Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA) defends earmarks:
By on Aug 16th, 2006 at 11:26 am
Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA) defends earmarks:
“There is a misunderstanding, particularly in the media, that earmarks are ‘out of control,’ said Lewis, who is chairman of the House Appropriations Committee. He added that it is not outrageous for Congress to “massage” that tiny portion of the president’s budget.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
Reports
In depth studies on select topics
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bailout
Big Oil
Bolton
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Earmarks
Economy
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iran
Iraq
Justice
Kristol
LGBT
Lieberman
McCain
McClellan
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Rice
RNC Convention
Rove
Terrorism
Third Bush Term
Torture
Veterans
Wiretapping
Women's Rights
ArchivesBlog Roll
Yeah, those hookers were massaging them quite well.
August 16th, 2006 at 11:28 amso, it begins to speak. must be trouble without dean
August 16th, 2006 at 11:39 amWasn’t his name brought up severzal times with that Cunningham whore?
August 16th, 2006 at 11:41 am“There is a misunderstanding, particularly in the media, that earmarks are ‘out of control,’ said Jerry Lewis, adding “Gwaaaw…oohh…hey lady”. I the French like him so much how can he be a republicant.
As to the out of control and skyrocketing earmarks as being just a massage, it just shows how out of touch these guys really are. They are ruining this country through misuse of funds and claim its okay…..as long as they are re-elected. If earmarks are so important why weren’t they used so much a decade ago as they are today?
August 16th, 2006 at 11:45 amAll earmarks need to be posted online so anybody can look them up and see what they are.
August 16th, 2006 at 11:48 am5 Mr. Big
August 16th, 2006 at 11:50 amI have to agree with you on this one. Transparency is the only way democracy has any chance of working. Can I have some oversight of NSA spying with that earmark announcement?
My comment was removed….because….???? I mentioned monopoly money???
Hello?? TP???
August 16th, 2006 at 11:50 amThe “earmarks” are Jerry Lewis fingerprints on our collective ears as he forces us down on him for more money.
-GSD
August 16th, 2006 at 11:52 amWhile “earmarks” or pork are bad, they don’t hurt the american tax payer nearly as much as the debt Social Securtiy and Medicare push down our throat each year. We need way more transparency in washington. Most people don’t even realize how much SS and Medicare are costing us. Sadly, these 2 programs alone will probably bankrubt this country. If you don’t believe me, read this:
http://www.usatoday.com/ printedition/ news/ 20060803/ 1a_coverart03.art_dom.htm
Our crappy washington folks come on and basically lie to the American people about how bad the budget actually is. They even claimed we didn’t come out behind one year under Clinton. They never actually use the correct accounting numbers which would show that we are actually going backwards trillions of dollars EACH YEAR. Anyways, read the report from my link. It made me afraid of the future. We need new people in Washington that will get rid of Social Security and Medicare ASAP before it ruins this country.
August 16th, 2006 at 12:19 pmHow about getting people in Washington to end the Iraq War which costs us $250million a DAY? And those tax cuts aren’t helping either. What about actually applying windfall profits taxes to the oil companies. Take that bunk about Medicare and SS being the downfall of this country. The asshats in the Administration giving away millions in tax credits to Corps, or wanting to abolish the Estate Tax, are the problem.
August 16th, 2006 at 12:28 pmMr big you are right on with your post.
roger-roger - Social Security isn’t in the red currently it still collects more money than it outlays and that is being used for the General Fund. You are such a lying asshat.
August 16th, 2006 at 12:32 pmBuckarooBanzai,
While the Iraq war is costing us alot of money, it is nothing compaired to what Social Security and Medicare cost us. If you looked the report over that I linked, you would see that even a conservative estimate places the debt from SS and Medicare at 3-5 trillion EACH YEAR!!!!
You can argue for whatever new tax you want. None of it will dent the huge amount of debt that these 2 programs cost us. If we were smart, we would end these programs today. If we are dumb, we will wait until it will be severely painful. Either way, both programs will have to be stopped whether we like it or not. I am just calling for us to be smart and do it now since it won’t be as painful today. Of course we are dumb americans and will wait another 10-15 years and then end these wasteful programs.
We are doomed.
