Monday, September 18, 2006
Sue Enables Pork (Part II)
When is a reform not a reform? When Sue Kelly and her colleagues decide to build the rule-making equivalent to a “bridge to nowhere”.
Sue helped pass a new House rule that purports to make public the names of members requesting “earmarks” (special projects which often benefit only a single entity). Problem is (and with these guys you always have to read the fine print) this rule will last only until the end of 2006, and would not eliminate a single earmark.
Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY) pointed out in the floor debate that this was a “deceptive bill that is riddled with loopholes… you could drive a truck through.”
But what do you expect from the folks who have more criminals than statesmen (dare I say Tom DeLay/Bob Ney/Duke Cunningham for starters?) in their midst. You certainly wouldn’t expect anything that smelled like ethics reform.
In contrast, the Democratic bill (yes, Virginia, there is a difference between Democratic values and Republican corruption) would have banned Congressional travel on corporate jets, prohibited lobbyist gifts, slowed the revolving door between Capitol Hill and the lobbying firms, shut down the trading of jobs in lobbying firms in exchange for legislative favors, and exposed earmarks to the light of day so that they couldn’t be slipped into bills without public scrutiny, including disclosure whether the Member proposing the earmark has a financial interest in it.
Sue voted "yes" which was a vote to kill the Democrat's comprehensive ethics reform.
Sue Kelly and her ethically-challenged gang are a clear and present danger to honest government.
Sue helped pass a new House rule that purports to make public the names of members requesting “earmarks” (special projects which often benefit only a single entity). Problem is (and with these guys you always have to read the fine print) this rule will last only until the end of 2006, and would not eliminate a single earmark.
Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY) pointed out in the floor debate that this was a “deceptive bill that is riddled with loopholes… you could drive a truck through.”
But what do you expect from the folks who have more criminals than statesmen (dare I say Tom DeLay/Bob Ney/Duke Cunningham for starters?) in their midst. You certainly wouldn’t expect anything that smelled like ethics reform.
In contrast, the Democratic bill (yes, Virginia, there is a difference between Democratic values and Republican corruption) would have banned Congressional travel on corporate jets, prohibited lobbyist gifts, slowed the revolving door between Capitol Hill and the lobbying firms, shut down the trading of jobs in lobbying firms in exchange for legislative favors, and exposed earmarks to the light of day so that they couldn’t be slipped into bills without public scrutiny, including disclosure whether the Member proposing the earmark has a financial interest in it.
Sue voted "yes" which was a vote to kill the Democrat's comprehensive ethics reform.
Sue Kelly and her ethically-challenged gang are a clear and present danger to honest government.
