I would definitely define it as an earmark. And I rise now to ask either one of the gentlemen to elaborate on the comment the gentleman from Iowa is making, and as the gentleman also raised, that this has already pressed accounts as to where this exemption is drafted for. But as the gentleman from Iowa said, there was no explanation as to why it came about. That is to say, the press accounts from the Speaker's office, I believe the gentleman from Iowa said that they have not been lobbied at all by the industry from their district. Is that correct? They were not lobbied at all by that particular industry from their district is what the press accounts say from the Speaker's office on this issue?
Scott Garrett: “I would definitely define it as an earmark. And I rise now to ask either one of the gentlemen to elaborate on the…”
On the recordJanuary 11, 2007
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Discussing earmarks and lobbying related to a specific exemption during a House floor debate.
Share
More from Scott Garrett
Nov 12, 2014
I have had a number of concerns with this Administration's approach to combating ISIS.
Sep 16, 2014
Designating more private companies as too-big-to-fail and turning their regulation over to the Federal Reserve and its ever-growing safety net, if you will, is not going to solve the problems of taxpayer exposure to the financial system.
Jan 26, 2015
I am speaking on behalf of the American taxpayer, that we are concerned that where the taxpayer dollars could potentially be as we return to these very loose underwriting standards.
Apr 7, 2014
Dodd-Frank bestowed almost limitless powers to the banking regulators, and especially to the Fed.





