and it's receiving earmark after earmark after earmark after earmark, although questions are raised all over the place. according to the center for responsive politics, concurrent technologies employees have donated more than $13,000 to current members of the house defense appropriations committee since 1998. let me just use a chart here. this chart kind of explains the if he none none that we'll see -- phenomenon that we'll see over and over and over again. this pattern exists where members of congress will earmark dollars, the earmark spending goes to the earmark recipient, the earmark recipient will then turn around and lobbying firms representing the earmark recipient, pacts there, executives from the lobbying firm, executives from the company itself contribute handsomely to members of congress and it recycles again and again and again. circular fundraising, that's what we're talking about. now, i should point out -- i will point out that when members of congress request an earmark, they're forced to sign a certification letter saying they have no financial interest. this kind of ci

earmark there, one earmark there can be as arbitrary as the process of earmarking sometimes appears to be. so i generally don't do that. but in this instance there's an earmark in the bill that i know a lot about. the senator whose -- from north dakota is offering, has done this because he believes very much in having another study on the missouri river. and we've been fighting over water in this country for as long as this country's been around. water's pretty important. water is very important in missouri. the navigation of the missouri river is incredibly important to our farmers. it's important to our utility companies. in fact, there was a very large study undertaken on the missouri river, and it was completed in 2004. it cost the taxpayers $35 million. it took 15 years to complete. and there was all kinds of lawsuits over it between the various states up and down the river. there were a couple of things that came out of that study. one of them was there was an agreement that began the missouri river recovery and implementation committee. it is a committee that includes stakeho

the earmark. our own ethics committee says campaign contributions do not necessarily constitute financial interest. they have greenlighted circular funding. i think that exposes members to investigation. in the house, we should set a higher standard than whether or not you can be indicted or convicted. we ought to say that if there's an appearance of impropriety, we should stay away. i have proposed resolution is to try to get the ethics committee to investigate pma. i offered eight in a row. i got an increasing number of members each time. finally the democrats offered their own resolution to basically force the ethics committee to indicate that it was investigating. host: when will we hear about that? guest: the ethics committee has indicated that it is under review. there's no ticking clock. i would like to see the ethics committee established a committee to look into it. only then do you really know it is investigated. host: jacksonville, fla. on the democrats' line. caller: good morning, jeff

get these earmarks. will i mention to the gentleman before i came to congress 15 years ago, this program was in existence. and the funding this year is precisely level with last year. this is not new funding. so i would suggest to the gentleman that in this case, with potatoes, they are not a program crop. they don't -- when you're -- another 15 seconds. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. kingston: another minute. mr. hastings: i thank the gentleman for yielding. when potato farmers go out and plant their crops, they are probably the biggest gamblers in the world. yet they don't mind putting some of their hard-earned cash when they make a profit into this research because that may make them an even bigger gambler next year. so i respect the gentleman with what he's trying to do, but his issue may not be with individual crops. this amendment goes to an individual crop in my area. maybe his issue is with ag research service in general. that's a matter for another debate. with that i thank the

, many of which are earmarking programs that we have instructed the agencies, earmarking moneys that we've instructed them to establish a competitive grant program for, then we have a problem. and if we don't like the way the agencies do it, let's change that. we control it because we control the purse. but let's not run a parallel program that turns into really a spoil system. and with that i urge adoption of the amendment and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the amendment is not agreed to. mr. flake: on that, mr. chairman, i would ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona rise? mr. flake: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk designated as number 4 of part b. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment numbe

nor can i find the word earmark. congress has the power to appropriate, but we authorize, we appropriate and we have oversight functions and we're circumventing that process when we earmark in this fashion. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from arizona reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from missouri rise? mrs. emerson: i rise in opposition. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized for five minutes. mrs. emerson: funding recommendations were made in full compliance with the applicable rules and procedures of the house. in addition, the small business administration was able to vet this project. it provided the committee with no negative feedback to the project and the grauntee. mr. simpson, the sponsor of this amendment, was unable to come to the floor due to other business. i ask unanimous consent to submit mr. simpson's statement for the record. the chair: the gentlewoman's request will be covered under general leave. mrs. emerson: i yield to the distin

not one congressional earmark. i think in the past couple of years there's been an upward of 2,500 earmarks in that bill. and the bill we'll address the bill, the energy and water bill, there are literally hundreds of earmarks. now, one would like to think that the appropriations committee would vet these earmarks, would actually check them out to see if they're meeting federal purpose, if money is being wasted, if it's maybe looks bad, looks like it's tied to campaign contributions or whatever, but they don't. they don't have the time or the resources or perhaps the inclination to do so. and so all we have is this forum here on the floor. and when you bring an appropriation bill to the floor under a closed rule, a restricted rule or structured rule and deny members the ability to offer amendments, then you've shut down this place in a way that is simply not right. in this bill for this bill there were 103 amendments submitted. now, because you have to prefile your amendments, a lot of members will offer more amend

