Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: dt57; onyx; b9; caww; KansasGirl; TitansAFC; true believer forever; SatinDoll; All
"Rick Santorum is not a fiscal conservative"

He was among the most big spenders Republicans in the Congress. As Senator, Santorum was a prolific supporter of earmarks, having requested billions of dollars for pork projects in Pennsylvania. In 2009, he declared, “I have had a lot of earmarks. In fact, I’m very proud of all the earmarks I’ve put in bills. I’ll defend earmarks.”

He voted for the 2005 highway bill that included thousands of wasteful earmarks, including the Bridge to Nowhere. In fact, in a separate vote, Santorum had the audacity to vote to continue funding the Bridge to Nowhere rather than send the money to rebuild New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.

Santorum: "People say that I voted for “The Bridge to Nowhere.” I did. I went with the federalist argument, which is, “Who am I in Pennsylvania to tell Alaska what their highway priorities should be?”

The NTU rating of Congress shows that Santorum has a terrible record on taxes and spending in each of his two Senate terms. In the 2003-2004 session of Congress, Santorum sponsored or cosponsored 51 bills to increase spending, and failed to sponsor or co-sponsor even one spending cut proposal.

Santorum is also a big fan of government regulations. He even boasted about sponsoring a bill to regulate “price gouging and unfair pricing by the big oil companies.” He also voted YES on Sarbanes-Oxley, the bill Newt promised to repeal in his first day as president.

Santorum had flip-flopped on government’s role in the housing market. In 2000, Santorum encouraged more home ownership, particularly for low-income families, with the help of government assistance, whether it was through the Federal Housing Administration, or Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. However, he changed his tune in in late 2005 (before the senatorial election), when he urged the reform of Fannie and Freddie.

Santorum - no fiscal conservative, pro-spending, pro-big government, pro-regulations, pro-more subsidies, more welfare, pro-gloated nanny-state ... How can ANYONE believe that he has any intention to reverse the flow of money pouring in Washington?

120 posted on 02/20/2012 12:23:51 AM PST by Marguerite (When I'm good, I am very, very good. But! When I'm bad, I'm even better)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]


To: All

“Santorum was a prolific supporter of earmarks, having requested billions of dollars for pork projects”

In 2006 at the Pittsburgh Zoo, Santorum boasted in front of local reporters about how he’d fetched $500,000 from federal taxpayers’ money to build one of the most luxurious polar-bear exhibits. “If the pot of money is there, I’m going to make sure we get a piece of that money,” he said.

Also in 2006, he earmarked $500,000 for the completion of the Pittsburgh bike trail.

Another pork secured by Santorum in 2003 was $3 million for building a parking garage, another $2 million for another parking garage in 2005 ...

In his career as senator, he required $3.5 billion in earmarks and sponsored spending bills of a total $53 billion.

Just imagine if 100 Senators did the same as Santorum, the government spending would have grown by $5.3 TRILLION.


122 posted on 02/20/2012 12:40:33 AM PST by Marguerite (When I'm good, I am very, very good. But! When I'm bad, I'm even better)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson