E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSFrom NBC's Kelly O'Donnell
Dismissing President Barack Obama's opposition to earmarks as "an applause line," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told NBC News on Wednesday that the president should "back off" and let lawmakers continue to direct spending to their home districts.
Asked during a one-on-one interview with NBC whether Obama was wrong to promise a veto on any bill that contains earmarks, Reid quickly replied, "of course."
"This is an applause line," Reid said. "It's an effort by the White House to get more power. They've got enough power as it is."
Reid, along with other lawmakers who support earmarking, argues that eliminating the practice simply puts more discretion in the hands of executive branch officials who have authority to fund projects. "I have a Constitutional obligation to do congressionally directed spending," he said. "I know much more about what should be done in Elko [or] Las Vegas, Nevada, than some bureaucrat does back here."
Reid said voters should recognize that eliminating congressional earmarks does not, in itself, reduce spending but changes how the same money is spent.
"I think it's absolutely wrong and the public should understand that the president has enough power; he should back off and let us do what we do."
Suggesting almost dismissively that the president is playing to the crowd, he added that Obama may win "in the short term" with conservatives and those in the public who think that the practice should be nixed.
"The president thinks this will help him a little bit. You know, more power to him," he said. "But it's just wrong."
Despite this strong disagreement, Reid says the fight over earmarks will not cause a long-term rift with Obama.
"He's been around awhile. I've been around a while," he noted. "Just because he's wrong on this, [it] doesn't mean he's not right on almost everything else."
Leave a Comment:
Well Harry as dick cheney would say " GO F****yourself " ! The earmarks are done in a dishonest way .. one of the reason's we are going broke !
As Rep. Joe Wilson declared before the World:
You Lie !
My guess is, You were For the Iraq War, before you were Against It.
I.E. When the Bill came Due!
Next year, Obama has one more crack at this SOTU speech stuff. Either he gets this earmark thing straightened out by that time, or he never does.
And, what about Gitmo? Closing Gitmo was a really important priority for Obama a couple of years ago. Now you don't hear anything about it. I wonder why that is?
Mr. Reid should go back to his gold mining operations.
Time to "think outside the box" Mr. "continue to do Congressional business the same way". Oh, Mr. Reid, please take a look at the current and projected deficit. Yeah, solicit Congressional members to put in another 9,000 earmarks in the next legislation to force a "showdown" with your boss. That should be easy for you.
Aside from your point being just silly and wrong, Rick,Ky, what is with the random capital letters? Did you go to school in Ky too? Was Bill due? Who is the "Bill?"
dick cheney would say " GO F****yourself " !
As Rep. Joe Wilson declared
I thought this story was about Harry Reid.
Harry knows Barry is lying about the earmarks, how would he have been able to buy the votes for Obamacare without them?
Harry just being a little p*ssy, literally trying to mark his territory?
I'm AppalachianAmerican & can Spell my name. There is this little thingy called a Mouse that allows You to scroll past Any post you don't like.
Can i buy a Vowel: Brto
Whazzup with that kinda Internet handle. Comeon, be all you can be!
this is the Internet
Aint It
"The earmarks are done in a dishonest way .. one of the reason's we are going broke"
Not true. We are going broke due to the combination of entitlements and defense spending. I hate earmarks but they amount to nothing in grand scheme.
Earmarks are but a drop in the bucket.
I agree, though, that the way in which they are handled is a joke. Harry Reid needs to explain to the American public why he thinks its a good way of getting spending directed by bribing people to support certain bills?
Here's a thought - how about we do "congressional spending" honestly, openly and all by itself. Have a big sit down where they all decide how much spending will be done (of the earmark variety) and then hash it out amongst each other who deserves it the most. Ya know, sell your pet projects to your coworkers.
And to those who think cutting earmark spending will solve the deficit (or even help) quit fooling yourselves. It would be akin to forgoing a carton of eggs each week and just eating toast by itself to save money.
We need to stop charging wars to credit cards and leaving that total off the "debt" balance sheet.
We need to stop borrowing from Social Security and leaving THAT balance off "debt" balance sheet.
Did you all know that if we added in the money owed to social security, it would balloon to 2.5 TRILLION in debt? yeah, Obama didnt do that one folks...thats been in the making since Reagan created the Soc Security Fund for Baby Boomers.
And its also why republicans love to say its in trouble - yeah, it will be if our own govt cant pay itself back. SERIOUS trouble. And EVERY SINGLE PRESIDENT has borrowed against it. Including Reagan right after he created it.
Well Harry as dick cheney would say " GO F****yourself " ! The earmarks are done in a dishonest way .. one of the reason's we are going broke !
One of the reasons, but not one of the major reasons unfortunately.
Harry Reid is SOOOO out of touch with reality. He knows better then some bureaucrat? Probably because he's been guided by some lobbyist $'s and the bureaucrat has been guided by facts and years of service to our country.
GITMO was not closed down because congress voted to defund the money needed to do so, tying Obama's hands. The defund technique is how they do everything they do not want so you can pass a law but without funding you cannot implement.
Eliminating earmarks may not make a huge difference in the budget or deficit (what's a few billions when you're dealing with trillions...), but it would be the first step to fiscal responsibility and returning credibility to the Federal government.
