Total earmarks for the previous Republican congress were about $29 billion dollars. Democrats have cut that figure to between $10 and $15 billion (depending on who's counting).
Why were they able to do this, while the Republicans couldn't (or wouldn't)?
Source:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-12-18-budget-earmarks_N.htm
2007-12-20 09:48:58 · 11 answers · asked by Steve 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Thank you for asking this question. Someone else asked a question stating that the Democrats have not cut earmarks. When I pointed out that they have more than halved and provided a link the question myteriously disappeared.
2007-12-20 10:09:44 · answer #1 · answered by wyldfyr 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
it is the demanding element about earmarks. at the same time as progression bridges and roads would properly be necessary throughout our us of a, those illustrations are ridiculous, unnecessary and stupid. If a political candidate complains about earmarks, he might want to grant an get together by under no circumstances suggesting one himself. that's the Republicans who're howling about earmarks interior the Stimulus equipment, so the very shown actuality that they have got protected about 0.5 of them makes them hypocritical and in truth partisan. Frankly, after listening to Limbaugh and observing the Congressional Republicans, I surely have come to the top that they don't provide a hoot about the folk of this us of a, yet will do some thing, say some thing, praying the rustic sinks right into a good melancholy to hopefully benefit potential lower back. they are performing like a group of sulking, recalcitrant toddlers and under no circumstances some thing might want to cheer them like a suffering, ravenous public and the failure of Obama's plans. they have received the Hoobert Heever Hopeless and Heartless Award!
2016-10-19 21:30:43 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They haven't. That is why they have done so little this year. Bush has forced them to reduce or face the blame of an unpopular congress for a government shutdown, which would not have made the Democrats look good at all to voters.
Had they passed the legislation and bills they wanted, earmarks would be nearly triple that of the Republicans. But Bush put his foot down.
2007-12-20 09:58:04 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
Because Bush has vetoed most of there proposed spending and financing bills.The Democratic congress hasn't stopped there earmarking.It's a happy result from Bush and Congress having fundumentally different positions on basically the "WAR".
2007-12-20 09:59:21 · answer #4 · answered by SAWKRUMBS 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
1. They're only halfway through this Congress.
2. Does it mention the earmarks on the bills that got vetoed?
2007-12-20 09:57:13 · answer #5 · answered by DOOM 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Because this President is vetoing the Dems bills left and right. Plus they have only been in office for less than a year. Give them time.
2007-12-20 09:59:15 · answer #6 · answered by mbush40 6 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Bush is out.
Shaved is in! Shaved Rice is really in!! Shaved Dick? Well, that's for Cheney only....
2007-12-20 10:20:01 · answer #7 · answered by Duane T 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Because the republicans knew he(Bush) would approve any budget they put before him!
2007-12-20 10:00:58 · answer #8 · answered by honestamerican 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋
I can't believe you believe what the LIEberal media says.
2007-12-20 10:39:05 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Dems spend as they go, Reps spend like drunken sailors
2007-12-20 09:52:22 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 4⤋