with regard to this particular earmark, new york has only received one earmark for $1 million. so in relation to the amount of risk and the necessary for an emergency response center, the need is great. and i just would like to add that our judgment, as the senators from new york, as what is the best investment for all of new york in terms of an emergency response investment is helpful to this process understand that it shouldn't necessarily be left only to a grant process. much of the money is still available to a grant-making process, which is a great process because it does have competition and you hopefully get to the greatest good for the greatest neevmentd but there is a balance where a judgment from a senator or a congress member is very important in that conversation, and the agencies and the administration can make their own judgments, and that's why a combination of targeted earmarks on the one hand and other investments through a grant process on the other hand is probably a better balance and a better approach because you're getting the judgment of all parts of our

that's just one of about $8.3 million worth of proposed earmarks in the d.c. budget currently being considered by the council. >> that's $40,000 that doesn't need to be spent. >> what do they even do? >> exactly. fashion police maybe. >> reached by phone, the group's president says the money will go to fund a business incubator to encourage growing the fashion industry in d.c. also in the proposed budget? $20,000 for social and etiquette programs for young women. >> definitely not a good way to spend our tax dollars. >> have we lost our minds? no. we don't have time for that. >> >> earmarks often go to worthy organizations. but it is a process that is not competitive and smacks of favorite simple. >> there are pricier earmarks, too, like $400,000 capital grants to the national council of negro women or $130,000 for the textile museum. >> when we're facing such honolulu deficits, it's not a good investment right now. >> we asked the mayor's office specifically about some of the earmarks and got a statement that didn't address any of them specifically saying onl

with this earmark process. again, let me point out in this piece of legislation, the energy and water bill, 58% of the funding is going to just 24% of the body. people who know their power and know that they can get earmarks. we hear a lot of high-minded rhetoric about earmarks, that we're doing it because we know our district better than those bureaucrats and these bureaucrats shouldn't be able to choose because i know my district better but apparently, just a quarter of the members of the body seem to know their district better than everybody else, they keep getting the earmark dollars. we're earmarking dollars because we can here. sometimes to the same organizations or institutions that get it year after year after year. and when we're running a deficit that may hit $2 trillion, i think we ought to say enough is enough. the sponsor of this earmark appears to be associated with, either as loan sponsor or in collaboration with other members, more than $87 million worth of earmarks last year and more than $94 m

contributions to the member who secured that earmark for them, members getting earmarks for their campaign contributors instead of being able to stand up and illuminate that, we will be likely restricted to one or two amendments or maybe none. that's what we're going through right now and that's what it's going to lead to. people say that nobody pays attention to process outside of this body or outside of this town, and that's largely true. it's tough to score political points saying the majority party simply won't allow amendments offered on the floor. people typically don't pay attention to that process. but that process also begets bad results or bad policy. we learned it on this side. when you hold a vote open for three hours like we did the prescription drug bill vote and twist arms, you get a bad result. we added about $11 trillion in unfunded liabilities for future generations. we had several of those, which several on this side were not proud of. we always held appropriations bills up and allowed open rules and allowed members to offer amendments even though it might have been unco

in fact, i think the last figures were 70% of the money that was earmarked was earmarked by fewer than 25% of this body. so it's a spoil system. now this, when you're awarding money to 6,000 projects this is simply irresistible to members of congress who seek to earmark. mark my words if we don't put protections in here, these funds are going to be earmarked. so the failure to allow the amendment to stipulate that none of these funds should be earmarked should be taken as notice that we're going to start earmarking these funds. that's unfortunate. it's part of a pattern we've seen this this year. we were bringing appropriation bills to the floor under rules. under a structured or closed rule where very few amendments are allowed to even be offered. we'll be considering the agriculture bill, there are hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of earmarks in that bill. we'll have amendments to strike man a half dozen. that's not transparency and accountability. what good is transparency if you can't actually challenge a number of these earmarks. but they the real purpose of all this, of all thi

now, he said he simply wanted to strike the earmarks. despite his intentions -- let me tell you about the impact. it's an actual impact. if his amendment passes we will cut $56 million for 16 national guard readiness centers. we will cut $44 million for nonmilitary ranges and training facilities. we will cut $83 million for 16 quality of life facilities, such as housing, clinics and military family centers. we will cut $98 million for 16 projects to improve forest protections, facilities for flight line safety. we will cut $86 million for 18 equipment maintenance and storage facilities and $47 million for seven military research and testing facilities. we will cut a project to provide properly sized and configured storage space for mark 48 torpedos at one of our key submarine bases. and a new stamp for the marine corps east coast logistic base will be lost. the gentleman would cut a new chapel complex to replace more than 15,000 square feet of trailers and world war ii era facilities. and he would cut a platoon machine gun range at the a