The journey of a thousand miles begins with one step. Don't make the first step and you go nowhere.
A drop in the bucket.
A lot of drops make a full bucket. Why does it have to be democrat or republican.
Are there no americans left?
Really? I mean, Really? Tell the people what they want to hear, not what you will do?
Harry, you will hear no applause from me. You will be getting the silent hands "you're #1 salute."
Did Obama go off and say something last night that can be objectively verified? Whoops, you mean people can easily figure out if he vetos bills with earmarks? Oh no, what's he going to do now?
But it sure was a pretty speech. A lot of nice words. And trains. Who doesn't like trains?
Clearly Reid does not want to join Obama in "winning the future."
JoAnnaSmith1: but rather ask what are the Republicans going to do to break their do nothing streak, Its time for the Republicans to lead in the congress, repealing health care is not leading, it is wasting precious time, and money!!
Jessica-1170252 The social security program was started by Franklin D. Roosevelt on August 14 1935. Reagan had nothing to do with it. The ferderal government has probably been borrowing against it since it started. Anyway, earmarks are not the total fix, but when you look at your family budget and have to cut out spending, it usually isn`t a $50 problem. But you have to start somewhere. We as Americans on a whole need to force our government to balance the budget of this nation. It doesn`t matter whether you are Dem, or Rep. This deficit spending cannot continue. Look at our history. Our founding fathers considered it immoral to leave our children in debt. Right now we are leaving our grandchildren in debt. Our gov needs to tighten it`s belt. Sure a lot of people will have a hard go in the short term, but by pulling together as a community, we can help each other through it.
Problems w/earmarks: 1) Veiled in secrecy, i.e., "hidden" within major bills, a quid pro quo/tit for tap much like a payoff. This strategy lacks integrity in a legislative body and needs to be ended. Period. 2) No public debate on earmarks before they're passed and little oversight once funds are used; therefore, earmarks often are for frivilous projects that sometimes don't come to fruition or have little value for the majority. Possible compromise: Have one week only during the full Congressional session to introduce earmarks transparently -- not tacked onto other bills -- with open debate and voting for the public to see.
Awww Harry....you mean you can't pay off your Chinese campaign contributors by giving them American Taxpayer money to build windmills by hiding it in some earmark?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40565987/ns/business-oil_and_energy/
When you look up "Corrupt Career Politician" you'll find a picture of Harry Reid.
Off hand I would say that HArry Reid and his emarks both need to go.
Reid disagreed with Obama? He must be a racist.
Earmarks are a tiny and insignificant part of government spending. Get over yourselves you bunch of experts. Just as tort reform on medical malpractice, which Obama threw out to shut up the whiny butts, is a very, very small part in healthcare costs.
Jessica, almost nothing in your post is true.
FDR created SS, and the democrats in the 60s voted to redirect SS deductions from your paycheck into the general fund (same as your income tax withholding) for spending on everything from bombs to researching sexual practices of college students. What was left in the fund was borrowed, and SS has been money in today-out tomorrow since.
If you hate Reagan at least hate him for something he actually did. Crack a book sometime.
calmbeforethestorm.....A racist ??...Hmmm.... how can you even suggest that when Harry said such nice things about Obama:
"Senator Harry Reid, the Democratic majority leader, apologized on Saturday for once predicting that Barack Obama could become the country’s first black president because he was “light-skinned” and had “no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.”
I guess people can make up there own minds....
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/10/us/politics/10reidweb.html
With respect, the problem is not earmarks. That's a failed attempt to draw attention away from the real problems - Social Security, Medicare, and Defense.
Those 3 things take up the vast majority of our budget - eliminating earmarks entirely would be a fraction of what we have to cut to have a balanced budget - without touching those three (presumably all of them), we cannot fix this.
I agree the pennies and nickels need to be scrutinized, but when your budget has 80% of your expense in one category and you need to cut spending by half, you can't avoid looking at the one category.
Get rid of both parties-do away with bi-partisan politics. Make politicians run without any party backing. Neither party is able to see beyond the "maintaining control" factor long enough to do what the American people need done. We need politicians we can count on doing what is right for the entire nation as a whole.
Lots of changes need to happen. Earmarks is just one of many changes. However, earmarks need to stop!
I tend to go along with Charles Krauthammer: "Don't listen to what Obama says; watch what he does."
Bruce - I was actually thinking that Obama thought reducing malpractice costs would be another step toward Gov't controlled healthcare.
Nearly all countries with Gov't controlled healthcare limit malpractice liability. In fact, some of those socialized medicine countries have virtually no malpractice judgments.
Of course their doctors make the same or more mistakes, but you don't get compensated like in the US.
Some people want to tell you that if a doctor makes $200,000 while paying $100,000 for malpractice insurance, that malpractice reform would not reduce medical costs.
But then ask them why nearly every country with Gov't healthcare has that liability lowered to nearly nothing.
Each project requiring Federal funds at the congressional level should be forced to stand on it's own merits. Hiding and getting funds for pork projects by attaching them to much larger, and many times critical, appropriation bills is dishonest and reeks of bribery. The US of A deserves better from the people elected to represent us. Bush 42 lost by a landslide for his infamous "Read my lips" quote when he capitulated to the Dem controlled congress. Obama may have just made his biggest political career mistake yet. When the veto doesn't happen people will remember his promise. Funny that he will be brought down by his own party.
At this rate the republicans won't even need to field a real candidate for 2012. Thank you Honest Harry.
When Obama grows a pair and tells Prince Harry to stick it where the sun don't shine. I might say there is hope for the man. But I'm not holding my breath.
What State of the Union speech? All I heard was campaigning for 2012.
Also with thinking like Harry Reid's we are stuck with more airports to nowhere and back-breaking spending. He doesn't understand that all those vote-buying dollars have got to stop.
So, to all you who say earmarks aren't a big deal and don't amount to much. What is your suggestion for earmarks? Kill them or continue?
Earmarks are the dirty little back room secret deals that most of us see as dishonest and immoral. So to all of you that like earmarks do you enjoy having to take long showers to try to was the feeling of rape off of you? Or do you just like rapeing the rest of your fellow citizens for your gain?
I think Harry Reid could have found a much more respectful way to disagree with the President of the United States. Comments like just an "applause line" are just plain rude and unneccessary. Remembering Tuscon apparently needs to be happen within the parties as well. Stop acting like little kids...we're sick of it!
Jessica, you are so wrong it is pitiful. It was LBJ who opened the Social Security lockbox and allowed Congress to spend the funds in there and even funds it hadn't received yet and to put in "I.O.U.'s" in their place. Reagan had nothing to do with it. It was also LBJ who created Medicare and the "War on Poverty" which has helped to bankrupt us.
Lets be clear about this, crooked Reid could never have gotten re-elected without promising millions of dollars in earmarks, now if Obama for once told the truth, then Reid would have egg on his face and by saying something now in public, he is covering his, well you know what, so the heavy hitters in Reno do not take him to the woodshed.
As we all know earmarks are only about 3% of the spending that goes on in D.C
But lets face it 3% here 5% there plus picking up 2,3,5% somewhere else this starts to add up. If you look a what Tom Corbett is trying to do in Pa. get rid of failing entitlements to make up for a 4 million dollar short fall. Why not try?
This country could possibly save billions, if we would get rid of subsidies to mass transit (for example) If they fond some transportation wiz who could run it more efficiently with less overhead. WHY NOT?
Last time I checked Con Rail was making money off of freight. WHY CAN'T AMTRAK OFF PASSENGERS??
Fast Eddie Rendel added $0.06 per gallon gas tax to help mass transit in Philly, and Pitt. Guess what it amounted to about 7 million for Philly and 3 million for Pitt. best part is they are still not making any money. This fact has the rest of Pa. madder than a hornet in a jar.
In NJ Christie went at odds with the teachers union. Paraphrasing, 70% of something is 70%, but 70% of nothing is nothing. Christie is right, we have gotten to the point in many states that are on the edge of bankruptcy. The doing business as usual crowd failed to see the writing on the wall and now there are tough choices to be made.
Point is people we have to start cutting somewhere. This business of you give me this and I will give you that has to stop.
But rest assured, Obama campaigned on getting rid of earmarks and has not followed up on it yet. So I think Obama's promises are about as hollow as a drinking straw.
Obama insisted he would do away with earmarks during his campaign. Never happened. In his first state of the union address he then insisted he would no longer sign any legislation containing earmarks. That too didn’t happen. Now in this state of the union address he repeats his pledge to not sign any legislation containing earmarks. Harry Reid need not concern himself because Obama is simply lying as usual and has no intention of curbing earmarks.
Earmarks are bribes in exchange for votes, nothing more.
Well at least we know that Harry is bought and paid for. Good job Harry and your buddy BONER.
Reid to Obama on earmarks: 'Back off'
Obama to Reid on insubordination: "F*ck off"!
You all are against "earmarks" and "pork spending" until it affects you. When the library in your hometown does not get built, when the roads in your county stop being fixed, than you will start crying to your congressman to do something about it...unfortunatly...they can't, or wont because they are afraid that in doing so, they will be seen as a big spender, and voted out of a job!
One of the reason we send someone to represent us, is so they can get things done for us!
Either you are a malpractice lawyer or a union contractor that is getting paid well by Harry's earmarks. There can be no other explanation for defending corruption.
So when someone goes in for a strained back and has a $2,000 MRI, multiple xrays and scans, physical therapy and 3 follow-ups for a pulled muscle so the doctor can cover his butt against a malpractice suit...it's an insignificant part of healthcare cost? Stop listening to the propoganda being spit out by the Litigation Attorney's Lobby and use your head.
As for earmarks...did you see the proposed budget that got shot down in December with 9000 or so earmarks? Oh, but hey it's only 3% so let's just ignore it and continue to pay for programs that only benefit the campaign contributors of the senator/rep that put the earmark in....it's only taxpayer money it doesn't really cost anyone anything right?
Sheesh...
I'll vote yes if i get my ear mark, I'll vote yes if i get my ear mark,
I'll vote yes if i get my ear mark, I'll vote yes if i get my ear mark
See how catchy it is. Ear marks aren't the problem the trend is.
Change the practice, kiss (keep it simple stupid)
Transparency stop the small font!
Earmarks are not new money being given as bribes. They are the directing of already approved federal funds that are allocated to the states unspecified as to exactly where they will be used within that state. The funds are then targeted to specific projects in that state, usually at the suggestion of one of the Senators of that state.
