Dems as our fiscal watch dogs. Rangel's own earmark for a building named for him

[mlyonsd]

Special Report with Brit Hume

The list of requested earmarks in congressional appropriations bills this year runs to hundreds of pages, and will take the better part of an hour to download all the requests, even with a fast Internet connection.

Tucked away in this year's labor and health bill is two million dollars sought by New York Democrat, and House Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel. The beneficiary would be the City College of New York to establish the "Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service." That's right — he wants us to pay for a building named in his honor.

Republicans tell opinionjournal.com they will target the request for criticism during the coming days — but it's worth noting members so far have rejected only one of the hundreds of earmark requests by politicians of both parties.

(Story continues below)

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,289699,00.html

[mlyonsd]

Another reason for term limits.

[Logical]

I am not sure how term limits would eliminate earmarks.

[pikesome]

We ought to have musical chairs for committee seats. Notice that it was the Ways and Means Chairman. We set up 5 chairs (or how many it is) in front of the Lincoln Monument and the Congressmen on the steps of the Capitol. First 5 butts in seats gets the job.

[jAZ]

Ear marks should be pubilcly available... and open for ridicule.

[ChiefaRoo]

Rangel is a dumbass why does this surprise anyone?

[jAZ]

Originally Posted by ChiefaRoo

Rangel is a dumbass why does this surprise anyone?

You have to give him credit for not trying to hide anything about this. Transparency is the key to good government.

[ChiefaRoo]

Originally Posted by jAZ

You have to give him credit for not trying to hide anything about this. Transparency is the key to good government.

I bet if Charlie Rangel put his dick in your butt and televised it for all to see you'd probably say " well, at least he's being honest and open for about it" "Can you slow down a bit Charlie?" (gravely voice) "No I can't Jiz, just hold still" "Oh, ok do what you want as long as you continue to hate Bush"

[wazu]

Originally Posted by jAZ

You have to give him credit for not trying to hide anything about this...

Yikes.

[noa]

It must be nice to be a philanthropist



with our taxpayer dollars

[ChiefaRoo]

Originally Posted by noa

It must be nice to be a philanthropist



with our taxpayer dollars

That's our money Charlie. If it even needs to be built I want it to be named after a real American hero like Ronald Reagan not an old cynical lib. like you.

[Taco John]

Wow. Actual stories about fiscal concerns from a Republican. I don't believe I've seen one of these threads in years. Must be because of all the fiscal responsibility the Republicans were showing when they controlled congress.

Why did we vote such fiscally responsible guys out anyway?

[Smed1065]

The whole system needs reworked!

Its hard to get past the dogs to tear down the doghouse.

[jAZ]

Originally Posted by ChiefaRoo

I bet if Charlie Rangel put his dick in your butt and televised it for all to see you'd probably say " well, at least he's being honest and open for about it" "Can you slow down a bit Charlie?" (gravely voice) "No I can't Jiz, just hold still" "Oh, ok do what you want as long as you continue to hate Bush"

Apparently I need to be certain to include the .

The guy's name is on the effing building for gods sake! It certainly seems like an absurd thing to do in connection with public money. Name it after a dead guy from the area.

I'm not excusing the spending or naming. I don't know whether the problem with this bill is the money for the building (or whether that's a reasonable ear mark). Or whether it's the audacity to allow his name to be used on the building (or if that's even a unique practice).

But the absurdity of allowing his name to be on a building he's earmarking funding for aside... the reality is that transparency in government is critical to good government. And the transparency of the earmark process is the way we (the media, the public) can know what we are spending money on. Without the transparency we don't even know who to hold accountable for many of the projects.

And it's probably best not to rely on our congress people to self identify themselves with big signs over the entrance to this pet projects.

Thanks to the Dems in Congress (and no thanks to the 13 years of Republican control)... We have *some* decent reform in place for the 110th Congress including transparency. Let's hope they can turn rules changes into legal changes.

http://www.cagw.org/site/News2?JServ...s_iv_ctrl=1033

Earmark and Ethics Reform

On January 4, the House adopted an internal rules package (H. Res. 6) that places new restrictions on earmarks. Proposed by the new Democratic majority, the rules will be in effect for the duration of the 110th Congress. The Senate passed its ethics reform legislation (S. 1) on January 18. The House is now moving forward with its own legislation.

...

The House rules require disclosure of the following details for each earmark: The members who requested it; name and address of the intended recipient or location of the earmark; the purpose of the earmark; and a certification that the member or spouse has no financial interest in the earmark. S. 1 includes those requirements along with the disclosure of earmarks and their sponsors on the Internet 48 hours prior to consideration of any bill or amendment.

[jAZ]

Originally Posted by ChiefaRoo

That's our money Charlie. ... I (don't) want it to be named after ... an old cynical lib. like you.

Well, at least you are transparent about your own personal political agenda and intellectual duplicity.

For you, it's not about the audacity of a sitting politician initiating/authorizing/approving funding for a building baring his name. It's that the person doing it only gets permission if they are a Republican/Conservative.

You get the same credit from me (including the ) that Rangel does.