Posted on 04/05/2024 9:34:41 AM PDT by ChicagoConservative27
Federal spending earmarks have always been the lubrication required to pass most legislation. Killing earmarks is just foolish, unless you want a government incapable of doing just about anything.
Politics remains a team sport, but there has to be something more than words to keep the team playing together.
“Killing earmarks is just foolish, unless you want a government incapable of doing just about anything.”
We already have a government incapable of doing just about anything.
But honestly, you are quibbling about less than 1/2 a billion. They are not the problem or even a part of the problem.
What they are though is an easy target to attack.
Heck one of them used to be a member of the Freedom Caucus, but no longer is, and h got a quarter of that amount or earmark money, but his money is lumped into the total amount that the article claims the Freedom caucus received.
Why would they do that?
Well, the bigger amount increase the the amount by 25$ pushing from less than a 1/3 of a billion to almost a 12 billion.
While they tell how the former Freedom Caucus member voted for the bill, they do not discuss how the other members voted, at least I didn't see that mentioned.
So, how many of the actual existing Freedom Caucus members voted for the bill?
But it has elicited condemning comments from some of this thread.
But even if they did vote yes on the bill, the money they realized paled in comparison to what the Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson handed over to Biden.
This piece is for short attention span voters, trying to equivocate the Squad and the Freedom Coalition. They know that most conservatives won’t look further than the headline.
But there is also a big difference between a rep asking for $$$ to dredge a shipping channel that is becoming impassible and another asking for $$$ for a community center for transgender teens. See post 20...
That too, thanks for you valuable input. 🙂👍
That was my first thought - earmarks only mean spending on certain projects in certain places. Some of that spending is legitimate and necessary, and is simply earmarked to be spent in a certain place to get that legislator’s support. But the money had to be spent and that project needed to be done.
And unfortunately, there is no non-biased way to spend the money where it should be spent. This is why major defense production is spread out everywhere. Why money is wasted building five different missile parts in five States, then shipping them all to a sixth for assembly and a seventh to box and an eight to ship to where it needs to be. Instead of one site doing it all. Still wasteful, but not 100% unConstitutional waste like most Commie earmarks.
What a bunch of ding dongs. Actual American conservatives have no representation whatsoever.
Of course, my Congressman, Matt Gaetz, got $50 million. He’s almost as embarrassing as my previous Congressman (Raskin, Commie-MD).
The difference is one group are ideologues who wants to kill you, the other group are prostitutes who say they’ll protect you, but then sell you out for money.
Gaetz's earmark was a single line, and it doesn't even go to your/his district. It goes to district 19, where fellow conservative Byron Donalds is the rep. It's actually for beach and canal improvements in the posh Marcos Island neighborhood. Considering that the wealthy people who live in the waterfront homes in that community could easily afford to clean it up themselves, this is the worst kind of pork. Gifts to the rich, under the veil of environmentalism.
And what did Gaetz get in return for giving Donalds' district $50M?
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.