As usual Mr. Reid is the typical elitist that feels is above the Americans he is supposed to serve! The earmarks are wrong and a waste of the taxpayers money. If he wants to support a cause, let him use his own money!
Forgetfulness is one of the great faults of American voters. It is unfortunate that some Senators suffer from the same malaise. Dirty Harry barely sqeaked out a win last November and the only reason he did was because of his vicious (and uncivil) attack ads against Sharon Angle. In two short months, he has already forgotten why the Republicans gained 63 seats in the House and 6 seats in the Senate. Hopefully, in 2016, the Nevada voters will remember this. That's assuming Harry hasn't been recalled or impeached (or however you get rid of a crooked Senator) by then.
Give it a rest, Harry! Special interests and earmarks do, indeed, add to the bottom line....a bottom line that desperately needs to be decreased. It would be really cool if we could have a full 24 hours without political bashing. Last night's speech and the entire mood within the Chamber during that speech set a very positive tone. Let's go with that note for a while.
well now, a member of the democratic party telling the people they are being played, lol. if that isnt discontent in the ranks, and telling the pres to go f*$@ himself we'll do what we want, not sure what is. dont get me wrong here, earmarks are bs, and a good sign of whats been going on the the past 6 years was it? when the dems had control. dont get me wrong on this, i dont think Nobama the Clown meant 1 word he said. he's been promising work on the economy since he ran for president, yet, each time he supposedly makes an achievement, his next line is usually "now it's time to roll up our sleeves and fix the economy", in almost if not those exact words. now me, just being me here, would think that above just about any issue i have on my plate, the 1st thing i would have to do is something to try and "fix the economy", rather racking up 3 trillion or so in stimulus spending that goes no farther than a semi, with 18 flat tires carrying a full load trying to go uphill on an ice covered mountain going uphill. lol.
I guess I don't understand why everyone keeps saying it is only a drop in the bucket to remove earmarks. I don't know about you but when our family cuts our budget we go to hamburger instead of steak, turn the heat down a few degrees, turn a light off when we leave a room and maybe rent a dvd instead of going to a movie----all drops in the bucket but they all add up instead of suddenly saying we will no longer spend money on food to cut a big chunk out. All areas have to contribute a drop here and there to fill that bucket. Instead it seems like I keep hearing everyone saying make those cuts but don't take anything away from me. Sure makes American's look greedy and so I guess we have become greedy.
My opinion with regard to why major Cities are broke:
First, look at Detroit, as only one example. Driven by greed, auto unions took everything that they could get. The auto companies fought back meekly, but soon gave up and added another piece of pie to the already hefty union workers paychecks. Some auto workers were making over $ 65.00 per hour. That's way more than teachers can earn. Same goes for city emplyees. Trash truck drivers in New York making over $ 65,000 per year. With pensions and other benifits, union workers can rack up formidable dollars. That's where to start. Declare bankruptcy and renegotiate union contracts.
How very dare he. It just goes to prove that he and his cronies are in this for themselves. They obviously really care nothing about transparency or reducing the deficit, Reid and his ilk are all for the maintaining the status-quo and staying in bed with the rich corporate partners. Screw the general populace and then blame the high deficit on the current administration.
I find him, his attitude and his ilk revolting. Earmarks are why this country is practically broke.
Jessica, a few other posters already schooled you on Social Security and Reagan's involvement with it, but even they aren't exactly accurate. Every dime that has been paid into SS since 1935 but was not sent out in benefit checks, or used to administer the fund itself, or needed as a bump fund for short term revenue fluctuations, has by law been invested in US Treasuries. Reagan didn't create this problem, but he did help continue it when he compromised with Tip O'Neill and democrats in the early 80s to raise the tax rate for FICA so SS could be saved.
The net effect of the Social Security Act on the federal budget has been to cause Congress to spend all of those surpluses that were invested in treasuries on other things. SS has only served to help expand the federal government beyond what should have been possible, and now we get the priviledge to begin to cut, or borrow, or tax ourselves even more, to pay it all back. Remember how Bush 43 talked about making modest changes to SS and you lefties said he would ruin everything? Well, enjoy everything.
This has nothing to do with the deficit...
It's a battle to see who gets to decide how and were our tax dollars are spent
Discretionary spending is a fixed amount and somebody in the government decides how it will be spent.
Somebody will spend it all and the deficit will not be helped at all.
Harry (balsac) Reid is the consumate liberal ...they love him...he is basically spitting in his kings face and I am laughing at it...hahaha
Yes, who cares about earmarks, they are after all just a drop in the bucket. Although the bucket contained 15.9 Billion drops last year. With Obama looking to save $100m over 90 it would take 53 years to save the first 15.9b. Lets see... 53 x 15.9b = 842.7b. Ah, who cares. Why would you worry about a number as small as that????? The USA already has to borrow .40 of every 1.00 it spends so why worry as inflation eats up all your saving?
William Van Buskirk here are some of the stupidest stats around , and yes unions are a srurge on America...ALL of them, especially government unions
Ahern also notes that the top paid stagehand at Carnegie Hall makes $422,599 a year in salary, plus $107,445 in benefits and deferred compensation. So why such exorbitant pay? You probably already guessed that a union is involved:
But... but... but... where is Fiesty Redhead and Ret Navy vet?
