E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSMembers of Congress have pushed more than $300 million in earmarks and other provisions to projects near their own properties, the Washington Post reported on Tuesday.
Thirty-three members of Congress channeled the public funds into projects next to or within two miles of properties they own, according to the newspaper's investigation.
The Post said this is legal under ethics rules penned by lawmakers themselves.
The investigation into the holdings of all 535 members also revealed that 16 had steered federal funds to firms, colleges and programs where family members worked or sat on boards, the newspaper reported.
In one case, an Alabama senator directed more than $100 million in federal earmarks to upgrade an area near his office building in Tuscaloosa, according to the Post. Another representative reportedly earmarked $486,000 to build a bike lane to a bridge near a property she owned. (Click here for full results of the Washington Post investigation)
Leave a Comment:
Is this surprising to anyone?
Nope.
not in the slightest, just disappointing...as long as they can keep the "d's" and "r's" fighting amongst ourselves, they will continue the process of rape, rob and pillage...and they will always have half of us defending their right to do so...We really are as stupid as they seem to think we are...also disappointing
Not in the least. If you make your own laws then anything goes. Take Inhofe and his fight against federal agencies and funding then he earmarks funds for a up close and personal endeavor. Talk about keeping it in the family.
Every member of Congress should be turned out as they come up for reelection. Both parties. This is the only way to send the message that they are not Lords.
and people worry about the single mother might be getting to much assistance wake up
Nothing surprises me about these GD crooked scumbags and the idiots who reelect them.
The whole system is corrupt. The only people our representatives are representing is themselves and this is irrespective of what political party they identify themselves with.
I've never have been in favor of term limits, but they maybe a necessary step to start getting our elected officials to work for us and not for just their interests.
After reading the list of findings they used for the article,you find that greed,abuse,and corruption do not have a favored party....Both are guilty...gee...I never saw that coming.........how about...TERM LIMITS!,and LIMIT the amount of money they can use for campaigns...maybe even consider making the sport of lobbying ( Disguised bribing) ,illegal....then just for @!$%#z and giggles,let's call these super-pacs what they are; anonymous funding from an unknown source with a special interest at heart.......these rules should apply to ALL parties.........U.S.Army DIsabled Veteran
Everyone believes that this type of behavior is limited to politicians? Politicians only reflect the culture of privilege and entitlement that has pervaded our society. Politicians, CEOs, business owners, the 'idle rich' - all participate in the culture of privilege and entitlement.
Privilege and entitlement are not limited to the 'successful'. Look at who actually uses handicapped parking - look at the abandoned shopping carts on a big box parking lot. We are a society that is entitled to something. We are Americans, after all - we are exceptional ...
Did you follow the story to the link that showed who and what they earmarked? Personally, there were only a couple of earmarks made by a couple of lawmakers that made me think otherwise. There were also a couple that made me think hhhmmm? But NO, it does not surprise me with the "good ol' boy" , elbow rubbing mentality that we all seem to take advantage of.
Sometimes, it IS all about "who you know".
Robert-2589118
Every member of Congress should be turned out as they come up for reelection. Both parties. This is the only way to send the message that they are not Lords.
I totally agree with you, the problem is who do we choose? how do we make sure the "new" people won't do the same? the root of the problem is that they are the ones we elect to make the laws, and it's the nature of the beast to be corrupted when you stay too long there, I'd say term limits will be the solution...
When we the people stop letting "Parties" decided how we vote and we start voting for the person some of this will change...
The rest will change when WE stand together and demand this to end...WE are the government....WE can only blame ourselves for letting this continue.
TERM LIMITS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Only we can change this....Will you do your part and contact your representative and demand answers?
http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml
Been going on since we became a nation. It's called "yankee ingenuity".
This is one of the reasons these people enter Congress. Most are very successful businessmen or lawyers. They are usually taking a very large pay cut to enter Congress at $174,000/year. You have to wonder how a person can become a multi-millionare when all they have ever done is work for the state or federal government. This is how they do it.
How about not sending that much power over our lives that far away from us? Nobody can be expected to be an angel with that much unchecked power. Its why we're supposed to be a republic and not a national democracy. Push power back down to the states and locales. This is what "starve the beast" is trying to achieve.
This is not only an issue with the current politicians but is an issue with the governmental system that has been established. The only way to correct this in order to ensure that our taxpayer money is not being used to enrich the politicians we elect is to:
A) Force all politicians to divest themselves of land holdings and stock holdings until out of office. Blind trusts are not as "blind" as the portray themselves to be. If you want to become an elected official then personal gain must somehow be removed from the equation in order to ensure that the best interests of their CONSTITUENTS are being met.
