The most important part to remember is, in the Senate bill, no matter what we do with transparency, it only applies to 5 percent of the earmarks. It doesn't apply to Federal earmarks, the type of earmarks that got Duke Cunningham in trouble. Those need to be disclosed. It doesn't apply to report language in conference reports which include 95 percent of all the earmarks we do. So there is no way for the media or the public to look in on what we do, regardless of how we try to do transparency on that 5 percent and say that we are doing anything to make this place more transparent. That is the main difference. If we defeat this bill with misinformation right now and it doesn't go to conference as part of the mix, the public is going to know from day one that this idea of being open and transparent is just a scam.
Kay Bailey Hutchison: “The most important part to remember is, in the Senate bill, no matter what we do with transparency, it only applies to 5…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing transparency in earmark legislation during Senate floor debate.
Share
More from Kay Bailey Hutchison
Decisions on enlargement are for NATO and the nation in question; no other outside country, such as Russia, has a voice in the process.
Absolutely. We should reinforce our efforts to get Russia to comply with the treaty, and it is the position of the American Defense Department, State Department, that Russia is in violation.
I agree with the President's effort to extract more from our allies in support of NATO.
there is a lot of buzzing going on around the Capitol today. Here we are on New Year's Eve, and so many of us had hoped we would have an agreement that would be really a big agreement, a long-term agreement that we would have liked to have…





