As I was trying to say, every single earmark, because of the fact that every single subcommittee comes to this floor under a fiscal cap, those earmarks are provided at the expense of other spending, but do not add one dime to the deficit. If you want to take a look at the root cause of the deficit--you can argue about the propriety of those earmarks, and I will share the gentleman's concern about many of them--but you cannot, with a straight face, suggest that they have added to the deficit because under the budget rules, which we all helped write, they do not do that. They do not do that. They simply come at the expense of other spending. That may not be good practice, but it does not make the gentleman's point.
David Obey: “As I was trying to say, every single earmark, because of the fact that every single subcommittee comes to this floor…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the impact of earmarks on the federal deficit during a budget debate.
Share
More from David Obey
This amendment was a Republican amendment offered by Mr. Cole from Oklahoma. It was not slipped in. It was voted in in the subcommittee appropriation bill 5 months ago.
I largely agree with my friend from Oklahoma. We have one simple dilemma: both in the case of the Cobell settlement and the Pigford settlement, the administration has asked us to provide the money. We do not yet have an understanding of…
The way I see it, we're watching a let's pretend attack on the deficit tonight by singling out these items that cost about a million bucks. If Members are concerned about the deficit, I would ask, why did they vote for two tax cuts…
I want to thank the Members on both sides of the aisle for their courtesies over the past 42 years, and I want to say that it has been a privilege for each and every one of us, whether we have served here one term or 21 or even more, it is…





