuse and might be productive of evil.”

Even as federal power vastly expanded during the twentieth century, Congress did not earmark extensively until the 1980s. Instead, Congress funded general grant programs and let federal and state agencies select individual recipients through a competitive process or formula. For academic grants, federal agencies select panels of “peer” experts to evaluate grant applications on the basis of scientific and other criteria. This insulation from political favoritism frustrates Sen. Craig, who recently said, “Can you see the University of Idaho and Boise State University getting grants in competition with Massachusetts Institute of Technology and other big-name eastern universities if some bureaucrat in Washington was making the decision?”

Sen. Craig and Rep. Simpson sit on the Senate and House Appropriations Committees, helping Idaho rank 13th in pork per capita in CAGW’s 2005 Congressional Pig Book. The fiscal 2005 Energy and Water Appropriations Act included more than $33 million for pork projects in their state. The 2006 Congressional Pig Book will be released on April 5.

Recent scandals have led Congress to consider reform proposals that would curtail the power of appropriations committees to pad spending bills with pork. Sen. Craig and Rep. Simpson caution against “knee jerk” changes designed to “defuse controversy and shift attention.” Yet their own editorial is designed to downplay controversy and draw attention away from proposals with teeth. For their fanciful interpretation of the Constitution and their self-serving arguments in defense of pork, CAGW names Sen. Craig and Rep. Simpson the Co-Porkers of the Month for March 2006.

http://www.cagw.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=9802

--------------------------------------------
Sorry Baser, you started by singling out Dems..... what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

:realtongu :realtongu
 

Living...vicariously through myself.
Joined
May 20, 2005
Messages
8,456
Tokens
The difference is you were suggesting it was a one way affair.....when we all know its not.That was the sole purpose of showing the Dems....all day were "lucky" enough to have Doc spam up the board with Republican transgressions.Not to counter wouldnt be fair would it?

To Earmarking Senators, Veto Seems to Spell Vote




By Shailagh Murray
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, May 4, 2006; Page A04

Senators keep stuffing new provisions into an emergency spending bill for Iraq and hurricane recovery, ignoring President Bush's veto threat to advance their priorities.
An amendment by Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), approved 53 to 46 yesterday, would add $289 million to compensate recipients of an experimental flu vaccine, in the event of an adverse reaction. By 51 to 45, senators added $1 million for water monitoring in Hawaii, which was hit by a torrential rainstorm. On Tuesday, the Senate tossed in nearly $1.7 billion in additional flood-control money for the New Orleans area, without offsetting it with cuts to other programs, as Bush had urged.
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=238 align=right><TBODY><TR><TD width=10></TD><TD width=228>
Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) added $289 million and set aside $104 million in the spending bill. (Chris Kleponis - Getty Images)


PH2005041201335.jpg




Taxes and Spending






Politics Trivia

<!--Monday's Trivia


--><SCRIPT language=javascript><!--function poll_popup(url,mpoll_height){window.open(url,'multi','width=428,height='+mpoll_height+',status=no,scrollbars=yes');}function execForm(form_name,mpoll_section,mpoll_name,mpoll_template,mpoll_height){vote=(findVote(form_name));document.location.href = 'http://polls.washingtonpost.com/cgi-bin/multi_quiz?section='+mpoll_section+'&pollname='+mpoll_name+'&template='+mpoll_template+vote}function findVote(form_name){var params = '' ;var questions = findQuestions(form_name) ;var longest = eval("document."+form_name+".longest.value") ;for (var i = 0; i < questions; i++){var answer = eval("document."+form_name+".answer"+(i+1)) ;for (var count = 0; count < longest; count++){ // change count to # of answers!!!!if (typeof answer[count] == "undefined") break ;if ( count == 0 )params += "&answer"+(i+1)+"=" ;if (answer[count].checked == true)params += answer[count].value;}}params += "&questions="+questions ;// alert(params) ;return params ;}function findQuestions(form_name){return eval("document."+form_name+".questions.value") ;}// --></SCRIPT><FORM name=pollform792621882601><INPUT type=hidden value=1 name=questions> <INPUT type=hidden value=4 name=longest>Rep. Richard W. Pombo (R-Calif.), is the chairman of which House committee?