August 16th, 2006 at 12:34 pmWe are doomed.
Comment by Roger_Roger — August 16, 2006 @ 12:34 pm
Who was telling the dems they were all chicken littles yelling about the sky falling?
August 16th, 2006 at 12:46 pmWe are doomed.
Comment by Roger_Roger
Lockbox
If the taxes we pay towards SS was not being spent on earmarks, wars, funding bridges to no where, faith based payoffs, etc… then we would be just fine… the problem is the politicians keep stealing the money … that is what Gores lockbox idea was all about.
August 16th, 2006 at 12:47 pmActually I am all for the republicans pushing for an end to social security, talk about he final nail in the coffin, the repubs would quickly go the way of the whig party.
August 16th, 2006 at 12:50 pmWhat a comedian…
August 16th, 2006 at 12:51 pmJerry Lewis has a wierd idea about tiny that tiny portion of the president’s budget. There were millions an dmillions of dollars of pork in the last Transportation bill. Now if we were to take all those roads and bridges and whatever money and used it for VA hospitals we could really be supporting our troops.
August 16th, 2006 at 12:52 pmRoger-Roger: Social Security and Medicare are programs that have served the American people very well. They are not programs that are spending borrowed money on a war that iis responsible for the deaths of thousands of people who were no threat to us. Which would you rather see the American people spend money on?
August 16th, 2006 at 12:56 pmRoger-Roger How old are you? We need to end this war in Iraq. I do not want my tax payers money spend on this illegall war. I hate to tell you I will be retiring in about 5 years and I will need SS and Medicare at that time. I paid into SS and Medicare and I will get my money. You must be very young and have not experience life yet. Wet beyond the ears so to speak.
August 16th, 2006 at 1:12 pmSo why won’t you guys “massage” the base pay for the working joe? That wasn’t unusual either until about 6 years ago.
August 16th, 2006 at 1:20 pmTINY MY ASS!
It’s at least a third of the budget by now, if you properly include off=budget items like the WAR!
Just because this asshole Jerry Lewis wants to continue to be bribed and to feed off the K Steet Buffet, he wants to protect ear-marks!
August 16th, 2006 at 1:27 pmSocial Security and Medicare are funded by the money specifically collected for those funds, which if left alone and with some tweaking on how benefits are dispersed would continue to solvent.
August 16th, 2006 at 1:34 pmA democrat congressman on the finance committee the other day charged that the Bush Administration is using TWO set of books, the real ones, and the set they cooked up. This did not make the MSM.
He charged that if you want the real figures you have to go to the Treasury Department. There you will find that almost on a weekly basis lies to the amurkan people about how well this country is doing.
One lie is that the budget will be reduced to a mere 254 billion by the end of the governments fiscal year.
The truth: The budget deficit is TRIPLE at more than 756 billion.
The national debt? It is setting a a mere 76 TRILLION.
You see - Bush is borrowing a billion dollars a day from countries who will give it to him. Amurka is so far in the hole it will take a half a century to dig out.
August 16th, 2006 at 1:57 pmI am being to brash in saying we need to kill Social Security and Medicare today. The people just aren’t ready for that step yet. What we do need to do today is raise the retirement age just like Greenspan has suggested. He said that we could get a little more mileage out of Social Security if we raise the retirement age to 75. That would at least help a little. When the program was put in place, it was designed with the idea that the average person would die around 7 years after starting the benefits. Today, people are living much longer. This means that they are receiving way to many years of benefits.
Either way, they need to start by raising the retirement age to at least 75. I would also be for passing a law that doesn’t allow anyone to get more out of Social Security then they put in. Right now, many people go on the government payroll for 20+ years yet never put much into SS in the first place. I just don’t want to see our country go bankrubt over these foolish entitlement programs. We should take what money is left and use it to teach people how to invest for there retirement themselves. Americans save nothing these days and figure that someday the government will just take care of them. That is not what made this country great. Social Security and Medicare should be in place for the very few who need it based on mental and physical disabilities.
If the government did accounting like the rest of us, the average american would demand that we change Social Security ASAP. The amount it costs us each year is beyond appalling. The amount we spend in Iraq is peanuts compaired to SS each year.
