Senators Mark Udall, Michael Bennet vote for earmark ban in Senate; ban fails 39 to 56

Colorado's Senators Mark Udall and Michael Bennet voted with most Republicans and against most Democrats when they voted for a ban on earmarks in the Senate. The ban failed 39 to 56. But in the 112th Congress, House Repubicans will have the power to reject any bills that include earmarks added to bills by Senators. Will the House GOP enforce their ban on earmarks on the Senate? In any case, Udall and Bennet voted for fiscal responsibility.

1. I think it would be prudent to be suspicious of any bill these two losers support.  I guess a lack of congressional earmarks would still permit the larger, current problem of presidential earmarks.

   Bennet’s a whore for Stinky.  Follow the scent, Don.  He didn’t suddenly get religion.

   Posted by Laura Victoria  on  12/01/2010  at  11:14 AM

2. Laura, Do you think they’re against earmarks because Obama suddenly is? Do you think they believe they’ll get their projects approved without using earmarks? How would that work?

   Posted by Donald E. L. Johnson  on  12/01/2010  at  07:24 PM

3. Don, I don’t think Obama “suddenly” is.  I think he realizes that he can be the earmark creator in chief as executive instead of congress.  And I don’t think this pair of leftist dems suddenly got religion.  Why would one think this pair has suddenly gotten fiscal prudence?

   Here’s one link on the issue. http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2010/dec/01/dave-obey/us-rep-dave-obey-says-earmarks-ban-would-greatly-w/

   Basically, the exec could propose all the details of a piece of leglislation that includes earmarks of sorts, and the leg branch couldn’t alter the laundry list.  Much of Zero’s legislation has been comprised of his own jug-ear marks, and has benefited his own acolytes, such as the Colorado pair.

   Again, working litigator-like, I would look at the actors first, and wonder about their motives.  Odds are the motives of Udall, Bennet, and Obama are not fiscally conservative.  Hence, the odds of something they all agree on being good are low.  Start with that premise rather than assuming the best from that trio.

   Posted by Laura Victoria  on  12/02/2010  at  01:03 AM

4. Don, I don’t think Obama “suddenly” is.  I think he realizes that he can be the earmark creator in chief as executive instead of congress.  And I don’t think this pair of leftist dems suddenly got religion.  Why would one think this pair has suddenly gotten fiscal prudence?

   Here’s one link on the issue. http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2010/dec/01/dave-obey/us-rep-dave-obey-says-earmarks-ban-would-greatly-w/

   Basically, the exec could propose all the details of a piece of leglislation that includes earmarks of sorts, and the leg branch couldn’t alter the laundry list.  Much of Zero’s legislation has been comprised of his own jug-ear marks, and has benefited his own acolytes, such as the Colorado pair.

   Again, working litigator-like, I would look at the actors first, and wonder about their motives.  Odds are the motives of Udall, Bennet, and Obama are not fiscally conservative.  Did they “suddenly” reform?  Heck no.  Hence, the odds of something they all agree on being good are low.  Start with that premise rather than assuming the best from that trio.

   Posted by Laura Victoria  on  12/02/2010  at  01:12 AM

5. Laura,
   Interesting scenario. But wouldn’t it require Obama to “suddenly” begin providing leadership?

   Until now, he’s let the Dem congress write his terrible bills. What you’re saying is that Obama would write the bills and Congress would have to pass them as written. With a GOP House and more Repubs in the Senate, I don’t think that will happen.

   And now that the House GOP plans to require votes on appropriations by major agency and Dept., the old omnibus bills may be history. How that will affect members’ ability to get pet projects funded remains to be seen.

   But I agree that Obama, Udall and Bennet are pretending to be against earmarks. They’ll find ways to get their spending schemes into bills, if not get them past the GOP.

   Posted by Donald E. L. Johnson  on  12/03/2010  at  07:48 PM

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

<< Back to main