B) Remove all private money from corporations, unions and PACs from campaigns and fund them publicly.
Not that it isn't this way now, but removing the financial incentives makes it so that only the rich and priveledged class can run and govern. It's not like being a member of the military where most companies give you your job back when you return home.
The state senator in my district is term limiting out of office, currently there is no one running for his seat. Our state reps only get about $11,000 per year and are in session for a majority of the time which doesn't allow anyone to keep their current full time job. It isn't feasible for someone like myself to run. Even if I could win the election, I would have to give up my full time middle class job. Only lawyers and business owners can afford to govern in our state, it's a travesty.
Yes, I know these turkeys have been doing this forever, however another Obama FAILED PROMISE:
Mr. Obama cannot use this in his MANY campaign trips anymore.
And our "elite" Congressmen and women wonder why their approval rating is in the DIRT !!!
Politics has always been a dirty game; however with the advent of the computer age, they have been able to bring it into new lows, the only difference between a politician and a whore is, the whore at least provides a service.
Starving the Beast ensures only the wealthy and elite can afford to run and then live on those wages while they control the works of their own agendas and benefactors. When they talk about Starving that Beast, you seem to forget that it’s “We the People” who is that “Beast” that they want to starve!
This cannot be true, because Obama said he was going to reform earmarks.
Something about change.
Oh well, business as usual in DC.
Both sides of the aisle are guilty of needlessly spending our money, and then they actually have the balls to rail about cutting the deficit.
How can anyone support either party is beyond me.
They are all crooks, and they are all stealing from us.
Is it any wonder?
These little earmarks add up over time, and we're letting them run us into the ground with this.
Here's an irony: New Mexico had a Senator some time back, Harrison Schmidt (who also happened to be one of the Apollo 17 astronauts). He was a fiscal conservative, and consequently didn't try to get a piece of the pork for NM. His constituents resented him for it (I don't say "we" as I was too young at the time), and voted him out.
Certainly shouldn't shock anyone. Just check on the financial condition of when some are elected, and when they leave office. Personal enrichment seems to be the driving force for a LOT of them to run for Congress to "represent" us. And even if they arrive in Washington with the purest of ideals, it doesn't take that CESSPOOL long to corrupt them. God help us - we're gonna need him !!
Surprise, surprise, surprise.....
More proof that earmarks should be banned. I am surprised that Debbie Spenditnow did not make the list. Her website is a giant bragging list of all the money she spends.
I have to note that Debbie Spenditnow has changed her website. It is now focusing on Michigan Farmers and Businesses. She is now in campaign mode. Amazing how they go with the way the wind blows. In the end she will be know as Debbie Spenditnow or Debbie Stabyounow.
So, where in Michigan do you live, Tracy?
The money never should have left the states in the first place, only to trickle back through pet projects, after everyone along the way took a slice. And since it did go to the Federal government, it should have gone back into state coffers and then spread evenly.
So what are you saying? The money should stay in the states so the local politicians can spend it with THEIR buddies? How about keeping it in the Federal Treasury, ban earmarks and put all earmark money into cutting the deficit. If you return all the money to the states and don't cut the deficit you are not solving anything. Local criminal politicians are no better than federal criminal politicians.
But if a local politician screws up, it only affects that local area. If a congressman screws up, it affects the whole country. Same reason ships have watertight compartments.
Treason
Gee...surprise! surprise! Sort of like voting themselves a raise.
Anyone pissed off enough yet!? Seriously...what does it take to get people mobilized into marching on washington!?
Agree 100%. To answer your question, most people are stupid.
Unfortunately, most of the people who would march if they could are working, or too old or ill, and can't afford the time off to travel, or they don't have the funds. Don't like the approach OWS took; it could have been soooooo much better and soooooo much more effective.
In some cases, I can pass off my upset with earmarks when at least the majority of a community benefits. But a half-million dollar BIKE LANE??? WTF? I'm not railing against bikers - and I completely understand the dangers they encounter from idiot drivers....but when we as a country are in debt up past our eyeballs - you don't go spending money on things that are not imminently needed!
Whoever pushed this one through should be publicly stripped, flogged, tarred and feathered - and in that order! PUBLIC humiliation does have value.
Rep. Candice S. Miller (R - Mich.)
Get link
Earmark near personal property: $486,000
Miller secured a $486,000 earmark in 2006 to help add a 14-foot-wide bike lane to a new bridge over the Clinton River, about 900 feet from her home. "People earmark for all kinds of things," Miller said. "I'm pretty proud of this; I think I did what my people wanted. Should I have told them, 'We can never have this bike path complete because I happen to live by one section of it'? They would have thrown me out of office."
