Lobbyists, Earmarks, Spending:
Senate Democrats Block True Lobbying Reform

WALL STREET JOURNAL

Can Barack Buy the Presidency?

By KARL ROVE

July 3, 2008; Page A9

Full article Karl Rove WSJ

Excerpts:

On the money front, how do Sens. Obama and McCain stack up? No contest, it seems. Since the campaign began, Mr. Obama has raised a staggering $295-plus million, versus Mr. McCain's almost $122 million. But that's misleading.

Mr. Obama spent a lot to win the nomination. So how much cash did he and his rival have when the general election effectively began in June? As of May 31, Mr. Obama had $43.1 million on hand while Mr. McCain had $31.6 million – a significant but not overwhelming advantage.

There is also the cash raised by the Republican and Democratic National Committees. Each candidate depends on the party committees for certain expenditures – registration, voter identification and get-out-the-vote drives, materials distributed by volunteers, even some advertising. Here, the Republicans had $53.5 million in hand on May 31, versus the Democrats' paltry $4 million. Thus Mr. McCain and the RNC have $38 million more than Mr. Obama and the DNC.

###

VISIT: Club For Growth

CLUB FOR GROWTH

May 7, 2008

Don Young's Arrogance

Press Release

Don Young's Arrogance Knows No Bounds Calls for a Tax Increase on Gasoline

Washington - Anyone who's watched Don Young waste billions of dollars on outrageous pork projects knows the Alaska representative has long disregarded the interests of American taxpayers.

Now, Rep. Young is taking his disregard to the next level, proposing a dollar-per-gallon gasoline tax as Americans across the country are being hit with record-high prices at the pump.

Americans are already overtaxed and certainly don't need a new tax on gasoline, especially when commodity prices are rising through the roof.

This proposal is all the more egregious when it is all but certain Young will attempt to spend the new tax dollars on wasteful pork projects.

Over his thirty-plus years in Congress, Don Young has accumulated a vast array of pork projects on the backs of American taxpayers. Last year, when Rep. Scott Garrett sought to eliminate money for one of Young's pork projects, Young defended the project, yelling: "You want my money, my money!"

Young was also partially responsible for earmarking $223 million for the infamous "Bridge to Nowhere" in Alaska. It is clear that Don Young thinks taxpayer dollars are his to do with as he pleases-the more wasteful the better.

"Don Young's disrespect for taxpayers is all the more insulting when it produces economically harmful policies," said Club for Growth President Pat Toomey.

"This is true whether we are talking about Young's insatiable appetite for wasteful pork projects or his desire to impose higher taxes on American taxpayers.

In both cases, Young is taking money out of the private sector that would be used to help the economy grow. Taxpayers and the economy would be much better off if Young took a hands-off approach."

Senator Tom Coburn (R) Oklahome says the ethics bill approved by the Senate Thursday is a big loss for taxpayers because it doesn't contain true earmark reform.

The bill, lobbying and ethics legialation passed the Senate by an 83-14 vote. Under the bill lawmakers must disclose campaign contributions of more than $15,000 by lobbyists in a six-month period.

It also prevents senators from lobbying within two years of leaving office and denies congressional pensions to members convicted of felonies committed after the law is enacted.

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-California) calls the legislation "the most sweeping reform bill since Watergate."

Senator Coburn, on the other hand, says it "foists a farce on the American people."

"You can't have dinner with a lobbyist. So how do you get around that? You have the lobbyist give you something and you go to dinner -- but the money goes for your campaign," he points out. "Lobbyists can't bundle up to $15,000 -- so they bundle $14,900 every three months. Nothing's changed."

We voters must start looking for and supporting twenty-five year olds to run for seats in the United States House of Representatives.

The Constitution designates twenty-five as the legal age at which a citizen can so run.

The popularity of the blogospehere and other forms of communications not very popular just several years back has dramatically changed our ability to talk to one another and millions of us are doing just that.

This year has been like no other for voters telling congress how much we want pork/earmarks to stop or at least be totally transparent.