that was through a congressional add-on or earmark. only later then were indian tribal police forces and court systems authorized and included in the president's budget. but it was congress that initiated the law enforcement approach that appropriated funds for indian police. in 1883, the united states navy began moving from wooden to steel ships. that came as a result of a decision by the congress. the congress said we want to move from wooden to steel ships. and that was appropriated in the naval service appropriations act. it directed the navy to construct two steel steam cruising vessels from funds appropriated but not required for repairing wooden ships. in 1943, the senate school lunch program was established through a $15 million earmark in the 1944 agriculture appropriations bill. of course, that turns out to have been a wonderful idea. the school lunch program is a remarkable success. in 1987, it was the congress that earmarked funding for what was called gene mapping which later became the human genome project. that didn't co

earmark.hat as a problem here, but clearly the justice department seems to see there's a problem with that. so what do we do here in the house? instofede allowing members to come to the floor during debate and saying what about this earmark? what about the campaign contribution this is a seem to have been received as soon as that earmark was sponsored? as soon as that report came to the floor saying that that earmark was in the bill, why did campaign contributions flow in response to that? instead of being able to examine those things, we decided to cut off debate. so we have transparency rules where we now know whose earmark is in the bill, but we've prohibited members from actually coming to the floor to examine that. so you have some more transparency, but you've cut out accountability. now we've done a number of appropriations bills and some amendments have been allowed. very few. i think in one bill, there were more than 100 amendments prefiled and only maybe 20 or so were allowed. i, mys

the senate has earmarked nearly half of its funds. the earmarks are directed to ten states. that means, mr. president, that 40 states will have to compete for the remaining half of these fundsthesefunds the amendment f. ten states get half and the other 40 states get half combined. many of these earmarks have shift clhistorically gone to smr cities. so my amendment, mr. president, would strike the earmarks in the text of the senate bill so that fema can decide which projects are homeland security priorities and federal responsibility. with regard to the predisaster mitigation funds, the house report has earmarked a fourth of the funds and the senate has so far not earmarked any of them. however, last year, both the house and the senate earmarked roughly 27% of the funds in conference. so my amendment directs fema to disregard any such earmarks in the explanatory statement of managers. as the majority of us won't be members of the conference committee, i urge my colleagues to consider whether it is in the best interest of your state to permit the earmarking of these critical

that explains the spoil system the earmarks are. when 70% of the earmarks go to 24% of the house. when less than 14% of the house gets well over 50% of the dollar value overall of earmarks. so i have to say we have to start somewhere. if we can't start by saving $100,000 for the myrtle beach conference center, i don't know where we can start. i really, really don't. so i would just urge my colleagues if we say we are fiscally responsible, then show it instead of standing up and saying, hey, we need to cut spending, but first before we cut spending we've got to spend another $100,000 on the myrtle beach convention center. i think the taxpayers have heard that for far too long. when we were in the majority and now with the new majority. at some point we have to say we are not going to do this anymore. that's what we are attempting to do with this amount. i would urge support of it and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, th

so for those reasons, i think this is a very appropriate earmark. then i would like to comment and i oppose again the amendment. i would like then to use the rest of my time to point out something that i did a little bit earlier, which was to point out that at the end of the carter administration, there was $1 trillion of national debt. that took us from the presidency of president washington all the way 190 years to 1980 to get $1 trillion in debt, of national debt. 12 years later, the national debt was over $4 trillion, more than four times, more than quadrupled in that 12 years. that's the 12 years of the greatest debt increase by any percentage-wise. in the presidency of president clinton, the debt went up another 1/3, from 33% in that eight years, which is quite modest compared what it then went up during the previous administration, the years from 2007 -- 2001 through 2009. the debt went up from $5.3 trillion. i said $5.4 the last time i made this, but in any case rgs it has gone up over $10 trillion by the end of the bush administration. that

remember, earmarks aren't competitive. earmarks mean that you forgo it. you tell those who are competing for this, you need to take a backseat because we are going to take the money that you competed for and we are going to give it to somebody else. and so perhaps this program is worthy of federal money. perhaps it isn't. it should have to compete for it. if we don't like the way the federal agencies have set up the programs for competition, we should change them. we should instruct them to change them. that's part of the process of authorizing, appropriating and then exercising appropriate oversight. but instead here, we're saying we don't like the way we do it over there so we're going to create a parallel system and we are going to do it ourselves. and that's simply not right. it's done. it amounts to a spoil system as i mentioned here in congress where a few powerful members tend to get the bulk of the dollars. it amounts to something in the defense bill where you're giving a no-bid contract to private companies. and that's simply not right. we tell t

