Now, I don’t buy the conservative yammering about earmarks. I think one of the integral parts of congress is requesting money to bring back home and that’s never changing. But, em, you think Sen. Clinton would be a little less grabby.
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) has requested nearly $2.3 billion in federal earmarks for 2009, almost three times the largest amount received by a single senator this year.
The Democratic presidential candidate’s staggering request comes at a time when Congress remains engaged in a heated debate over spending federal dollars on parochial projects.
So? Washington State gets a hell of a lot too, and I’m not complaining.
I agree, this is a non-issue. Wealthy states like New York deserve earmarks as it is the only way that Federal money gets returned to the taxpayer. Our taxes are high in part because we only get back 50-75 cents of every Federal tax dollar in favor of Southern and Midwestern welfare states where the population is poor. We have to pay state and city taxes to build and fund things that the Feds fund elsewhere.
Way to go, E.L. — Good answer.
Lesseee now, she proposes to invest $2.3 Billion on the people of NY State? That would come to about what we wasted the last 72 hours in Iraq.
Think which expenditure will provide the best return for Americans in jobs, education, roads, and infrastructure repair.
I can kinda see this all right, seeing as how Lurch Chertoff cut DHS funding for NY, and how Wichita is more at risk of attack. Or …something.
Quoting the Politico again, OW?
Very cagey the way they distort this one, comparing Clinton’s request for next year with the amount received this year by other states. As if requests are the same thing as appropriations.
Don’t feel bad. I was taken in by this too, but Media Matters set me straight.