But at this point I want to ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle tonight, focus on these three charts, posters, if you will, that I've got because I think this is so telling in regard to why I said, at the outset, when we started talking about this problem, that this is bipartisan. This is a bipartisan problem. It needs a bipartisan solution. When we were in the majority, maybe doing the exact same thing, business as usual in regard to what the gentleman from New Jersey just pointed out, and in the way these earmarks are handed out with sort of, first, if you are one of the fortunate 65 that sit on the Appropriations Committee, whether you are in the minority or the majority, especially if you are in the majority, you get a much, much, much, much bigger bite at the apple, the earmark apple, than some rank- and-file Member on either side of the aisle that is part of the 'obscure caucus' that sometimes we refer to. That is not right. That is absolutely not right.
Phil Gingrey: “But at this point I want to ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle tonight, focus on these three charts, posters…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the need for bipartisan solutions to earmark distribution in Congress.
Share
More from Phil Gingrey
I am in opposition to the amendment. To a large extent, we are here to represent the voices of our constituents, each of us, approximately 700,000, and the voices of our State, our State government, being firm believers in the 10th…
All of these mandates, all this mandated coverage, comes at a tremendous price.
But, you know, here we are 50 years later, these States, and one of them is mine, the great State of Georgia, is far, far beyond that, and yet we are under section 5 of the Voting Rights Act for another 25 years.
I really have to commend the FDA on that and realizing the desire and need for new antibiotics and acting quickly to implement the program.