clients, especially defense earmarks. it boasted more than $15 million in revenue last year. p.m.a. group clients reportedly received $300 million in defense earmarks for fiscal year 2008 and $317 million for fiscal year 2009. p.m.a. group and its clients spread around a lot of campaign contributions in an attempt to curry favor with lawmakers. according to one report, the firm had been credited with $1.8 million in contributions since 2001, and that's just to members of the defense appropriations committee. last november, the federal bureau of investigations raided p.m.a.'s offices and the home of its founder, paul nagliaciatti. according to news reports, prosecutors were initially focused on whether mr. nagliaciatti used a florida wine steward and a golf club executive as a front to funnel illegal donations to lawmakers. "the washington post" examined campaign contributions reportedly given by employees of the p.m.a. group and found listed in donor records -- quote -- "several people who were not reg i registered lobbyd

-- earmark reform? how low must congress's approval rating sink before we act to repair this institution's reputation? how many more lawmakers, staffers, government officials and contractors have to go to jail before we actually fix this process? unfortunately congress's earmarking practices have grown worse, not better. just about every year i served in the senate. this year promises to be the worst. we began the year by passing a $400 billion omnibus appropriation bill with almost 9,000 earmarks in it. contrary to his prom to the american people to stem the tide of earmarks, the president refused to veto that pork claim bill. he signed it in a quiet room far from the public eye. and i might add that using the rationale that it was -- quote -- "last year's business" even though it was passed this year. two weeks ago the senate approved a $44 billion department of homeland security appropriations bill. it was over $200 million more than last year's bill and almo almost $100 million more than the preside

we got another $2 billion earmark and another $2 billion earmark and five, ten years from now, they'll either do one or two things, oh, we finally figured it out, which means had we waited to build on a small prototype plant and really perfected the technology, we could have done it for 5% of that, or they'll say, it just didn't work. we can't do it. but we did it on the basis of parochialism and the enhanced interest of some power companies who were well-heeled and well-connected to this body. and so now we got $2 billion of your money going to a project that m.i.t. says the technology isn't finished yet and we shouldn't be spending any money to build a final plant, and yet we did it. but yet the claim was there wasn't any earmarks in the stimulus bill. or we build -- here's another fact that a lot of people don't know, and every fact i'm going to give, i can absolutely document either from the department of transportation or somewhere else. we have over 250,000 major bridges in this country in disrepair. remember minneapolis, the bridges collapse? we've got tons of those bridges. now

, 70 of those earmarks are for clients of p.m.a.hich is a lobbying firm with close ties to murtha, which, in fact, is still being investigated by the justice department and the house ethics committee. bret: jennifer griffin live at the pentagon n news around the world, in spain, authorities have sealed off the resort island of my jor ka after a bomb killed two police officers. the bomb is blamed on a separatist group, and the it it is the second bombing in less than 36 hours n iran's capital city of tehran, police beat protestors with batons as thousands attended a graveside memorial for victims of post-election violence. among them, a 27-year-old woman whose dying moments were filmed and widely circulated on the internet. in china, u.s. consumer product safety regulators are planning to set up an office in beijing. the idea is to help ensure chinese products bound for america are safe, alf ter a slew of recalls from pet food to children's toys. the chinese must still give approval. and in north korea, that country's first fast-food

this earmark equals $153.87 per inhabitant. per inhabitant. there are cities all across america that are operating out of inadequate facilities, including my own state. all we've asked for is to have these prioritized according to competition assessment and recommendations by agencies of government rather than inserted in the bill as an earmark and without any of that. so from the previous votes, madam president, we'll probably lose on this one, but i want to tell my friend from montana sooner or later the american people are going to reject this kind of pork barrel earmarking. $153.87 for every resident in whitefish, which may be warranted -- it may be warranted, but there is no assessment, there is no study, there is no rationale besides the fact that this was inserted in this bill without any scrutiny or authorization. madam president, we should reject this kind of practice, and this is an egregious example of it. i yield the floor. a senator: madam president? i would ask that you notify me when i have three minutes left. the presiding offi

earmarked in this little bet protect, this little pet project, is earmarked for $16.1 million. no, steve king is a reactionary radical. it isn't in the bill. isn't going to a w wouldn't do a thing like that including the speaker who has defined she won't do a thing like that now has $16.1 million going into the marsh for the saltwater marsh harvest mouse. this viability i presume. he's doing ok without this earmark. if we need jobs in an economy that works, we don't need to be dumping money into the mouse. by the way that is an earmark. it is a pet project. his ears are notched. that's what we do and that's where the name came from. . i wanted to point that out while this microphone is still alive that this is the day that there is confirmation that the people who pointed this out back then in january and early february were right. and those who defended the speaker and said it will never happen were wrong, $16 million dropped into the saltwater marsh harvest mouse. i want to put something else into the record here this evening and that is, we have had a couple of votes this we

