If you still don’t think that members of Congress use earmarks primarily to secure their own electoral future, look no further…
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) has requested nearly $2.3 billion in federal earmarks for 2009, almost three times the largest amount received by a single senator this year.
[...]
Clinton’s huge earmark requests have some speculating that the former first lady is preparing for a soft landing should she lose the Democratic primary to Obama and refocus her energy on winning a third Senate term.
Do you see why people might reasonably object to sending a third of their income to these people?
5 Comments
Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI
Leave a comment
Why not just limit Senators to one term?
I dont know why you didnt mention Republican Thad Cochrane out of Mississppi, who has $837,256,500 in earmarks according to
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/power_rankings/power_card.tt?id=341
and
http://www.taxpayer.net/index.html
I know your going to delete my comment, but look at both sides of the fence before you just vote for someone with an R in front of there name
How bout this link?
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/power_rankings/power_cats.tt?cat=E&submit.x=12&submit.y=9
Looks like hypocrasy to me. A republican leads the list!
“Jim,” you’re welcome to read my blog and see that I’ve been very critical of Republicans and Democrats who take excessive and ridiculous earmarks. I’ve been entirely consistent and not hypocritical in the least.
However, it is fishy that Hillary’s requesting three times the amount of the leading earmarker last year, don’t you?
“Dan (Fitness),” it’s good to hear from you again. I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic in your comments or not. Are you really advocating one and done senate term limits?