<INPUT type=radio value=a name=answer1>Committee on Energy and Commerce
<INPUT type=radio value=b name=answer1>Committee on Science
<INPUT type=radio value=c name=answer1>Committee on Resources
<INPUT type=radio value=d name=answer1>Committee on Government Reform


<INPUT onclick="execForm('pollform792621882601','politics','politics/trivia/050806.poll','politics/trivia/050806_results.htm','300')" type=button value=" Check Your Answer "> </FORM>

<SCRIPT src="http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/technorati/Technorati.js"></SCRIPT><SCRIPT>var technorati = new Technorati() ;technorati.setProperty('url','http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/03/AR2006050302094_Technorati.html') ;technorati.article = new item('To Earmarking Senators, Veto Seems to Spell Vote','http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/03/AR2006050302094.html','Senators keep stuffing new provisions into an emergency spending bill for Iraq and hurricane recovery, ignoring President Bush\'s veto threat to advance their priorities.','Shailagh Murray') ;</SCRIPT><SCRIPT src="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/03/AR2006050302094_Technorati.js"></SCRIPT><SCRIPT>document.write( technorati.getDisplaySidebar() );</SCRIPT>
Who's Blogging?

Read what bloggers are saying about this article.
<STYLE>#technorati_link a {color:#339900;}</STYLE>
icn-talkbubble.gif
Full List of Blogs (28 links) »
spacer.gif

Most Blogged About Articles
<STYLE>#technorati_link a {color:#339900;}</STYLE>
icn-talkbubble.gif
On washingtonpost.com | On the web
spacer.gif




<SCRIPT src="http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/javascript/resetCookies.js"></SCRIPT><!-- delicious --><SCRIPT><!--var delicious_url = 'http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/03/AR2006050302094.html?referrer=delicious' ;var delicious_headline = 'washingtonpost.com | To Earmarking Senators, Veto Seems to Spell Vote' ;var delicious_subheadline = '' ;var delicious_byline = 'Shailagh Murray' ;delicious_byline = ( delicious_byline && delicious_byline.indexOf('By ') != 0 ) ? "By "+delicious_byline : delicious_byline ;var delicious_blurb = 'Senators keep stuffing new provisions into an emergency spending bill for Iraq and hurricane recovery, ignoring President Bush\'s veto threat to advance their priorities.' ;// --></SCRIPT><SCRIPT src="http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/javascript/delicious2.js"></SCRIPT><STYLE>#delicious_display {display:none ;color:#333333 ;background-color:#EEEEEE ;padding:4px ;padding-top:0px ;border:1px dotted #0D3159 ;}</STYLE>
Save & Share

  • Tag This Article
triangle2.gif
Saving options

<FORM id=delicious style="DISPLAY: inline">1. Save to description:
<INPUT onclick=keep_it_checked(this) type=checkbox CHECKED name=headline_name> Headline (required)
<INPUT onclick=set_delicious_options_changed(this,DELICIOUS_DESCRIPTION_BYLINE) type=checkbox name=byline_name> Byline

2. Save to notes (255 character max):
<INPUT onclick=set_delicious_options_changed(this,DELICIOUS_NOTES_BLURB) type=checkbox name=blurb_notes> Blurb

</FORM>3. Tag This Article





<SCRIPT>setTimeout('update_delicious_form(delicious_cookie)',1)</SCRIPT></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>Despite repeated efforts, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and other fiscal conservatives failed to strip out pet projects, including $6 million in aid for Hawaiian sugar interests and up to $500 million for a Northrop Grumman Corp. shipyard in Pascagoula, Miss., to compensate the company for hurricane-related losses that insurers have refused to pay.
At the bill's core is $72 billion in war-related funding and about $27 billion to aid Hurricane Katrina recovery in Mississippi and Louisiana. But with November midterm elections approaching, senators showed little restraint on items that would prove popular with constituents or important interest groups.
For example, the legislation includes $4 billion in aid to farmers and ranchers to offset rising natural gas costs and provide new relief from drought, floods and wildfires. It contains nearly $800 million in additional highway and transit funding and $2.3 billion to prepare for a possible flu pandemic.
In a speech yesterday, Bush reiterated an earlier pledge to veto the legislation if it tops $94.5 billion. The Senate bill -- which totaled $106.5 billion when it reached the floor last week -- now adds up to nearly $109 billion. Final passage is expected today.
"Congress is considering a piece of legislation that will test its commitment to spending restraint," Bush said in an address to the American Council of Engineering Companies. "I've requested a bill that would provide emergency funds for the war on terror and hurricane relief. Unfortunately, there are some here in Washington trying to load that bill up with unnecessary spending. This bill is for emergency spending, and it should be limited to emergency measures."
The presumption is that the extraneous provisions will get cut in a final conference committee with the House, which backed a $91.9 billion package. But so far, the Senate has found additional spending irresistible. "We are a coequal branch of government," Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.), author of many of the hurricane-related provisions, said in his defense of the Northrop Grumman money. "We do have a say in these issues. Sometimes we can help."
The long list of Senate earmarks, or special provisions, addressed a broad array of needs. "There are other emergencies that come up from time to time," Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) said as he defended aid to help Hawaii recover from a torrential rainstorm. "There are acts of God that take place."
A second Kennedy measure approved yesterday would set aside $104 million in funding already in the bill to keep afloat nongovernmental organizations working in Iraq on democracy-building projects. The State Department opposed the effort and circulated a detailed memo among Senate offices in an effort to forestall it.
"The U.S. is pursuing a dynamic integrated approach that is adjusted according to conditions on the ground," the memo explained. Earmarking department funds to the outside groups "could impact the integrated program designed by our embassy in Baghdad, especially our initiative to build provincial reconstruction teams," small units designed to decentralize the reconstruction process, it said.
The Senate accepted the Kennedy measure by voice vote. If it survives the House-Senate conference, it will provide seven nongovernmental organizations with funding that Kennedy said would be vital to democracy building.
"The measure accepted today will provide them with the resources they need and makes clear our commitment to stand by these organizations that are working on the front lines in the struggle for democracy in Iraq every day," Kennedy said in a statement.
The Senate also approved by voice vote an amendment by Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.) putting the chamber on record as opposing permanent U.S. military bases in Iraq and U.S. control of the country's natural resources.
"I have no illusions that a single amendment will somehow change the dynamic of events on the ground," Biden said. "But I do believe that we have a duty to proclaim -- and proclaim regularly -- that we have no intention of either maintaining permanent American military bases in Iraq or controlling its oil."
Another Democrat, Sen. Robert Mendendez (N.J.), won voice-vote approval to add $60 million for peacekeeping efforts in Darfur, Sudan, increasing the total to $130 million. The money would be shifted from other diplomatic funds, including those for construction of the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad.
 

I'm still here Mo-fo's
Joined
Sep 20, 2001
Messages
8,359
Tokens
"Despite repeated efforts, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and other fiscal conservatives failed to strip out pet projects, including $6 million in aid for Hawaiian sugar interests and up to $500 million for a Northrop Grumman Corp. shipyard in Pascagoula, Miss., to compensate the company for hurricane-related losses that insurers have refused to pay."

Oops, those fiscally conservative Conservatives.

Point is my friend your boyz are in charge, dominating all 3 branches of gov't and IMO this is bad, bad, bad to have any one party hold all the cards.

Let's see if your boy does indeed veto this. It's today isn't it??
 

Living...vicariously through myself.
Joined
May 20, 2005
Messages
8,456
Tokens
cussin'it said:
Oops, those fiscally conservative Conservatives.

Point is my friend your boyz are in charge, dominating all 3 branches of gov't and IMO this is bad, bad, bad to have any one party hold all the cards.

Let's see if your boy does indeed veto this. It's today isn't it??


I get it....its OK for politicians of any party to stuff the bills full of useless earmarks but its Bushs job to slap them down.As soon as Bush vetoes something like this the left will rant about the poor (fill in the blanks) that are now going to suffer because of his veto.Cmon Cuss cant play both sides against the middle.

Dominating.....lol.

PS I hope he does veto it.
 

I'm still here Mo-fo's
Joined
Sep 20, 2001
Messages
8,359
Tokens
BASEHEAD said:
I get it....its OK for politicians of any party to stuff the bills full of useless earmarks but its Bushs job to slap them down.As soon as Bush vetoes something like this the left will rant about the poor (fill in the blanks) that are now going to suffer because of his veto.Cmon Cuss cant play both sides against the middle.

Dominating.....lol.

PS I hope he does veto it.

LOL Baser, I just hope he vetos something ....just f'ing once...I could give a flop about who's gonna whine. Of course they all stuff the pork and guess who gets most of the f'ing? Point is the Repugs are porkin it bigtime too. Yep, that's why I don't trust your boyz or the boyz on the left. Just happens that your boyz are in charge...all 3 branches my friend...:howdy:

The economic figures are postive though....:toast:
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,119,906
Messages
13,575,079
Members
100,883
Latest member
iniesta2025
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com