more than 1,000 earmarks in the defense bill. that was considered by the full appropriations committee for a total of 18 minutes. not 18 minute pers earmark or per section of the bill or anything else, but the appropriations bill, full committee, appropriations committee, considered that bill for 18 minutes, past, done, markup, finished. now we've got that bill on the floor tomorrow. unfortunately, as is the case, or as has been the case with the rest of the appropriations bills this season, it will come to the floor under a structured or closed rule, where the rules committee, the majority party, will determine which amendments the minority party and members of the majority party get to offer. breaking from tradition that has held for decades and decades and perhaps centuries in this institution where appropriations bills have come to the floor under an open rule this will come to the floor under a rule that only allows amendments to be offered that the majority party wants to see. not those that the minority party necessarily w

-- there is $8 billion worth of earmarks supposedly in it.ve insurance through my work and it is 11 under dollars per person with insurance, paying for this -- $1,100 per person with interest, paying for this, why can't we get health insurance for other people? guest: let me say first, i think the economy is in connection -- in continuing trouble. the federal reserve reported last week that they expect unemployment to be higher than the rich -- originally estimated, above 10%. they even more sobering lee reported that we could have a jobless recovery, which would not be a recovery in my mind, in which you could have basically no net new jobs for the next four or five years. they are projecting a% and 9% unemployment for four years. for us, passing a giant energy tax and health care -- and giant health tax is going to be very destructive behavior. it will make unemployment worse and poverty for employment and slower and lumber and weaker. i agree with you, the bill coming from the house is designed by the. and frankly, the reason you're gettin

scandal that's centered around campaign contributions and earmarks. it is for this reason and this reason alone that i chose to offer 552 amendments to the rules committee each one fargetting an earmark that the sponsors listed on their website as going to a for-profit company. these amendments have been derived as an abuse of the process. i'd like to address this criticism, which i think is wholly unfair. it's unfair because the office of legislative counsel is not in any way inconvenience by the drafting of these amendments. my staff wrote them and wrote them individually. they were delivered to the rules committee well in advance of a 3:00 p.m. monday deadline given them enough time to process these amendments accordingly. in fact, i'm told that the rules committee closed up shop at around 8:00 p.m. friday night. at the rules committee meeting yesterday, there were 12 -- i'm sorry -- and the rules committee met yesterday, and the 12th rule of this appropriation process was passed, which restricted amendments again. that meeting lasted just one hour

. >> we're not having earmarks in the recovery package, period. sean: oh, really? >> $16 million of the stimulus money to take care of the salt marsh harvest mouse. sean: ruth bader ginsberg admits why she really supports abortion. mr. president, what are you looking at there? >> what i saw is what i saw. >> i was scared out of my mind. sean: and the search for elusive creatures known as werewolves, and karl rove and mike huckabee, "hannity" starts right now. as a second bill sweeps through congress, the wasteful bills are now coming back to haunt democrats. during the debate over the first stimulus, the president and democratic leaders including princess pelosi denied that any earmarks or pet projects would be included in the bill, but now we know that is a flat out lie, it is not true. in fact, one of the pet projects that republicans criticized the most was funding for the protection of an endangered rodent called the salt marsh harvest mouse that happens to, by the way, live in in nancy pelosi's district. she long denied it would be in the bill, and several mon

. >> we're not having earmarks in the recovery package, period. sean: oh, really? >> $16 million of the stimulus money to take care of the salt marsh harvest mouse. sean: ruth bader ginsberg admits why she really supports abortion. mr. president, what are you looking at there? >> what i saw is what i saw. >> i was scared out of my mind. sean: and the search for elusive creatures known as werewolves, and karl rove and mike huckabee, "hannity" starts right now. as a second bill sweeps through congress, the wasteful bills are now coming back to haunt democrats. during the debate over the first stimulus, the president and democratic leaders including princess pelosi denied that any earmarks or pet projects would be included in the bill, but now we know that is a flat out lie, it is not true. in fact, one of the pet projects that republicans criticized the most was funding for the protection of an endangered rodent called the salt marsh harvest mouse that happens to, by the way, live in in nancy pelosi's district. she long denied it would be in the bill, and several mon

have you done anything wrong with the city earmarks, for under $50,000? -- $450,000? >> everything i have done has been legal. >> marn barry back in the spotlight. we are told that the city council will be holding hearings on the nonprofits monday. richard reeve, abc 7 news. >>> some of the economic stimulus money is being used to help the less fortunate. bc is receiving nearly $7.5 million to help homeless families -- the district is receivingearly $7.5 million to help homeless families. prince william and arlington counties are each getting $700,000, and prince george's county is getting $3 million. >>> firefighters called to a home and langley park discovered to be a murder victims. breanne carter has the latest. >> investigators have been trying to figure out what happened. the firefighters were the first to respond, called here for reports of smoke in the building, but it quickly turned into a crime scene. dozens of police cars and yellow crime scene tape sit outside the entrance of this apartment complex. >> we were shocked. >> the police say around 11:00 this m