Oh, I guess they only post on issues that praise the leftwing nutcases....
Earmarks are just another form of GRAFT. They are spending allocations aimed into local corporate coffers (in exchange for political contributions from those same corporations). It's a way for corporations to get taxpayor money. Harry Reid should BACK OFF and really think about the Constitution and "TAXATION without REPRESENTATION". It's illegal. Enough said.
Patrick.....true that
#1.58
the last paragragh is mine...didn't slip it in the post correctly
"I have a Constitutional obligation to do Congressional directed spending," he said. "I know much more about what should be done in Elko [or] Las Vegas, Nevada, than some bureaucrat does back here."
Yet Reid wants to control our spending on Health Care, Education, Etc Etc Etc....
Reid you really need to make up your mind. Or just state the truth, You want to control everyone's spending. Because you can do it soooooo much better than anyone else.................Hypocrite.
"Earmarks" are job building projects in districts all over the land and even NOT IN THIS COUNTRY(military special projects). You people do not want flood control projects, or public transportation, or road improvements? Where in hell do you think this money comes from? Do you think someone not in your area will send you money to fix your public spaces, HELL NO they won't. I would trust my local leader to make better choices for us locally than I would some bean counter in Washington. Senator Reid is right, but this can also be used by some to line their own pockets. That is why we need honest and OPEN conversation about how and where our public money is spent on discretionary things. We can do what we need to do cheaply and still do it right, it is the fraud and the cheating within the process to deliver care to our citizens that some how gets slipped into the pockets of criminals. Some of those CRIMINALS are our bankers, our stock brokers, our politicians, our judges, our attorney's, and our civic leaders. We ordinary citizens shirked our duties of making sure things are done honestly and correctly. We have to do a better job of fulfilling OUR responsibility of OVERSIGHT.
Rick, in KY. You must be in your own world. 1.5 trillion deficit. Where would you cut. How about everywhere. Watch what Ohio does, Kasich is the one who forced the fed balanced budget.
i agree!!!!!!! earmarking - stealing is there a difference?
Earmarks, as I see them, are an added expense and are dollars added to a department's budget. If there were not an earmark added to a department and thus no additional dollars, what added power would the executive branch have to redistrube the funds?
At this point, I won't even get into the issue of why the federal government is paying for local projects.
My understanding is the the earmark is a way to bypass the bidding process that the executive branch would normally do (or the no-bid process that they've been known to do...). Thus, the project itself and money are already approved, but with an earmark, some congress member has claimed it for one of his/her own constituents and no one else will get the chance to bid on it. Eliminating earmarks won't eliminate the projects per se, but will change the way they're awarded (if I'm right).
So you could argue a couple of ways on it. One, that without being able to guarantee a contract for their constituents, the congressman are less likely to want to fund the project. Two, that a fair bidding process will drive the cost down and fight corruption. Three, that bidding every project will add more overhead and actually increase costs. Take your pick of any of the three...
Unemployment in Nevada is still the highest in the country, the same is true for home foreclosures....Harry desperately needs the earmarks to pay off the Unions.....you know what they say......What happens in Vegas, Stays in Vegas......and there is a lot of desert a man can disappear into....bada bing !!
p>
Without UNIONS you would be making 50 cents an hour. It is unions and the blood of thousands of workers that had to endure the miserable working conditions forced upon them by big business and their slave driving work practices. You fools are so easily lead by the nose to your own slaughter. UNIONS my friend is your ONLY way to survive if you WORK FOR A LIVING. Of course if you "work" the stock market and commodity markets You may think you work hard, well I do not think you work 10% as hard as the PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT ACTUALLY MADE THE THINGS those people decide how much that work is worth. They never even touch our hard work, they just MANIPULATE IT'S COST. Meanwhile you get little to nothing for your hard work, because corporations know their labor force is stupid, they know you cannot fight for honest pay, they know their well funded propaganda AGAINST UNIONS are spread ever where, AND YOU AGREE WITH THEM. Being lead to your own grave is not what these corporations WANT you to know until you have your foot stepping into it, you have to be intelligent enough to recognize the signs all around you, and react with reason and thought, not hate and ignorance.
Trouble is Mike, Ol' Harry wants what happens in DC to stay in Vegas too, at least the financial part.
ray4a...(#2.3) I was 20 years in a NYC construction union....The Shopsteward didn't even bring his tools to work. Played cards all day with the other trades Shopstewards. Every 10th worker was a deputy shopsteward. In "good times" you couldn't get rid of the lousiest workers...they made top pay, same as the most skilled...if you were doing too much you were told to slow down. In "bad times" it was known that you "tipped" the shopsteward at the end of the week. The same guys down at the Union Hall kept getting sent to jobsites. The rest just had to keep paying their dues...Highest ranking shopstewards were on several job payrolls....the checks were mailed to their home.....the cost of keeping the peace. In the worst of times when Employer paid Union benefits were shrinking, the Union instituted a "Dues Check-Off"....2% of my gross pay got taken off the top of my check and sent to the Union too......it never went away. So, yeah, my union was great as long as you were an obedient brown-noser.
You also could have de funded the war and the pentagon ! you chose not to ....now the republicans can do it !
