Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (519228)	10/9/2009 5:38:28 AM
From: Road Walker	Respond to of 1576251

Congress curbs pet projects -- a little By Matt Kelley, USA TODAY WASHINGTON — Spending on lawmakers' pet projects is heading down this year, but Congress is still on track to far exceed what President Obama set as an acceptable spending level during the 2008 campaign, a USA TODAY analysis has found. Obama pledged during the campaign that he was "committed to returning 'earmarks' to less than $7.8 billion a year, the level they were at before 1994, when Republicans took control of Congress." Each house of Congress already are planning to spend more than that in 2010, according to a USA TODAY analysis of the bills and data from the watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense. The Senate included $12.6 billion for earmarks in the 12 annual spending bills for 2010, while the House versions contain $9.1 billion, the analysis shows. That's down 9% in the Senate and 13% in the House, compared to the Senate and House bills in 2008 — the last time that Congress enacted separate spending bills. Congress is working this month to pass final versions of those bills, which cover the 2010 fiscal year that began Oct. 1. Obama has continued his calls for restricting earmarks since taking office, saying in March that he would work with Congress to eliminate earmarks that serve "no legitimate public purpose." He threatened to veto the House defense spending bill because it contained funds for F-22 fighters the Pentagon doesn't want. The Senate did not include F-22 funding in the bill it passed Tuesday. Tom Gavin, a spokesman for the White House budget office, says Congress is making progress. "Earmarks are down across the board," he said. "It's a strong step in the right direction." For earmark opponents, this year's decline in spending doesn't go far enough — especially since Congress passed a $787 billion economic stimulus package in February. "This was a great opportunity for Congress to take a break ... and take their hands out of the cookie jar," said Steve Ellis of the non-partisan Taxpayers for Common Sense. "It was also an opportunity for the administration to demand greater accountability and reductions in 2010." House Appropriations Committee spokesman Ellis Brachman declined to comment, referring to previous statements by Chairman Dave Obey, D-Wis. "The fact is, without the earmarking process, the White House and its anonymous bureaucrats would make every single spending decision in government," Obey said on the floor in February. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and other critics of earmarks say they're wasteful. In floor speeches this year, McCain has singled out for criticism: $2 million for a bike path in Spokane, Wash.; $600,000 for the National Wild Turkey Federation, a hunting organization; and $350,000 to promote specialty meats in Wisconsin. "We need to put our national priorities first and eliminate unnecessary, wasteful earmarks," he said in August. Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., another earmark opponent, says Obama is in a "tough position" because he needs support for his policy initiatives, such as a health care, from some of the same powerful lawmakers who benefit from earmarks. "It's a very fine line he has to walk between trying to influence Congress and trying to meddle with Congress," she said, "and he's trying to find that line." Find this article at: usatoday.com