Thread: DeMint: We'll Ban Earmarks Right Away

Really? Really Jim? You are going to ban earmarks? That is absolutely amazing. An amazing feat that is following an amazing claim. What are you going to do with federal dollars tax dollars then? Spend it all on things in Washington? Not send any back to congressional districts? How does one actually ban earmarks?

An absolutely amazing claim by the senator. I would certainly welcome anyone telling me how he plans on doing this, and under what authority he thinks he can do this. By the way, it is the job of elected officials to bring tax dollars back to their districts as tax dollars that I pay are not wholly intended to do nothing at all, in my wise and entirely correct opinion.

More absolute pie in the sky nonsensical claims from the senator that have zero hope of ever becoming reality.
DeMint: We'll Ban Earmarks Right Away - The Early Show - CBS News

With their sweeping electoral victory in hand, Republicans are committed to ending earmarks - the local-project riders to legislation - and focusing on the big national issues, a top Senate Republican said Wednesday.

"We can't have 500 congressmen and senators who think it's their job to bring home the bacon - and that's what's going to change," South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint told CBS' "The Early Show. "One of the first thing we'll do in the House and Senate is ban earmarks as Republicans - that'll get our eyes back on fixing our tax code, fixing social security and Medicare, getting America back to work."

DeMint called earmarks "that parochial interest I think gets that the focus of interest off national interests onto paving local parking lots." He said in an editorial Tuesday that the dozens of GOP congressional newcomers "can't be bribed if they're not for sale."

The conservative, Tea Party favorite DeMint was among the least surprising victors, easily dispatching his erratic challenger Alvin

"I'm excited about what's going to happen. It's going to be, particularly in the House, it's going to be even more exciting than 1994," he said.

DeMint praised Sarah Palin as a boon to both the GOP and the country. He said that he shared her position on the possibility of running for president - he would only do so if "no one else is willing to do it."

The lesson of Tuesday's results, DeMint said, is that "America's moving back towards a Constitutional limited government and the party that carries that mantle … will be in power for a long time."

Still, DeMint said, "This is really not so much about the Republican Party as it is the American people, who realized during this election cycle that they had a lot more power than they knew they had."

"I hope that's the legacy that comes out of this election and the Tea Party movement is that the power resides in the hands of the American people," he said, "and not in the elected officials in Washington."

This shows how foolish his supporter were.

It reminds me of Ron Pauls line that he never votes for Pork, even in his own district. Which is true except for 1 point he leaves out.....He submits Pork for his district then votes against it..Why?? because he knows in most cases his vote won't stop it from passing. Thus his district gets Pork and he can claim he always votes against Pork. This is how Paul's operate. Will be interesting to see if his son is the same way..

Originally Posted by angryamerican

This shows how foolish his supporter were.

It reminds me of Ron Pauls line that he never votes for Pork, even in his own district. Which is true except for 1 point he leaves out.....He submits Pork for his district then votes against it..Why?? because he knows in most cases his vote won't stop it from passing. Thus his district gets Pork and he can claim he always votes against Pork. This is how Paul's operate. Will be interesting to see if his son is the same way..

Oh hell, if worse comes to worse the Repubs will simply change the definition of "earmarks" and "pork".

Lip service is lip service. DeMint is an incredibly problematic politician but he's not doing anything particularly bad here. Hopefully it is not entirely false and there will be a serious bipartisan effort to reduce and curtail some of the worst pork. Don't count on it though, with all of the secret donations that were going on in this election you can guarantee that, especially in the Senate, a lot of the newcomers owe a lot of people a lot of favors.

Originally Posted by Rassales

So without earmarks, it will be more up to government employees to decide exactly how money is allocated.

I'd honestly trust the IRS over Congress to allocate federal funds to my community. Makes sense too, they monitor revenue and are in a good position to immeadiately determine how much of that income is expendable on side projects and, under Congressional oversight, allocate accordingly based on need. Such a system however would rob Congress of its historical power of the purse, and them giving that up is out of the question.