GOP Spenders Attack Patriotism of Conservative Brethren
By Boddington Posted in Republicans — Comments (20) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
“Isn’t it time that Speaker Hastert, Majority Leader Boehner, and the entire Steering Committee remove this menace to a GOP majority in peril?”
Deep divisions within the GOP majority finally boiled over in public on Friday. On the House floor, during consideration of a military construction and veterans benefits spending bill, Jerry Lewis and his fellow appropriators maligned the patriotism of fellow Republicans because they called into question the way his team wanted to spend the American people’s money. In short, Lewis & Co. were called out for attempting to wrap their largesse and pride in the flag.
According to the Office of Management & Budget’s Statement of Administration Policy (SAP), the Committee decided to buy itself roughly $500 million in space within the budget for 66 pork projects (items like animal kennels, parking garages, education centers, and an “indoor washrack”) by dubbing 20 normal items requested by the President as "an emergency"—therefore exempting them from the budget resolution passed only two days earlier. The Committee then wanted to tap a separate $50 billion reserve fund within the same budget exclusively for the Global War on Terror to make themselves look fiscally responsible. The SAP reads in part:
The Administration opposes the use of war reserve funds for military construction projects. This funding should be used only for urgent construction directly related to the Global War on Terror, instead of funding regular construction projects related to long-term defense needs. In addition, the Administration urges Congress to remove funding for 66 unrequested projects, totaling nearly $0.5 billion, which divert funding from other higher priority programs.
Lewis and top-lieutenant James Walsh figured that budget hawks lacked the nerve to pick a fight on a bill with a direct nexus to the war effort and veterans benefits. They were wrong. Jeb Hensarling, Mike Pence, Jeff Flake, and John Shadegg took to the floor and found a procedural device to strip the funds and prevent the raid on the war fund. And then the withering attacks on their patriotism began. More below.
When Hensarling raised the first of six procedural objections that stripped the funds, Walsh seethed:
Does the gentleman not understand that we are at war? Does he not understand that we have people in harm's way across the entire southern tier of Asia, that are being fired upon as we speak; that these funds are essential to fight the global war on terror, to bring democracy to these scattered points around the world, that these are soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines are in dire need of this support, of these expenditures?
For his part, Lewis was slightly more restrained, but he too cast aspersions on patriotism of the conservatives:
To exercise themselves in a way that undermines our efforts on the war on terror is not just an affront to the work you are about; I believe it is an affront to the work that we are all about, on a bipartisan effort are attempting to make sure that we have some strength in this effort on the war on terror.
And then towards the end of the debate, it appears from the record that Ray LaHood from Illinois simply lost it, oozing with venom:
I also want to stipulate that the gentlemen that have been out here on the floor for the last 2 hours, talking about the fact that they support our troops….You picked the wrong bill to have your earmark fight. Please do not tell us you support the troops. Please do not tell us you support the war. When you came out here and X'd out all of these important projects that help our troops, help us win the war, help the administration fight the war on terror. Pick another bill, not this one, and then try to lecture all of us on the idea that you support all of this…So you cannot have it both ways. I know you would love to, but you cannot.
The conservatives valiantly withstood the blows. For his part, Hensarling framed the debate as follows:
Mr. Chairman, we have heard a lot about what this debate is about. That is not what it is about. This is not about whether or not this House is going to support our brave men and women in uniform as they fight this war on terror. Every time the Commander in Chief has come to us and asked us to pass a supplemental appropriation to put guns on the front lines, ammunition on the front lines, gasoline on the front lines, equipment on the front lines, we have done it. We have done it. That is not the question….
Clearly, the greatest threat, the greatest threat to our country is the war on terror. But we also have another threat, and that is out-of-control Federal spending. If we are going to buy the guns, we had better get a little lean on the butter, and we had better quit wrapping the butter in the American flag in this sleight of hand. It is wrong, Mr. Chairman. It is wrong to do it. We will support our troops, but to sit here and pay for all of these earmarks and all the pork projects wrapped in the American flag is the wrong thing to do.
With the wheels coming off, Majority Leader John Boehner quickly emerged to quiet the situation and order was quickly restored. But not before three senior members of the GOP attacked the patriotism of their colleagues—who happened to be defending the point of view of the Commander-in-Chief—in public, in the thick of a mid-term election cycle that is anything but promising.
Obviously, this is not the first time Lewis has acted up. He nearly sank lobbying reform because he didn’t want to budge on earmark reform. Similarly, he attempted to derail the budget over a fund to budget for emergencies. And now this—only two spending bills into the annual appropriations process.
Isn’t it time that Speaker Hastert, Majority Leader Boehner, and the entire Steering Committee remove this menace to a GOP majority in peril? Or might it be better to wait a few more months until he attempts to kill the President’s line-item-veto bill, blows through the budget again, and secures a thousand more earmarks? The answer seems clear.
« Burn the Witch — Comments (18) | Someone is Listening — Comments (187) »
GOP Spenders Attack Patriotism of Conservative Brethren 20 Comments (0 topical, 20 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
from the lemmings?
The Washington Republicans are simply pathetic. The only bright spot for me personally is that I live in Arizona. My US Senator John Kyl is a good guy. The Senator from Washington DC, Mr. McAmnesty vacations here but we try to avoid him. I'm proud that my CongressCritter is John Shaddeg and before I moved to my current house it JD Hayworth. Our whole delegation, with the exception of a couple of Southern Arizona liberal Dems are good reps.
