On Earmarks, Social Security, and B.S.

$300,00 for mapping the catfish genome? $2.5 million for a virtual spray paint simulator system?

ABC news recently did a spot on Americans For Prosperity's crusade to end such dubious earmarks. You can see the video here.

***

Speaking of earmarks, the Democrat overlords refused to let real earmark reform come to a vote.

Senator DeMint's bill, S. Res. 123 would expose those guilty of saddling the public with their pork projects by posting the bill, with the requester's (and recipient's) name attached, on the internet at least 48 hours prior to consideration. 

Such a system would go a long way toward helping voters identify which Senators are wasting our money.

Our own Senator McCaskill was one of five cosponsors of DeMint's bill, so kudos to Claire! I've had harsh words for her in the past, but I must give credit when credit is due.

Pat Toomey, president of The Club for Growth, had this to say:

The Democratic leadership passed earmark reform unanimously when the issue was hot, but now that the appropriation process is under way and its special-interest cronies are knocking at its doors, it is all too eager to sweep the issue under the rug,” Mr. Toomey continued. “Democratic leaders want to tell taxpayers they voted for earmark reform out of one side of their mouths, but brag about their pork-filled goody bags out of the other side. American taxpayers will see through this hypocritical charade.

***

McCaskill was the only Dem who voted for S.Amdt 489, which would have protected Social Security funds from unrelated spending by established a reserve. (Republicans should heap scorn on Olympia Snowe (ME) and Senator Smith of Oregon for voting against this amendment.)

I hope voters remember that Democrats, known for their demagoguery of  Social Security, voted against this amendment.

Looks like the Dems just exposed their real motives for rejecting privatizing Social Security and it has nothing to do with your retirement.

Comments

[PC]

Actually there was talk, but that was it--and I'm quite sure that a lot of that was Republican pork.

Since that was a major reason that the Republicans got the boot, you'd think that the Democrats would be a little more cautious about screwing us so early in the game. But, perhaps they think it was ALL about the war. I disagree.

[tom]

I really hate to be obvious but when the republicans were in CHARGE there wasn't any talk of PORK REFORM. Now these very same republicans want us to believe they are concerned how our money is wasted.
I'm not buying it, must be an election in the very near future

[The Libertarian Guy]

Pork: The RepubliCrats' white meat.