In Case You Were Wondering… Democrats Out-Pork Republicans 50-1
Posted by Jim Hoft on Friday, December 17, 2010, 6:36 AM
This really comes as no surprise.
Obama tripled the deficit in one year. Pelosi has added $5 Trillion to the national deficit in 4 years. And, the democratic members in Congress are no better.
A new study found that Democrats out-porked Republicans this year 50 to 1.
Democrats LOVE to spend your money.
Byron York at The Washington Examiner reported:
Press coverage of the budget frenzy on Capitol Hill has suggested that pork-barrel earmark spending is still a bipartisan problem, that after months of self-righteous rhetoric about fiscal discipline, Republicans and Democrats remain equal-opportunity earmarkers.
It’s not true. A new analysis by a group of federal-spending watchdogs shows a striking imbalance between the parties when it comes to earmark requests. Democrats remain raging spenders, while Republicans have made enormous strides in cleaning up their act.
In the Senate, the GOP made only one-third as many earmark requests as Democrats for 2011, and in the House, Republicans have nearly given up earmarking altogether — while Democrats roll on.
The watchdog groups — Taxpayers for Common Sense, WashingtonWatch.com, and Taxpayers Against Earmarks — counted total earmark requests in the 2011 budget. Those requests were made by lawmakers earlier this year, but Democratic leaders, afraid that their party’s spending priorities might cost them at the polls, decided not to pass a budget before the Nov. 2 elections. This week, they distilled those earmark requests — threw some out, combined others — into the omnibus bill that was under consideration in the Senate until Majority Leader Harry Reid pulled it Thursday night. While that bill was loaded with spending, looking back at the original earmark requests tells us a lot about the spending inclinations of both parties.
In the 2011 House budget, the groups found that House Democrats requested 18,189 earmarks, which would cost the taxpayers a total of $51.7 billion, while House Republicans requested just 241 earmarks, for a total of $1 billion.
ADVERTISEMENT
`
Henry Hawkins commented:
50:1? Yikes. I likes me bacon, but…..
tarpon commented:
Pure and simple, earmarks are unconstitutional bribes.
bigkahuna commented:
Not suprised… Nazti Botox Pelosi is the most disgusting big pig ever to walk the steps of capital hill.
Sell the skanks plane and send here back to SF on her broom… first class broom though
bigkahuna commented:
Maybe when she hands over the gavel Boehner will hand her her broom ?
Sally commented:
Someone needs to tell Mrs. McCaskill….
Ginger commented:
I want Boehner, when taking the gavel from the witch say to her…. “This is a fu*&ing good thing” Remember who said that ?
hekktor commented:
Is this best analysis? Which is more important? The ratio 50:1 using dollars or the ratio 75:1 for the number of requests? Each request is a chance that pork barrel earmarks have occurred.
The cost ratio is 50:1. One of my greatest concerns is the continual end run around the legislative process that most of these dedicated appropriations represent.
I treat as proper Congressional authority the following scenario. Congress wishes to extend I-70 from Denver to the West Coast somewhere. The money is directed to build a highway in Colorado, Utah, Nevada, and California. The funding measure is buried in the USDOT appropriation bill. The Transportation Committees of Congress include it in the bill. The amount is in the annual budget resolution. The amount is listed in the appropriation bill. Goes through the necessary committees. The amount is listed in the bill when it comes to floor votes. That scenario to me is not an earmark with pork barrel overtones.
The legislators, whose home districts benefit, may want their names all over that expenditure, but that is proper budgeting.
My problem is pork barrel earmarks that are added at the last second in amendments on the floor or in conference committee. I also hate appropriators having any right to put ear marks on for the benefit of their home districts. Period. Appropriators should have to recuse themselves from votes on bills that benefit their home districts. They should be gate keepers, not the Greeks in the Trojan Horse letting in the pillagers.
So with that mindset fully disclosed. I restate, Which is more important? The ratio 50:1 using dollars or the ratio 75:1 for the number of requests?
Pig Lipstick commented:
The reprehensibly irresponsible Liberal Media will predictably ignore this pesky, irritating, little factoid, decrying instead that ‘hypocritical conservatives’ tacked on pork-laden earmarks ‘exactly the same as democrats’, (a la Claire McCaskell). Never mind that many of those GOP earmarks were put forth many months ago, long before We The People spoke loud and clear in November. Lesson: 50:1 is “exactly the same” to biased, lying, Liberals posing as objective journalists (and to the masses of lemmings who consistently take their bait).
Pig Lipstick commented:
The Liberal Media will conveniently ignore the 75:1 ratio of Liberal ‘requests’ Hekktor pointed out as well. as well. And Liberals everywhere will predictably laugh at the notion that the preponderance of the media are Liberal and biased, (and liars).
Tarantulas commented:
“’This is a fu*&ing good thing’ Remember who said that ?”
Joe Biden had a quote about a “fu*&ing big deal.” Is that what you meant? It will be a great moment, however he plays it.
GemStateMom commented:
The fact that ANY Republicans requested earmarks is appalling. What part of “NO” do they not understand?
My Senators from the Gem State (Idaho) included!
`