It should be interesting to watch! Obama promised a ban on earmarks during his campaign. I wonder what changed his mind...if it actually did in fact change?
Old Harry's just going to have to stop spending along with everyone else. We at home have had to stop, it's about time they stopped.
Earmarks are nothing but political bribes to Congress and the Senate to pass enormous bills. They're likely to vote if they get something in return - it has nothing to do with the bill they're passing at all.
All I can say is it's about damn time. Let's see if Mr. Obama will keep his promise...this time.
But, how can he buy (sorry I mean campaign for) votes back in Nevada if he doesn't bring home the bacon?
When two Liberals disagree, is that called "bi-polar-partisan"?
Oh I'm sure Dirty Harry will continue to find a way to get those Hispanic and illegal votes.
Now Michelle has a huge deal with Walmart to regulate what is on our grocery list, so I'm sure she's on the take and can comp a few million Walmart gift cards in return for something like letting the Walmart employees kid's eat donuts while we only get broccoli.
Well, it doesn't really matter what Harry thinks. Obama laid down the law last night, he's vetoing all spending bills that have earmarks. Just like he said he would do last year, and the year before, and on the campaign trail . . . . . .
If you can't trust Obama, just who can you trust?
Yep, Liberals put full trust into someone who campaigned for earmark reform and to veto any legislation which has pork. And, they continually spew their Liberal rhetoric to show their support.
It is really going to be interesting to find out if Mr. Obama is going to "VETO any legislation which has pork" he mentioned in his SOTU speech. Gee, haven't we heard this before.....nah:
If we cannot trust "Our" President, then who can we really trust ?
Last I checked, the health care bill had about 2000 pages of pork and provisions aimed at undecided congressmen and senators. Veto that sucker!
Well, friends, I believe we have to call the SOTU a win for the President. At least from the panic that JS1 and no jo are showing.
For Reid, NV and those politicians that think like him, the days of "old" ARE over! This is STILL the UNITED states, where we all have needs in each state. Yet, we are still waiting for the time, when across the states there will be more people back to work in every area. Not, just the states where the biggest game winners continually win the biggest pot.
That thinking of the "oldsters" is exactly why they are being voted out. It is a serious thought as to term limitations for ALL political holders from judges down to PTA position holders.
Congressional Earmarks are not a significant portion of the budget as a whole. You can look up the figure but an oft quoted recent value of ear marks is in the 29 billion dollar range.
While to you and I as individuals this is a giant heap of money, as a portion of our federal budget it is very very small. The last budget was 3.5 trillion dollars. 29 billion is 0.8% of that value. So not even a single percentage point of the budget.
Removing earmarks does very little to control the budget deficits. At best its symbolic, but the net effect of the symbol is to cause a large amount of job loss and pain for the very people who whine about the earmarks.
Proving that generally, us Americans, are completely stupid and vote against our own best interests the majority of the time.
What could and would benefit America most is if Americans stopped acting like they knew what was going on and instead tried to educate themselves and learned what was actually going on. Simple Math eludes the greatest majority of our nation and it is far to easy to whip the masses into a froth over 29 billion dollars of waste and thus provided their bread and circus they do the work of whining and being misdirected while our congress continues instead to behave very poorly and in the interests of those who pay them instead of those who elect them.
Ahh NewDay, of course we call it a "win" for Obama. Because everybody knows winning at speech making is the important part, right.
Let me guess you are a Oral Communications major?
Mayhaps you might want to venture over to the actual left wing sites. Unlike the libbie light weights around here, they found the speech to be, ummmm, distressing.
But by all means, for you let's go with a win. And we know this topic sucks for you - no Fiesty, no bev. Not even a Drive By. All you seem to have is Rick. Oh my!
Is the $1.5 trillion dollar projected deficit for 2011 also a win for Obama? Or is that a win for the American people? Or, maybe the Chinese people?
Hey Vote Dem Out !!!
Did you know broccoli is a brain food? You could use some.
nice try Cro...but your liberal utopia ears are showing
OverTaxedAgain,
You're an idiot and you are part of the problem. I said NOTHING about accepting Harry Reid, a liberal agenda, or anything of the sort, yet because YOU presume I am speaking against what you want, I must be a liberal.
First off, MOST of the people who were opposed to ridding the budget of earmarks were Republicans. Republicans have been, historically, one of the biggest benefactors of ear marks. Red States, take in far more federal money while sending less in federal taxes, than do blue states.
Secondly, you should likely read what Harry Reid said. Because if you are also a fan of the constitution, you would realise that what he said has some very significant importance. The EXECUITVE Branch is not there to make pronouncements about what can be passed by the Legislative Branch. They can Veto, but the Veto can be overridden and this exists for a reason. The Executive threating the Legislative is not really the intent of our document that frames our national government.
Get a clue and stop tossing around idiotic liberal v conservative us v them tripe. Its not a frikken football game where people paint their chests red or blue and scream maniacally for their group of spandex clad mesomorphs to win.
This is OUR GOVERNMENT.
Do not make ironic DeTocqueville's pronouncement that in a Democracy like ours, you do not get the best government, but the government you deserve.
"but the government you deserve."...hahaha...we got we deserved all right , for electing either one of the morons
"This is OUR GOVERNMENT."
yup...and it is way too large...
