On the recordJuly 29, 2010
Again, this bill has 461 earmarks, $328 million in those earmarks. I wish we could challenge them all. We can't. We've only been allowed the opportunity to challenge four of them. So we will have a rollcall vote on four amendments to strike these earmarks. So Members will have to go from this body back to their districts this next month and say why they voted against an amendment to strike an earmark for downtown beautification in one city that was just picked by the Appropriations Committee and why in the world it's better to borrow 42 cents of every dollar we're spending here from our kids and our grandkids and our foreign debtors, why that is a good plan for economic development, why it wouldn't be better to actually pay down the debt to lessen this deficit a bit. That's what this is about. So don't think we can hide behind, well, these were indiscriminate cuts. This is a specific cut to cut a certain earmark from the bill, in this case, that would cut a million dollars. It's not insignificant not to anyone outside of the Beltway. This is a specific amendment to strike a million dollars in spending for a streetscape for beautification in a certain city. I think we ought to beautify the appropriations process a little bit by actually having fewer earmarks and saving a little money. I yield back the balance of my time.





