David Obey: “I am opposed to both the underlying amendment and the substitute amendment, and let me tell you why. I think it's…”

“I am opposed to both the underlying amendment and the substitute amendment, and let me tell you why. I think it's important to put that amendment in context. We had crocodile tears expressed here about the number of earmarks and what will happen to earmarks. Let me cite the record. In 1994, the last year when Democrats controlled the House, earmarks were primarily concentrated in four appropriation bills. They were project-oriented bills like military construction, energy and water, Interior and general government. This Homeland Security bill had not even come to pass yet because it was before 9/11. In the Labor-Health-Education appropriation bill the last year that the Democrats controlled, we had zero earmarks. The last year under Republican control that we had earmarks in the Labor-H bill, we had over 3,000. In the Transportation bill, the authorizing bill, from 1956 through 1995, we had 20 separate highway bills pass this House containing a total of 739 earmarks. Do you know how many we had, Mr. Chairman, in 2005 under Republican control in just one bill? Five thousand. Then we all remember the infamous 3-hour vote on Medicare part D. I would ask my colleagues on this side of the aisle to keep this civil. If the other side wants to turn it into a circus, fine, but I think we ought to behave.”