Earmarks aren't the biggest part of the budget, but they sure perpetuate the problem of making "lawmakers" cater to the special interest groups who contribute to their candidacies in return for benes.
What does this tell us about Nevadans? They're the ones who keep sending ol' Harry back to DC to bring home some nice, fat pork.
You and Nancy were in charge kinda !
If anyone needs to "back off" it's you, Senator Reid. You and your colleagues on BOTH sides of the aisle have wasted so much money over the years, it's not even funny.
True, these earmarks are simply specifying the destination of funds that would be spent regardless, but the public wouldn't have such a problem with them if they were directed to efforts that are actually meaningful.
Irony Dept.;
The crazy lady Harry defeated would be supporting the president on this one...
I think Harry Reid has no one on his side on this one. While the earmarks are symbolic as to the overall budget deficit and the National debt, it has to start somewhere. If President Obama wants another 4 he will have to deliver on these promises.
If only the Republicans had a viable candidate, Reid would be gone. Thanks Tea Party!
Harry Reid hand picked Sharron Angle. When Sue Lowden made a silly comment about paying for health care with chickens, Harry went on the offensive during the Rep primary and put out commercials against her. He basically campained aginst Sue during the primary, ensuring that he would get Angle. Sue lowden had a real shot at beating him, and he knew it. It really didn`t have anything to do with the tea party. If Sue had won, the tea party would have backed her.
It has everything to do with the Tea Party. If the Tea Party had backed a viable candidate, then Reid would have lost the election. The Tea Party sent in the clown.
Reid carries little weight in this one. "If" the Prez hold true on his promise to veto earmarks--what is Harry to do other than b**ch.
Thank you Grand Moff!
Senator Reid needs to get a filter between his brain and his mouth. It was a stupid thing to say (much like calling the Chinese Premier a dictator while he was in the country). Considering the current financial situation, defending earmarks makes him look really out of touch with reality. If a project is that important to him, produce a bill and let Congress debate it. Don't attach it to a piece of legislation that has nothing to do with the project. That business as usual - and business as usual got the country into this mess.
The problem with what you are proposing is that they would actually have to work. Can you imagine having to vote on several thousand separate bills? They might have to stay there 16 hours a day 7 days a week to get all of that voted on but I like it!!!
Oh the horror! They might have to work.
The only time the politicians have to work is to figure how much they could steal from SS and send it to the states they are suppossed to represent. They have more time off than just a working person. They get mad if they have to work overtime or extra days. One thing for cerain they know how to vote themselves a raise in 2010 and 11 while negating COLA during a down economy. The bad economy didn't stop them. I have always wondered how much would be saved if they had to buy their own healthcare, pay for healthcare insurance, their own cars, gasoline etc. They certainly could afford it. How about cutting back on a senators or congressman staff. There are several tons of wasteful spending that could amount to billions of dollars that they ask the taxpayers to pick up the tab. Can anyone name an honest politician? Senator Muthra was able to get $220 million for a small town in his state to increase the size of the local airport and be able to land jumbo jets where the average coming and going each day is 20 people. If you add up all those type of things they get for useless projects the deficit would be in the plus along with the rest of the comments I just made.
Earmarks are just symptoms of what ails our government. Let them have their stupid earmarks, just reduce the $ amount as much as they cut spending on education.
Either way, hold our government accountable by way of our elections.
Reid, How could the people in his state vote him back into office. Look up " DUMB" and you'll find his picture.
It was either Harry or that nutjob Sharon Angle. We took Harry.
Polling place shenanigan's was one reason he got the votes, but the Earmarks( money)he has provided
to the illegals and voters and businesses in Vegas is how he bought all those votes.. Votes he bought with us taxpayers money. The man is a stone cold faced CROOK..Highest unemployment of any state in the US and the liberal voters of Nevada still voted Harry back in..That should tell you volumes about the mentality of the voters in Nevada!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You are calling voter fraud in the Nov. 2010 election in Nevada? Be very careful what you say. Back it up by facts!!! And not all the voters in Nevada are liberals. Not that there is ANYTHING wrong with being one.
Hannah -
It was all over the news that when voters went to polling places to vote that Reid's name was already marked and that it would not un-mark - thanks to the SEIU maintenance of the voting machines. Complaints were made at the time.
Where were you? Did you have your head stuck where the sun doesn't shine?
Senator Reid just doesn't get it does he!! This country is in a financial crisis and he is more worried about being able to send money to his home state instead of what is good for the country. If he keep this up, he may not be re-elected tne next time around.
It is my belief he wants the practice to continue so that he can persuade other senators by dangling their pet project carrot in front of them to get their support for whatever bill he wants to pass. Without the carrot, the bill will need to stand on it's own.
mr reid is a disrepectful little twerp who is lucky he got reelected earmarks and lobbist are ruining this country i love this country and for sure he doesn't only his own small little importance.