Bottom line, DC needs a good earthquake. About a 14 or 15 would be a good start. We could blame it on global warming.
We need a President who will lead on this, and any 'lesson' in 2006 won't fix that.
All that'll do is create new Democratic incumbents to hamstring any good Republican who gets elected President in 2008.
And by "a 14 or 15 earthquake" I was not referring to a turnover in House seats. I was talking about one of those things where the earth shakes and buildings fall down.
Congressional bailout (or whatever they call it) is coming & I figure if all the Capitol buildings got flattened by Mother Nature (blessed be her name) Congress wouldn't be able to do any business.
At the rate they've been going for the past few years, I consider that a GOOD thing.
The real one: Jon Kyl.
And tell him that he should seriously consider running for President in 2008 after he wins this fall.
I would love to see McCain get humiliated in the Arizona presidential primary. That alone is a good reason to encourage Kyl to run.
Considering the Richter scale is logarithmic, a 14 or a 15 would probably destroy half the continent, so I figured you meant seats, heh.
Can't say I'd mind an old-fashioned government shutdown, not one bit.
The other one is the Voting Shadow Senator from Washington DC.
come down and stay down. Wouldn't like to see anybody hurt. Just that they have no place to work...
I'm not from AZ. In fact I spent the first 29 years of my life (of 30 total) in NY. The last year in DC.
But I'd jump on the John Kyl bandwagon mighty quick. Other than monetary contributions, what can we easterners do to help JK win his race this fall?
It's been all downhill since Bush failed to veto the pork-laden highway bill a couple of years ago after drawing a line in the sand that the Lewises of the party then crossed. If Bush promised to veto this and the members knew he would keep that promise, the Flakes of the party would be rejuvenated.
The reason that crap laden bill passed is because farm bill passed before it. In both instances, the "negotiation" process went on forever. At no point did Bush say, "Stop it guys!"
I'm kinda down to the point that I'd like to Bush veto anything. Just to see him veto something. I'll bet Congress would override.
At the end of the day, my guess is he'll get about 60%. Pederson is a rich liberal who's self funding. Depending on what the Senate does with immigration it won't be close. I think Kyl's enforcement stance will do him well. Some of the race will depend on who the R's nominate for Governor. Napolitano isn't really popular but she's not a total screw up either (and if you know anything about Arizona governors thats a big deal), but she could be beatable depending on what's happening come late September.
Bottom line, nobody pays much attention until then.
when Denny Hastert became Speaker, he has all the strength of a wet noodle. I trust Mr Lewis will enjoy the remainder of his chairmanship,but when he loses it chances are he will remain in the House, ossifying but happy.
Hang in there folks, when the Dems take over it's only going to get worse, think "peace dividends".
that there are Republicans that stand on principle and don't feel that simply calling something a "military" appropriation makes it sacred.
It boggles the mind that a country that spends so much money on our military so often finds our military underequipped*. But then you read stories like this and understand why that total number may not be such a great barometer of true military funding.
* - This isn't some backhanded jab at this Administration. This is a problem that has gone on for at least 50 years.
What in the world do a bunch of day care centers have to do with military spending? I've also been to Ft. Bliss and they've got a pretty big "physical fitness" facility as it is.
Good job, Jeb!
Pick another bill, not this one...
Not In My Bill, Yo-yo!
priceless
that the Chairman Lewises of this world are the norm within the Republican Party. I'm so dissapointed with the whole GOP apparutos that the notion of a Speaker Pelosi and Chaiman Conyers does not longer scares me to come out in 06.
What is the point in supporting a Republican that's rotten from top to bottom? I know the Democrats arent any good either; but that isnt an excuse to get people to go and vote for the GOP.
Throw 'em bums out
that Lewis will lose his re-election race?
What about Walsh or Lahood?
I would be especially happy to see Lahood go.
But understandable. I see why people aren't inspired to come out. I think I even see why people aren't scared at the Democrat threat.
But you aren't going to the polls to vote for the leadership. Only their districts get to vote for Hastert, Lewis, etc.
What you get to do is vote for your Congressman. So, at least go out and learn what he or she is about. If you're in Mike Pence's district, are you really doing the movement any favors by staying home and letting him lose?
Sure, throw the bums out, but not every member is a bum. And making the House more liberal by throwing the good out with the bad does not make the GOP more conservative. We need to keep the good ones and sink the bad ones.
May I ask who your CongressCritter is? And if you're in a Democrat district, what the GOP challenger has said on the fiscal issues?
Does anyone know which 14 seats the Democrats are "likely" to gain in this November's US House election? They need 14 seats to win the US House.
I live in Denver and I am right down the block from the Colorado 7, which voted Kerry 51 to Bush 48 in 2004. The seat will be vacant 'cause the Republican is running for Governor of Colorado.
But where are the other seats? And how "ripe" are they? I read that if the Democrats don't win the California 50 (Cunningham's former seat) in two weeks (first Tuesday in June), they have little chance of winning back the House.
Anyone have any ideas?
Krusty will come in 2008. I know it. The Republican Party wouldn't have the Krusty brand seal of approval if it didn't meet the high personal standards of Krusty the Klown.