oh, we were told they weren't earmarks, but there were earmarks nonetheless. all sorts of special projects were in the bill. then we were told we had to pass the budget bill. over $400 billion. 8% increase over the previous budget bill. we couldn't wait, couldn't have delay, couldn't have extra time for debate, we had to pass it now because otherwise bad things might happen. what happened as a result of the stimulus bill? we were told if we didn't pass that stimulus bill we could see 8% unemployment. wouldn't that be terrible. what's unemployment today? 9.5% nationally. in the state of michigan it's 15.2%. what about jobs? what about all the job crease ated? two million jobs have been lost since the stimulus bill was put forward. 150,000 jobs were lost because the government got involved in g.m. and chrysler and handed out pink slips. this isn't going well for us. then cap and trade. cap and tax. the ultimate authority that government could have over every person's life in the united states. we're literally -- where literally every time we flip on a switch, it

even the most earmarkers want to avoid the appearance of pay-to-play system.hey have questions noted to campaign contributions made on behalf of the firm, including questions relating to strawman contributions and reimbursement for political giffings, pressure on clients to give, a suspicious pattern of giving and donations related to activity. "roll call," the firm and its clients when it reported that they have provided thousands of dollars worth of campaign contributions to key members to legislative activity such as the deadline for earmark request letters or passage of a spending bill. whereas the associated press highlighted the huge amounts of political donations from firms and clients to select members and noted that the political donations have followed a distinct pattern. the giving is especially heavy in march, which is prime time for smithing -- submitting earmark requests. and including several that were approved even after news of the f.b.i. raid of the firm's offices and justice department investigation into the firm was well known. whereas afte

. >> i resisted the stimulus package and we have championed earmark reform, slashing earmark requestshe cycle of dependency on a stiefling, unsustainable federal agenda. >> reporter: even though palin said this type of talk has nothing to do with national ambitions it's clear that many would like to see her head in that direction. in that spirit, parnell says he'll carry the torch. she ended her speech by a line from her inauguration. she said alaska should look north with help to plan the future. as for her future, palin does not say but as many others speculate it's for a presidential run in 2012. in fairbanks, alaska, cbs news. >>> this morning we'll have more on sarah palin and speak with political commentator and former bush speech writer. i'm michelle gielan and this is the "cbs morning news." diabetics on medicare! i'm a diabetic and i want you to know over 230,000 u.s. doctors have authorized their patients to receive their diabetic supplies through liberty medical. and that begins with the one touch®ultra2 meter. easy to use, fast results... at no additional cost! liberty hel

and that contains six earmarks.rgetic materials research and testing center in new mexico. $23 million. the national center for biomedical research and training at louisiana state university university, $23 million. national emergency response and emergency training center at texas university, $23 million. national exercise and test training enter-- center in nevada, $23 million. transportation technology center in colorado, $5 million. and, of course, we never want to forget the natural center preparedness training center at the university of hawaii, $5 million. $3 million for the dbted environment for critical infrastructure decision making exercise. so we need money -- $3 million for the infrastructure decision-making exercises and money is set aside for the cybersecurity consortium, a group of schools, including, miami university of ohio, utah state university, university of nevada at reno, and potomac institute for policy studies. a certain thread may become apparent throughout this conversation here and that i

her boss, marion barry, was making decisions on how to spend earmarked funds. a revelation at large city councilman david katanian found disturbing. >> she alleges that in mr. barry's, told her how to spend the mean, it puts a cloud over the funds. >> reporter: a. scott bolden, an attorney representing brenda richardson said at worse, it's a poor choice of words. >> easy to understand that miss richardson's comments, a poor choice of words, meant that that was mr. barry's feelings in regard to her poor performance and that doesn't mean he was controlling the dollars. >> reporter: bolden said his client was involved in no wrongdoing and the inspector general's investigation will ultimately clear her name. barry said he's done nothing wrong and outside of the council chambers on tuesday, he complaind about the recording saying it should never have been made. >> nobody in the meeting consented, and misswise aught to be prosecuted -- mess wise aught to be prosecuted for doing something illegal. >> reporter: no one is -- for making the recording. sources say that er