Many of us are in a state of disbelief over how congress just keeps ignoring us and catering to those who give them money and favors for favors in return.

Maybe we can get 25 year olds elected because they have not made promises to or gotten cozy with high priced influence peddlers

###

This past March Jack Abramoff and a business partner were sentenced to five years and 10 months in federal prison for fraud related to their 2000 purchase of the SunCruz Casinos gambling fleet. Abramoff had in the past entered guilty pleas in corruption charges that could involve up to 20 members of Congress.

Bob Ney (R-OH) one of the congressmen involved with Abramoff is scheduled to be sentenced on January 19th. Ney pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit fraud, deprive his constituents of honest service and violate his former chief of staff's one-year lobbying ban

In another scandal, in which government contracts were obtained with bribes Congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham, (R-CA) was sentenced to 8 years and 4 months.

Lobbyists like Abramoff tie in, both legally and illegally, in relation to the unnecessary billions spent each year by congress, especially on special interests that in the long run do harm to the nation.

Of course the congressmen themselves must cast the vote but when it comes to the out of control spending by our federal government, understanding as many parts of the problem as possible, might help us regain control of the country's resources. Lobbyists, earmarks, spending tie neatly together.

Several years back, political scientist James L. Payne listened to the hearings of 14 different congressional committees, paying particular attention to what witnesses were essentially seeking.

In the 14 separate hearings, there were 1021 witnesses. There were those testifying in favor of greater spending, while others argued for less spending.

The breakdown:

For greater spending-1014

For less spending - 7

The Ratio: 145-1

Recently The U.S. House, controlled by Democrats passed legislation making it harder to hide earmarks, a big plus for taxpayers.

In the Senate, Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid put up a bill for show, that did little or nothing to solve the problem of earmarks.

Senator Reid wanted it to appear as though the Senate was tackling earmarks, lobbyists and spending under his leadership, but it was another sham with no teeth.

Senator Jim DeMint a Republican from South Carolina, used the language from the Democratic House bill to offer as an amendment to the original Senate bill. Thirty eight Democrats and seven Republicans threw up an obstruction, not wanting to lose their pork capability.

If the Senate continues its charade, pork, earmarks and lobbyists will simply continue along their merry way.

Although the outrage of all this is almost beyond comprehension, the horror story doesn't end there.

Jeff Flake a Republican of Arizona and several other Republicans sponsored about 40 amendments in the last congress, to prevent the passing of pork projects. In ratings from The National Taxpayers Union Mr. Flake was named the number 1 fiscal conservative in the House, based on the votes he cast.

Just prior to the November election, Mr. Flake talked about the problem of earmarks on the show "60 Minutes."

Now the Republican leadership has removed him from the Judiciary Committee, even though he has more seniority than 6 others who are still on that committee.

The story gets worse. That same leadership has left Jerry Lewis a Republican from California, and an almost indescribable porkmeister, as the ranking Republican on the Appropriations Committee. Appropriations is a euphemism for spending. Jack Abramoff has referred to the Appropriations Committee as a "favor factory"

Lewis not only goes crazy with pork, he is a great defender of the practice and speaks out publicly about its benefits. Adding just one more thing, he is under investigation, suggesting payoffs to lobbyists, relating to earmarking and also relating to Duke Cunningham!

When anything becomes this brazen, no matter which party you support, a serious housecleaning is needed.

This congress, like most, of the last 40 years, is a lobbyists dream. With almost $3 trillion dollars to go after each year and great cooperation from many House and Senate members, it's win, win every year for congressmen and lobbyists but lose and pay more for taxpayers.

We voters should start to seek out and elect 25 to 35 year olds who will tackle government spending as a percent of GDP. Young elected officials might start by accepting less pay and benefits, then tackle pork, then decades long, wasteful, programs, then unnecessary subsidies.

Except for the few like Jeff Flake, today's dinosaurs are there for reelection only, on the way to fat pensions.Their actions will not move the great American Experiment along, in any way.

Lobbyists, Earmarks, Spending To Editorials