That money should have been spent locally instead of being laundered through DC.
Agreed. The problem is Washington takes too much from people as it is. Lower the Federal Tax Rates and let the states, counties, and cities tax and spend as they see fit. Politicians are obviously held more accountable at the local level.
I am sick of the Federal Income tax I pay going to local projects nowhere near where I live. I wouldn't be upset about paying the same taxes locally that go to improving my community instead of a politician's community 8 states over.
If they went back to the late Strom Thurmond, you might find an interstate highway being built through some of his property. It is nothing new.
Congressional seniority is a badge of corruption not honor. Vote 'em all out!
Politicians and diapers need to be changed regularly and for the same reason.
Those ear marks also provide jobs for people. But the projects selected may not be in the publics best intrest.
That same money could have supported even more jobs before it was laundered through congress and had everybody taking their cut.
I am shocked. Self-dealing politicians? They better be careful or this news could hurt their approval rating.
Congressional corruption is alive and well.
Find me one honest, moral, ethical politician. You can start by looking at the unemployment line as we the people seem to like to elect perverts, cheats, unethicals, and just plain scum to lead us into the bright "America's Promise".
Makes me GAG!!!
I'll start checking tombstones. ;)
I can't help but think of the missed chances these monies could have been used for to help the poor and needy instead of profitting these politicians and their families. I guess I didn't understand why political office is so highly sought after........now I know........even more importantly, so does God.
While many projects funded by "earmarks" are valid projects that create jobs, funding should not be included in legislation. Rather, funding should be approved by Appropriations. More importantly, these earmarks highlight the hypocrisy in Washington.
All of us need to take credit for this problem..............How many of us vote for the "representative" that goes to Washington and "fights for us" and brings back what we "deserve" from the "system".
The "system" is US and we are to blame.........so how do we fix it? Sounds pretty difficult to change the real culprits, you and me.
How do we take back our country from these crooks ? !!!!!
Unfortunately, earmarks have been used to pass legislation for years. Our elected officials need to learn to compromise on the legislation itself rather than relying on earmarks.
Bob-3388709
By the way you vote.
Starve the beast. Keep your money local and spend it yourself.
Is anyone surprised?
Ethics rules? They don't seem to know the meaning of ethics, either side of the aisle.
The Post said this is legal under ethics rules penned by lawmakers themselves.
If all the criminals could pen their own rules to make whatever they do legal, wouldn't there be an outrage. Though it is our illustrious (yes, dripping with sarcasm) lawmakers who are thieving the country away and selling it to the highest bidder, and not an average American soul is one of the buyers.
23 Republicans sit on that list and 25 Democrats and I support neither side.
This is really no surprise. It is also the reason, that the GOP is so against defense department spending cuts. Most of the major defense contractors are in the republican states.
Don't blame ethier party they all are to blame we should all vote them out & start a new set of rules and watch them for 50 years after they leave office to ensure no latent funny busness goes on.
tweet.... defense is not an earmark issue. Earmark/pork-barrel projects are those items that the nation could go without but the congress person needs to get re-elected so why not build a federal building in his district or state, you know just to show that they can bring home the bacon.
Defense is an item that every sovereign nation needs to protect themselves, unless you are one of those pacifist appeasers who would stand by while the enemy marches in a takes over.
Like the ten million or so dollars that was ear marked for "cowboy research" in Montana. That is a pork barrel ear mark. congress doens't need to fund that.
I'm going to run for president, i promise to eliminate "super PAC" ads and make ear-marking federal funds illegal. Fund government entities and reduce spending.
Perhaps more people should watch the movie "Mr. Smith goes to Washington". Funny how movies imitates real life or is it the other way around.
This is the whole problem with earmarks. Congress comes up with a budget and then a few people sit behind closed doors and carves out huge chunks of money to go to specific projects in order to get the support of the so called honest elected officials, then they all run around claiming they knew nothing about these projects because that is not what they voted for, turns out almost all of them do it and we the taxpayers end up paying for it.
Lawmakers use the explanation that they know their district better than some federal branch, but the problem with that argument is that the federal govt assigns the $ to the state and I suspect the people who work statewide know what is needed more urgently than some politician. The more politically connected get $ for their district while statewide other projects go unfunded.
Think about this when you vote in Nov.
square dude that is their argument but here is the reality, when congress puts together a budget the only criteria that should be looked at is what does the Federal Government need.
If it needs an interstate highway then appropriate money.
If a Federal building is needed in a particular city then appropriate money.
If a congress person asks for money to be appropriated the first duty of every other congress person to consider is, is it necessary to the Federal Government.
If the answer is yes appropriate money if the answer is no pass on it.