|
|
|
Missouri’s leading Senate candidates are joining the call to curb congressional spending earmarks — though the person they are seeking to succeed remains a staunch defender of them.
Republican U.S. Rep. Roy Blunt and Democratic Secretary of State Robin Carnahan both have pledged as part of their Senate campaigns to go beyond their own party’s proposed restrictions on earmarks.
Retiring Republican Sen. Kit Bond, whom they are vying to replace, has been a leading champion of earmarks. He defended the practice in a statement Thursday evening as a means of keeping Congress in control of spending decisions — as opposed to leaving them to the whim of executive branch bureaucrats.
Earmarks send taxpayer dollars to projects in lawmakers’ districts outside the competitive process required for other federal spending. Bond has used his seat on the Senate Appropriations Committee to bring numerous earmarked spending projects to Missouri.
But House Republicans pledged Thursday not to insert any earmarks for local projects in this year’s spending bills. House Democrats a day earlier said they would no longer earmark spending to for-profit companies.
Blunt, who has used earmarks in the past, said he wants ‘‘to go one better’’ than his Republican colleagues. Blunt said he will sponsor an amendment cutting spending in this year’s budget by $30.7 billion — the same amount that he said was dedicated for local projects in last year’s budget.
‘‘These cuts represent an important step toward getting our books in balance and earning the taxpayers’ trust,’’ Blunt said. He also expressed support for a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget, line-item veto power for the president and a three-year freeze on domestic spending.
A Carnahan campaign spokesman had said last year that she would support dedicated spending only if it was discussed openly. But Carnahan took a more stringent position Thursday.
‘‘Republicans want to stop the practice of wasteful earmark spending for just a year and the Democrats want to ban only certain kinds of earmarks — I’ve got a better solution: ban them all,’’ Carnahan said. ‘‘This is the problem with Washington and it’s time to get serious about cutting wasteful spending.’’
Efforts to curtail earmarks may run into trouble in the Senate, where many lawmakers have made clear they have no interest in House Republicans’ self-imposed moratorium or House Democrats’ ban on earmarks to for-profit companies.
Bond took aim only at Carnahan — not Blunt — in a statement defending the use of earmarks. If lawmakers were to abandon earmarks, Bond said, then President Barack Obama’s administration would have more sway in spending decision.
‘‘There are fewer and fewer people in Missouri who want to provide more and more power to the Obama administration to spend money,’’ Bond said. ‘‘I would rather trust the people at home to set the priorities than the people in Washington, but apparently, Robin is more in touch with the Obama White House.’’
Earmark spending in Missouri
Total (in FY 2010) - $829,120,022
Check out what the money is going for and who's supporting it at www.legistorm.com
Missouri’s leading Senate candidates are joining the call to curb congressional spending earmarks — though the person they are seeking to succeed remains a staunch defender of them.
Republican U.S. Rep. Roy Blunt and Democratic Secretary of State Robin Carnahan both have pledged as part of their Senate campaigns to go beyond their own party’s proposed restrictions on earmarks.
Retiring Republican Sen. Kit Bond, whom they are vying to replace, has been a leading champion of earmarks. He defended the practice in a statement Thursday evening as a means of keeping Congress in control of spending decisions — as opposed to leaving them to the whim of executive branch bureaucrats.
Earmarks send taxpayer dollars to projects in lawmakers’ districts outside the competitive process required for other federal spending. Bond has used his seat on the Senate Appropriations Committee to bring numerous earmarked spending projects to Missouri.
But House Republicans pledged Thursday not to insert any earmarks for local projects in this year’s spending bills. House Democrats a day earlier said they would no longer earmark spending to for-profit companies.
Blunt, who has used earmarks in the past, said he wants ‘‘to go one better’’ than his Republican colleagues. Blunt said he will sponsor an amendment cutting spending in this year’s budget by $30.7 billion — the same amount that he said was dedicated for local projects in last year’s budget.
‘‘These cuts represent an important step toward getting our books in balance and earning the taxpayers’ trust,’’ Blunt said. He also expressed support for a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget, line-item veto power for the president and a three-year freeze on domestic spending.
A Carnahan campaign spokesman had said last year that she would support dedicated spending only if it was discussed openly. But Carnahan took a more stringent position Thursday.
‘‘Republicans want to stop the practice of wasteful earmark spending for just a year and the Democrats want to ban only certain kinds of earmarks — I’ve got a better solution: ban them all,’’ Carnahan said. ‘‘This is the problem with Washington and it’s time to get serious about cutting wasteful spending.’’
Efforts to curtail earmarks may run into trouble in the Senate, where many lawmakers have made clear they have no interest in House Republicans’ self-imposed moratorium or House Democrats’ ban on earmarks to for-profit companies.
Bond took aim only at Carnahan — not Blunt — in a statement defending the use of earmarks. If lawmakers were to abandon earmarks, Bond said, then President Barack Obama’s administration would have more sway in spending decision.
‘‘There are fewer and fewer people in Missouri who want to provide more and more power to the Obama administration to spend money,’’ Bond said. ‘‘I would rather trust the people at home to set the priorities than the people in Washington, but apparently, Robin is more in touch with the Obama White House.’’
Earmark spending in Missouri
Total (in FY 2010) - $829,120,022
Check out what the money is going for and who's supporting it at www.legistorm.com
