"Earmark" pork-barrel spending isn't just for the U.S. Congress anymore, it's also the latest fad in the Democrat-dominated Washington Legislature, today's Seattle Times reports: "From sports complex to roads, lawmakers' pet projects on rise"
Earmarked spending has reached record highs since Democrats gained control of the state House, Senate and governor's office in 2004.But House Speaker Frank "Pork" Chopp "wasn't sure" why Democrats hand out a disproportionate share of the bacon:
...
state records show that districts controlled by Democrats take in twice as much money on average for earmarked projects as districts with Republican lawmakers. Districts with Democrats in leadership positions get three times as much money.
"Maybe they are twice as responsive to their constituents," he said.Or maybe they are twice as inclined to spend other people's money, or something. Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at August 19, 2007 10:51 AM | Email This
An allegedly corrupt - yet well-known porkist - like Stevens is finally getting what he deserves and therefore there's a small chance that less tax dollars will be wasted on such pork - and this is worse news to you than uncontrolled spending the by the state Ds? Less tax dollars being wasted is worse news to you? Good grief.
To the subject of the actual post ...
It's interesting to look at the growth and non-growth years in the chart. Notice the large spike in the early 90s. Prior to that spike, the House was controlled by the Ds and the Senate controlled by the Rs. After the spike, the House was controlled by the Rs and the Senate controlled by the Ds. Oh, the spike? 65-33 D in the House; 28-21 D in the Senate. Shocked. Shocked! I tell you.
It remained flat during the two years the Rs controlled both House and Senate ... and then started creeping up again when the House was split 49-49 and the Senate controlled by Ds.
Once the Ds got complete control of the House, it's skyrocketed ... with the Senate Rs standing in the way only once.
After reading this article and seeing the indisputable proof, it'd sure be nice to hear the screams and wails I heard from the liberals when the GOP was spending money like drunken sailors in DC. Somehow I doubt I'll hear a damn thing.
Posted by: jimg on August 19, 2007 11:30 AMWe could be wasting it in Iraq instead, to the tune of a trillion or so.
Posted by: Big Picture on August 19, 2007 12:02 PMTargetting both D's and R's of course.
So just stop the hypocrisy that this is something that only D's do.
Gee, the topic could not even be mentioned without some GOP kook aid drinker DEFENDING Ted Stevens the guy who tried to give a $10 million road to some developer in Florida...which the local government REJECTED it was so pork barrelly.
Are you guys only against pork when it's Democratic pork?
Or as it seems here, do you love Repubican pork and only condemn Democratic pork, which of course would be dirty and shameful and dishonorable?
Personally I'd like to see a list of all the pork and then we can condemn it all.
Posted by: Seattle Democrat on August 19, 2007 12:12 PMThere are few politicians with the will to fight this corruption, and it seems every single one of them is a Republican. So if you Democrats give a rip about fighting wasteful spending and corruption, clean your own house first.
Posted by: AP on August 19, 2007 01:00 PMWhen the viaduct falls down will they use the sculpture park as a staging area for the rescue effort? ( Sorry, I just could not resist that last jab. )
Posted by: Moondoggie on August 19, 2007 01:23 PMSounds good to me. I see the Democrats pushed an ethics rule through congress...guess who tried to stop them. GOP had complete control of the House, Senate, and PUSA yet they definitely had their chance to do this for the six years of one party rule. Face it pork is a fact of life for both parties. I doubt it's going to stop even after the ethics rule is signed by Bush.
That's a big step up from William Jefferson, Jack Abramoff and Ken Lay. At least this bill is a step in the right direction. Question is will Bush sign it?
Posted by: Cato on August 19, 2007 05:55 PMSenator Proxmire made a lot of enemies for his award and may have not brought WI all the money when compared to the likes of Scoop Jackson or Warren Magneson, but he also enjoyed probably the best reward a politician can enjoy. Even though he was a Democrat, all in Wisconsin favored him and his awards. His final senate campaign cost a few hundred (to a little over a thousand--I can't remember the actual amount) dollars. The costs were to mail back campaign contributions. He didn't need them. Yes, Republicans put up a nominal candidate, but Proxmire was so well known and liked that it was just showcasing. No one could argue that he wasn't doing the job right (in the big sense of the term). He was watching out for the taxpayer's dollar and trying to make sure the taxpayer got their money's worth.
I think this should be the question we put to all politicians, no matter the party. How are you spending are dollars?
Senator Proxmire made a lot of enemies for his award and may have not brought WI all the money when compared to the likes of Scoop Jackson or Warren Magneson, but he also enjoyed probably the best reward a politician can enjoy. Even though he was a Democrat, all in Wisconsin favored him and his awards. His final senate campaign cost a few hundred (to a little over a thousand--I can't remember the actual amount) dollars. The costs were to mail back campaign contributions. He didn't need them. Yes, Republicans put up a nominal candidate, but Proxmire was so well known and liked that it was just showcasing. No one could argue that he wasn't doing the job right (in the big sense of the term). He was watching out for the taxpayer's dollar and trying to make sure the taxpayer got their money's worth.
I think this should be the question we put to all politicians, no matter the party. How are you spending are dollars?
i doubt anyone today has the stones he did to do the same with tax monies--in any party--the game is just too big or the players are just too greedy; too bad; the people would welcome one;
and--i recall their highways were smoother and nicer than most other neighboring states, despite their weather extremes;
Posted by: jimmie-howya-doin on August 20, 2007 09:29 PM