You know, there is a lot of hanky-panky
that goes on in the hallowed halls of the U.S. congress. Kind of goes without saying.
But most folks are completely IGNORANT (by choice) of the roles and responsibilities of these collective idiots we keep putting in office.
Case in point: there is a tool available in the legislative process that allows congressmen to attach additional spending commitments to any bill that is being passed. It’s called “earmarks” and it is THE sweetheart tool for shoveling money back to their home district for pet projects and to buy people off (or pay off obligations.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but basically it serves to circumvent the constitutional obligatory responsibility to present, debate, modify and pass an annual “budget.” In so doing, it completely craters “earmarks” because all spending is covered in the passed budget.
So, three things happen. First, no budget, so the congress uses “continuing resolutions” as a means to keep spending money. This is a concoction invented by congress to avoid their constitutional responsibility to pass an annual budget. Second, there are no restrictions on continuing resolutions so additional spending can be passed at any time. Third, the concept of “earmarks” is used to attach desired spending to any bill at any time. And no way to track these “earmarks.” It is utterly without responsibility and is a crime against the voters IMHO.
So, under Trump, the rinocrats managed to suspend the use of “earmarks” by passing a resolution prohibiting same.
Last week, the demoncrats – who never saw an earmark they didn’t love – reinstated earmarks while they still have the majority.
Well, surprise, surprise. Rinocrats ALSO supported the reinstatement by a margin of 2 – 1.
Outrageous, but not as outrageous as prosecuting the January 6 folks for peacefully visiting the capitol building.
Anyway, that vote to reinstate earmarks was taken in secret. Of course it was. So I called my congressman’s office today to inquire “how did the congressman vote on the earmarks resolution last week?”
“Don’t know how he voted” was the response. “He is opposed to the concept of earmarks, but now that it has passed, he will be using it to the best of his ability to support his voters back home.”
How nice of the man. So, here’s the question: If they passed a resolution allowing slavery again, would the congressman go out and get slaves to help his people back home?????
End of conversation. They will get back to me if they can ever figure out how the congressman voted.
Excellent synopsis of the subject Sir Silverboom, thank you. I would be willing to bet he either voted for it or abstained.