and 2008, there were about 400 earmarks in the bill. and now we are down to about 322. we are making a lot of progress in reducing the number of earmarks. that is a good thing. what this bill does not have, though, is spending reductions. unfortunately, mr. speaker -- mr. chairman, we spend a lot of of time talking about increasing spending. but we don't talk about efficiency and effectiveness. the purpose of congress really shouldn't be just to spend more money on an authorized program, but we should make sure that the programs are effective, they are efficient, are they doing the intended purpose? is increasing w.i.c. or increasing food stamps, is that a good thing? i would challenge that premise that it's not necessarily a good thing. it may be a necessary thing to do, but just because we have increased food stamps or w.i.c. spending, don't think we can polish off our halos and pat ourselves on the back. i think it underscores a situation in society that we need to be addressing. some of it in this committee, some of it in the authorizing committee, but certainly all

to maintain a researchable earmark if the committee does not have the earmark listed, then it cannotund t it's a good bill. host: mobile, alabama, republican line. caller: yeah, i was wondering on this medicare thing and our ability to ensure all these, quote, americans, and we have a lot of these illegals in here, where we can't say that we really don't want the illegals accessing this, but it seems like to democrats, you're just running along to make absolutely sure that all illegals and their families and anybody that can get here is going to have this access to our healthcare. host: thank you. i want to start with congressman cassidy on. this as a physician, you were probably treating a lot of people. did you ask your status before you did? guest: as a physician, that's not my role, and so i don't. host: how does the system pay for people who need healthcare who aren't legal? guest: the system is currently broken. the federal government mandates that whoever shows up innage emergency room is treated, period. it doesn't matter if you are abusing the system. it doesn't matter if yo

. >>> up next, how one lawmaker could be full of hot air when it comes to earmarks. we'll tell you about blimps and nearly $20 million and an outspoken senator. >>> and stealing a car to avoid church. that's right. you will not believe who is behind the wheel. you are watching "big picture" msnbc. it can be tough living with copd... but i try not to let it slow me down. i go down to the pool for a swim... get out and dance... even play a litt hide-n-seek. i'm breathing better... with spiriva. announcer: spiriva is the only once-daily inhaled maintenance treatment for both forms of copd... which includes chronic bronchitis and emphysema. i take it every day. it keeps my airways open... to help me breathe better all day long. and it's not a steroid. announcer: spiriva does not replace fast-acting inhalers for sudden symptoms. stop taking spiriva and call your doctor if your breathing suddenly worsens, your throat or tongue swells, you get hives, or have vision changes or eye pain. tell your doctor if you have glaucoma, problems passing urine or an enlarged prostate, as

these little pet projects with earmark pet projects. there's another project here that is a huge project and that is this new health care plan that has emerged. i came prepared to talk about it a little bit. this big huge health care plan that it was too expensive when the first estimates came out, and so the speaker was critical of the congressional budget office's estimates. those estimates mirkly -- miraculously were reduced. somewhat we think because some language got changed in the bill, and this $1.5 trillion c.b.o. estimate went down to just a little under $1 trillion. now we can afford this. i always thought, if i want to buy something if i can get it down below $1 trillion it's not so bad. like buying a loaf of bread if it's $900 some billion it's not nearly as bad as one-plus trillion dollars. so i find out that that c.b.o. estimate was made by the congressional budget office, these professionals that calculate the cost of the legislation they usually do it for committee chairs first and somebody else over months and months. b

. >>> president obama has earmark money to use on h1n1 virus. the funds will be used to buy vaccine ingredients. >>> check back with us and we have a preview. >>> there's some shocking new allegations about arlington national cemetery. how the army may be failing to honor the heros. >>> doing your part, you buy reusable bags instead of plastic, but there's a health concern you need to know about. don and mary, have a fabulous weekend. >> you too. >> stay with us, we'll be right back . >>> welcome back, looking at the five-day forecast, we're going to see a good turn about. less humid and breezy. 83 on monday, 84 on tuesday, 82 on wednesday. the humid upper 80s. we're living pretty big in late july. >>> tune into the cbs prime time lineup. numbers airs right here at 10:00 and follow by the news at 11:00. >> thank you for joining us. >> don scott,. >> mary bubala. >> marty bass.

you know, when i left congress, sean, i never did earmarks.ey had a parade for me to the airport to get me out of town, and some of the people here that i would not get the pork for, they did not like to see me, but at the end of the day, it is not about making friends. it is about being responsible. sean: all right, to the governor in ohio, thank you. the professor, the cop, and the president. we give the details on that. also, the green nazzarog greenreen cz -- the green sfx: coin drop, can shaking hear that? that's the sound of people saving. saving money, saving time, and saving for the future. regions makes it simple - starting with lifegreen checking and savings - featuring free convenient e-services, up to a $250 annual savings account bonus and a free personal savings review. so make the switch today - and get into the rhythm of saving. regions - it's time to expect more. sean: and tonight on hannity's america, four days, we have told you about president obama's tan king poll numbers -- for days. nancy pelosi has also taken a hit. only