Slimy little twerp, Reid should be voted out so we won't be subjected to his stupidity in America anymore. Yes, this 'earmark' busines which we have been focused on, is disgusting and ramped up that Obamacare bill that no one read. Boy this country is going down the hill! Anyway, maybe now the POTUS will decide to keep his unfulfilled promises re: earmarks from campaign days, just to keep our minds on the pennies and OFF THE TRILLIONS WE NOW OWE + the TRILLIONS that Obamacare will cost the U.S.A. (except for President and congress who don't have to be subjected to Obamacare.) Or maybe thinking about him never halting the 'earmarks' will keep our minds OFF his moratorium against drilling in the gulf. Then permits not issued after the drilling moratorium is lifted, HENCE THIS VERY DAY OUR GASOLINE IS ABOVE $3 a gallon and HEADING UPWARD. And we're going to pay for the 'alternative' energy projects while paying what is projected to be $5.50 gallon gasoline. Let's not worry about promises never kept, let's be concerned about BEING HELD UP WITHOUT A GUN!
Realgirl ...the drilling moratorium has nothing to do with gas being $3 a gallon. The price is set by market demand; and things like China's demand for oil is driving the rise in prices. I also noticed that many on the right are blaming President Obama for the rise in oil prices. What do you want him to do? Regulate the price? Oh wait....that would be socialism.
""I know much more about what should be done in Elkhorn [or] Las Vegas, Nevada, than some bureaucrat does back here.""
The perhaps the fine people of Elkhorn or Las Vegas should come up with the funding Harry.
Naive as it may be, my viewpoint is federal monies (over bloated as they are) should go to FEDERAL projects. Not to local pet projects.
Further proof that the federal government is not only a welfare provider to people - but more and more to communities on the whole.
Honestly, what kind of a Democrat does Mr. Obama think he is??? Why, the nerve....!!!
inagine that!!!!!!!
LoL The next two years are going to be a real hoot.
Chill out, Harry. He didn't mean it anyway.
look up A-hole and you will find Reid
Just the reverse- look up A-hole and you will find robowine.
Hannah -
Are you from Nevada? One of the idiots who perhaps voted for the imbecilic crook by the name of Reid?
NO, I am from Massachusetts, where LIBERALS ROCK!!!!!!!!!! What a bunch of Repugs on this site. :(
No - this is Reid's End. Obama already hates him. Reid's a wart on the party and will fall next time.
Obama's now going to begin pre-stealing Republican campaign themes (e.g., small business regs, merging/dissolving gov't agencies, and freezing budgets). So, earmarks are dead (or will at least be better hidden as general agency funding for purportedly biddable projects).
Besides (to invite a fight), why does Nevada need to have so many earmarks? Nothing worth funding there in the first place. <smile>
I guess Harry is worried that he won't get that lucrative job from his supporters when he gets voted out next time around.
Harry Reid is an idiot. How the Hell did he get reelected?
Because the best the Republicans could do was Sharon Angle......LOL! Although I'm not sure if I like CROOKED any better than I like DUMB....hmmmmmm
WE have no need for folks like Reid!
I would be happy to be represented by an honest moron rather than a brilliant crook. The moron would be much less successful stealing my money.
Exactly. This is what you clowns get for re electing these bribed over idiots over and over again. This is also what you clowns will continue to get if you dont start voting in Independant candidates and leave this rediculous "two party" song and dance show by the wayside.
I so much agree with you mtpolitico
A lot of earmarks are set by politicians who look at this money as their road to re-election. Many of the earmarks are nonsense money, but they can still say, "I brought __million in for this!" And then, they will blame the local officials on the misspending or misuse of that money. As long as the representative can save his job, so be it: "Long live the Earmark!" Finally, a president (who is trying to save HIS job) has come along - standing up to these bureaucrats - and says, "No more!" A bill comes in, for example, that states "thou shalt not jaywalk" is pretty easy to understand, but when there are 300 pages of earmarks (money to save a senator's favorite picnic table, example) it gets a little lost in the bill. I applaude Obama - I didn't vote for him, but he's doing the right thing. Maybe this will get OUR representatives off their arse and work for a living.
Earmarks are needed by both Democraps and Republikans. They are a legal tool of bribery for both sides of the agreement. Earmarks = Campaign Money and Power!
I agree with Mr. Reid that he may know best how money should best be spent in his home state. That being the case, the bills appropriating that money should be submitted and voted on by themselves, instead of being attached to and hidden in other, unrelated spending bills. Let them see the light of day and be considered on their own merit, and not slid under the back door hoping nobody notices.
I'm not so sure he does know where to spend the money. He's been in DC since the turn of the last century. I do agree that each and every earmark should be voted up or down. This would do two things; shed lite on all monies appropriated and slow down the process so maybe they will run out of time before they run out of chinese money.
If only that could really happen. Transparency of earmark spending will never happen and I do not believe Obama will be able to withstand the pressure to veto bills with earmarks.
Dingy Harry knows nothing about the State of Nevada, he shows up once every six years to get re-elected.
It's the people in Clark county that keep sending him back there...
I hope they wake up soon!
Earmarks are a dishonest method long used to force unwanted bills on either side. One of the side-effects is that important bills that need "yes" votes often get nixed because of stupid earmarks conained in the broader bill. The other side then points the finger at the opposition saying they voted against the important bill when, in fact, they were voting against the worthless earmark. If earmarks are so important, they should stand on their own.
Good work Hot Rod...not many people will get it though.
Exactly right, stand alone. This business of senior politicians slipping pork into larger bills does away with the idea of equal representation.