Posted on 11/09/2010 1:12:01 PM PST by WOBBLY BOB
When the Nov. 2 general election is over and the lame duck session of Congress begins, Inhofe said he plans to take up the cause of earmarks again. Inhofe said he is listed as the most conservative member of the U.S. Senate by a number of conservative journals and will try to reinstitute the practice of earmarks. He said earmarks should be germane to the legislation they are attached to.
“It would be nothing short of criminal to go to all the trouble of electing great new anti-establishment senators, only to have them cede to the executive branch their constitutional power and obligation, which is exactly what a moratorium on earmarks would do,” Inhofe said in a prepared remark.
(Excerpt) Read more at enidnews.com ...
WTH? Can someone explain?
RINO!!!!!!!!!!!
“It would be nothing short of criminal to go to all the trouble of electing great new anti-establishment senators, only to have them cede to the executive branch their constitutional power and obligation, which is exactly what a moratorium on earmarks would do,”
Unmitigated B.S.
“It would be nothing short of criminal”
Unmitigated drama queen.
Well, the honeymoon is over. I did not know Inhofe was such a bald face liar.
Anyone who dares to call Inhofe a RINO needs to have their head examined. (I’m not saying you’re doing that, Wobbly Bob...)
If Congress wants to spend money for a specific item, let them put it through the budget process and vote on it. Members of Congress should go on record for each individual expenditure they vote for.
Don’t increase revenue through taxes, reduce expenses.
They don’t “get it”.
They are addicted to spending like a crack ho...........
Money has to be appropriated one way or the other. Cuts or no, there is still “stuff” that needs to be purchased by the gov’t. A moratorium on earmarks means one of Obama’s cronies will decide where money is spent instead of legislators. That’s the short term bad. The long term good is that legislators can’t buy elections by bringing home pork.
I was joking - forgot the /s
Earmarks wouldn’t be an issue if the states and districts kept more of their own money anyway. Better still if the individual citizens kept the money and decide for themselves what they can afford.
Inhofe has been a great senator, very conservative, but he needs to seriously reexamine his views on this.
Earmarks are sanctioned bribes and have infected congress with corruption.
One has to be a special kind of liar to make this one up:
“only to have them cede to the executive branch their constitutional power and obligation, which is exactly what a moratorium on earmarks would do,”
He is trying to distract with a statement about Obama. A very calculated lie, one can’t make up something like that as a momentary slip.
They don’t get it. They won’t, until the guillotine kisses the backs of their necks.
They are not pure, they will continue to make mistakes, some campaigned as though they were ...
be not fooled.
They are but politicians and some might dare compare them to children. Behaving as sibling rivals might behave for the coveted toy that might be bestowed upon them from their parents.
Understand, we are the parents, and we control the power, we control the word “no,” and we are responsible for reigning in our wayward children.
Earmarks in the hands of Leftist’s be they Democrats, or RINO’s have been abused to the point we mostly understand them as evil.
Inhofe is right. Without the ability to initiate good earmarks, the new Congress will strap themselves, and frustrate the redemption of our government.
Earmark is where congressman get to pick where the money go to
Without the earmark, the executive branch aka Obama gets to decide where the money go to
“A moratorium on earmarks means one of Obama’s cronies will decide where money is spent instead of legislators”
Please. They could designate it in the legislation that passes through committees the normal way. Done all the time with legit projects.
Correct. Thanks for your post.
Earmarks are the Senate’s way of getting around that pesky old Constitution...........
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.