onwyrdshammer (![[info]](http://www.insanejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} onwyrdshammer) wrote,@ 2008-03-14 10:07:00 |
 |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pork, congress can't resist the old troff
From Hot Air it would appear that it's enough of an issue that all 3 remaining presidential candidates showed up to vote for a 1 year moratorium on pork (including Obama, who's wife got a nice raise after he threw some tax dollars her employer's way.) Despite their efforts, though, the vast majority of the Senate voted against a moratorium on earmarks. What's the point in being Senator if you can't get your own statue or an unneeded bridge named in your honor? This only makes congress look sleazier, and makes it harder to vote for them.
On the up side, I don't see any North Carolina senators on the list, so at least my state is doing it's part?
Named and shamed, the Senators who voted against:
if your senator was on this list, you should probably let them know you don't appreciate them putting getting themselves reelected (or personal enrichment, or using tax dollars to underhandedly get campaign contributions) ahead of the tax payer. It's your money they're allocating to things not in the national interest. It's your money, and your vote. It isn't about congresses right to set funding priorities. What this is about, is taking millions of dollars and transforming it into thousands of dollars for reelection campaigns, bridges with your name on it, and family members and friends being enriched at the expense of the rest of us. National taxes should go to national, not local interests, should seek the best value for the money (not no-compete contracts), and should not be beneficial to explicitly named entities.
Vote for people who will be responsible with your money. If you don't, you may find you don't have money for them to be responsible with. Ask Cuba.
From Hot Air it would appear that it's enough of an issue that all 3 remaining presidential candidates showed up to vote for a 1 year moratorium on pork (including Obama, who's wife got a nice raise after he threw some tax dollars her employer's way.) Despite their efforts, though, the vast majority of the Senate voted against a moratorium on earmarks. What's the point in being Senator if you can't get your own statue or an unneeded bridge named in your honor? This only makes congress look sleazier, and makes it harder to vote for them.
On the up side, I don't see any North Carolina senators on the list, so at least my state is doing it's part?
Named and shamed, the Senators who voted against:
| Akaka (D-HI) | Durbin (D-IL) | Nelson (D-NE) |
| Baucus (D-MT) | Feinstein (D-CA) | Pryor (D-AR) |
| Bennett (R-UT) | Gregg (R-NH) | Reed (D-RI) |
| Biden (D-DE) | Hagel (R-NE) | Reid (D-NV) |
| Bingaman (D-NM) | Harkin (D-IA) | Roberts (R-KS) |
| Bond (R-MO) | Hatch (R-UT) | Rockefeller (D-WV) |
| Boxer (D-CA) | Hutchison (R-TX) | Salazar (D-CO) |
| Brown (D-OH) | Inouye (D-HI) | Sanders (I-VT) |
| Brownback (R-KS) | Johnson (D-SD) | Schumer (D-NY) |
| Bunning (R-KY) | Kennedy (D-MA) | Shelby (R-AL) |
| Byrd (D-WV) | Kerry (D-MA) | Smith (R-OR) |
| Cantwell (D-WA) | Klobuchar (D-MN) | Snowe (R-ME) |
| Cardin (D-MD) | Kohl (D-WI) | Specter (R-PA) |
| Carper (D-DE) | Landrieu (D-LA) | Stabenow (D-MI) |
| Casey (D-PA) | Lautenberg (D-NJ) | Stevens (R-AK) |
| Cochran (R-MS) | Leahy (D-VT) | Tester (D-MT) |
| Coleman (R-MN) | Levin (D-MI) | Vitter (R-LA) |
| Collins (R-ME) | Lincoln (D-AR) | Voinovich (R-OH) |
| Conrad (D-ND) | Lugar (R-IN) | Warner (R-VA) |
| Craig (R-ID) | Menendez (D-NJ) | Webb (D-VA) |
| Crapo (R-ID) | Mikulski (D-MD) | Whitehouse (D-RI) |
| Dodd (D-CT) | Murkowski (R-AK) | Wicker (R-MS) |
| Domenici (R-NM) | Murray (D-WA) | Wyden (D-OR) |
| Dorgan (D-ND) | Nelson (D-FL) | |
if your senator was on this list, you should probably let them know you don't appreciate them putting getting themselves reelected (or personal enrichment, or using tax dollars to underhandedly get campaign contributions) ahead of the tax payer. It's your money they're allocating to things not in the national interest. It's your money, and your vote. It isn't about congresses right to set funding priorities. What this is about, is taking millions of dollars and transforming it into thousands of dollars for reelection campaigns, bridges with your name on it, and family members and friends being enriched at the expense of the rest of us. National taxes should go to national, not local interests, should seek the best value for the money (not no-compete contracts), and should not be beneficial to explicitly named entities.
Vote for people who will be responsible with your money. If you don't, you may find you don't have money for them to be responsible with. Ask Cuba.