Jump to content




Photo
- - - - -

Insight into the "earmark ban"


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
18 replies to this topic

#13 L.A. Fanatic

L.A. Fanatic

    LOWER YOUR FONT!!!!!!!!

  • Joined: 13-January 09
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 403
  • Reputation: 2
HUDDLER

Posted 25 January 2009 - 11:24 PM

I wonder how much the elaborate oversight system will cost? probably a lot more than the most cost efficient one

#14 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 48,724
  • Reputation: 16,148
HUDDLER

Posted 26 January 2009 - 12:26 PM

I guess you guys can't give Obama 6 months to change a system decades in the making?

Next two paragraphs.

But none of that will happen until after the bill becomes law. Even critics of the earmarks system acknowledge that specifying projects upfront offers some measure of transparency.

"We hate earmarks, but at least it's a way of tracking where influence is had," said Keith Ashdown of the watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense. "There is a challenge now that projects will be added behind closed doors without a paper trail."

Point being that while he campaigned on transparency, he's putting a system in place that will actually make it tougher to track these things.

#15 Zod

Zod

    YOUR RULER

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 20,088
  • Reputation: 14,961
MFCEO

Posted 26 January 2009 - 01:25 PM

Next two paragraphs.


Point being that while he campaigned on transparency, he's putting a system in place that will actually make it tougher to track these things.


Because that is the intended outcome or because lobbyists will always find a loophole in something that has to be thrown together in a week?

#16 Matt Foley

Matt Foley

    Member

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 15,983
  • Reputation: 1
HUDDLER

Posted 26 January 2009 - 01:39 PM

Because that is the intended outcome or because lobbyists will always find a loophole in something that has to be thrown together in a week?


Because he said whatever he thought would get him elected. Just like he went to Reverend Wright's sermon every Sunday when it helped him get elected in Chicago, then claimed he knew nothing about the man's true feelings when he wanted to win the national election.

Fluffo is a fraud. And you, sir, have been taken in.

#17 Zod

Zod

    YOUR RULER

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 20,088
  • Reputation: 14,961
MFCEO

Posted 26 January 2009 - 01:40 PM

you smoke to much seaweed

#18 Matt Foley

Matt Foley

    Member

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 15,983
  • Reputation: 1
HUDDLER

Posted 26 January 2009 - 01:46 PM

you smoke to much seaweed


I don't inhale.

#19 Dawg

Dawg

    Junior Member

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • Pip
  • posts: 4
  • Reputation: 0
ROOKIE

Posted 26 January 2009 - 04:12 PM

Because he said whatever he thought would get him elected. Just like he went to Reverend Wright's sermon every Sunday when it helped him get elected in Chicago, then claimed he knew nothing about the man's true feelings when he wanted to win the national election.

Fluffo is a fraud. And you, sir, have been taken in.


Typical......