Either way, I am just ranting and so are you. You don’t want to keep spending the money on Iraq, yet your Democrat congressmen and women don’t listen. They will continue to vote for the money and the war while paying you lip service.
They all know the horrid state of the federal financials based mostly on Social Security and Medicare, yet they are shortsighted and won’t do a thing about it. We currently have 65+ trillion in debt (Most of it from Social Security and Medicare), yet there isn’t one single politician that will do a thing about it.
August 16th, 2006 at 2:05 pmBluedog,
We can raise all the taxes we want on things. It still won’t save Social Security in the long run. People are still taking more out of it then they are putting into it. I am with you on eliminating the tax cut for the top 1%. We could even agree to further tax the Oil companies if you want. None of that will really solve the problem.
I would not support eliminating the cap of SS tax though. It is already of a bad program. Once I cap out my SS payments I am happy they don’t take anymore of my money for a bad program. That extra money I currently use for my retirement. I invest it properly so I can retire some day. Just giving more of it to SS won’t do a thing for me or anyone else.
Anyways, I’ll agree to most of your wishes if you agree to 2 of mine. 1, raise the retirement age to 75. 2, pass a new law that states you cannot receive more out of Social Security then you put in.
All you new taxes or not, my 2 ideas will actually save Social Security.
August 16th, 2006 at 2:48 pmRoger-Roger You are crazy if you think seniors should work until they are 75. You never answered my question How old are you? what do you do for a living? Some jobs that are labor jobs that men & women cann’t do until they are 75.
Bluedog49 You are so right the weathy 1% should pay their fair share of taxes. The corporation should also not get away with all the tax breaks especially the oil and energy companies. They are making racord profits.
August 16th, 2006 at 2:57 pmBluedog and Mary Poplins.
Question:
What is the correct tax rate for Business’?
What is the right tax rate for the most wealthy?
Honestly, I want to know a figure. I always hear people like you scream that we need to raise taxes. So, what is the tax rate you would like to see them at and WHY? Raising the tax rate doesn’t equal more taxes afterall. It is a very fine balancing act. If we raise to tax rate to 100%, we know the federal government would get $0 per year as no one would actually work if they got it all taken away. Conversely, if we set the tax rate at 0%, the fed’s would also get nothing. So as you see, it is a very fine line if you want to maximize your tax intake. You raise the rate to high and the rich will not continue to produce more taxes as there isn’t a good enough return. you tax the rich to little and you miss out on some tax revenue.
So, exactly what rate would you like to see? Exactly why have you picked that rate and why do you feel it will maximize tax revenue?
BTW, I am 49 years old. I have 3 children. They are all in college currently.
August 16th, 2006 at 3:04 pmROGER ROGER
I read one of your posts where you stated that SS costs the taxpayers billions each year.
You are so full of shit it is coming out of your ears. SS does not cost the taxpayers a dime. The program pays for itself, even the burdensome overhead.
You see my man, the taxes that are gathered and sent to the administration on a quarterly basis pay for all.
There is one thing wrong with the system however. Bush cant keep his friggin hands off of the money. He robs it every three months. He has “stolen” over 650 billion from the SS trust fund over the past five years.
Now take the 650 billion and put it in the trust fund and you have a very, very healthy system. Keep robbing it, as Bush does, and you have a system that is broken, and will be penniless in about 40 years.
Wake up and pee pee friend, the world is on fire.
August 16th, 2006 at 5:29 pmI’ve heard the French love Rep Jerry Lewis. Ooo-la-la
August 16th, 2006 at 9:51 pm31,
We actually didn’t balance the budget under Clinton. If the Fed’s would use correct accounting principles, they would have come up over 3 trillion short even that year. Once again, read this link:
http://www.usatoday.com/ printedition/ news/ 20060803/ 1a_coverart03.art_dom.htm
August 17th, 2006 at 12:06 pmThen again,
using true accounting principles wouldn’t be any fun now would it?
August 17th, 2006 at 12:07 pmBack to Jerry Lewis - Social Security and other conressionally established funding will not change - only increase in costs. His statemet that ear marks projects for districts is nothing more than buying votes and antoher way of gettting kickbacks from contractors and others. His defense of them is admission of guiilt.
August 17th, 2006 at 1:32 pm