and a lot of that money is coming from congressional earmarks.>> john, carol, the 18 members of the committee that came up with this bill accounting for 1/3 of all of the earmarks contained in it. >> reporter: $600 billion won't buy you anymore f-22s. the house cut funding for the fighter jet that never fired a shot in battle. the pentagon didn't want that jet but it's stuck with projects it did not ask for. robert gates did want a new missile defense system or another engine with a joint strike fighter or nearly half a billion dollars for new presidential helicopters. come to think of it, even president obama didn't want those? they're all in the new defense spending bill. >> the department of defense has no history of being frugal. >> reporter: the president for taxpayers for common sense, a nonpartisan watchdog group says the words "pentagon" and "frugal" have never been connected before. >> when they say we don't need this, this is extraordinary. we should listen to that. >> reporter: nearly $3 billion goes to earmarks, projects demanded by i

you know, when i left congress, sean, i never did earmarks. they had a parade for me to the airport to get me out of town, and some of the people here that i would not get the pork for, they did not like to see me, but at the end of the day, it is not about making friends. it is about being responsible. sean: all right, to the governor in ohio, thank you. the professor, the cop, and the president. we give the details on that. also, the green nazzarog greenreen cz -- the green czar. that and much more, straight ahead. you have questions. who can give you the financial advice you need? where will you find the stability and resources to keep you ahead of this rapidly evolving world? these are tough questions. that's why we brought together two of the most powerful names in the industry. introducing morgan stanley smith barney. here to rethink wealth management. here to answer... your questions. morgan stanley smith barney. a new wealth management firm with over 130 years of experience. you hungry? yeah. me too. (door crashes in) (broadview alarm)

he cut about $12 million in earmarks. but they are suffering with the revenue shortfall. the council is scheduled to vote on that budget on july 31st if you ride a bike to the nearest metro station. metro wants to hear from you. the transit agency is looking for ways to increase access to bicyclist. now they include new bicycle cages and double decks for bikes. people riding bikes was 60% between 20 2002 and 2007. >> we certainly had gorgeous weather this weekend as folks get ready to head back to work. >> what a treat we have this weekend. mild temperatures. low humidity. comfortable dew point levels an lots of sunshine. t looks like it's going to sa end for theta srt of a encurrt weekwork. gathersberg, leesburg. fairfax. winchester reporting 79 degrees. satellite and radar shows clouds beginning do increase. west virginia, ohio. this is what's on the way and we're going to expect some poblete possibility of showers and testimony. we'll have sior a complete look at the forecast in just a few moments. >> all right. steve. coming up at abc 7 news at 8:30. 59 tom watson had

[applause] we have championed earmarked -- earmark reform, slashing earmarked request by 85% to breakthe cycle of dependency on a stifling, unsustainable federal agenda. other states should follow this for america's stability. we do not have to feel that we should beg an allowance from washington, except to beg the allowance to be self determined. to be self-sufficient, alaska must be allowed to develop, to drill and build and climb to fulfill statehood's promise. at statehood, we knew this. [applause] we are responsible for ourselves and our families and our future. 50 years later, let's not start believing that government is the answer. it cannot make you happy or help the or wealthy or wise. what can? it is the wisdom of the people, and our families and small businesses and industrious individuals, and it is god's grace, helping those who help themselves. this allows that very generous, voluntary hand up that we are known for, enthusiastically providing those who need it. ago, remember we had the bumper sticker that said alaska, we don't give a darn how they do it outside. remember

theoney was earmarked to ild a stle, but much of it disappeared. ountry has traveled see early onnd found poverty, disease, and aarning and that could return. -- humprehy traveled --sier leone. >> she is eaking rocks. it is dangerous wo. it to trynd py for schooling. how much doeshe need? just 1 pound. >> neitr my mother nor myunt have enoug money, she told me, anif i did not have the money, i could n go to school. under international ghts, t governme must givehildren free education, but it does not. she is just one stor of one child i itain's recent inlvement in sierraeone. nine yeago, britain came to stop the war, and they are the mos -- bigge donor. >> there ha beenmisused, but the has to be anengagement. iowa a serious engagemt that leaves us out of whe we are. >> britain spent 50 milln pounds last year, so where the taxpayer going? not all the roads,it seems a lorry of medical supplies plummet's through a mashift bridge. they admit crucial mistas have been made in tackli corrtion and poverty. in a district hostal, a brother an sister have mari

. >> there is no $87 million stashed or line items or budgeted earmarked. >> a decision will be issued next monthly, but state regulators complain they have not received all requested information from constellation. they say they submitted 15,000 pages of document and provided unprecedented access to senior corporation officers. >> last month an attorney general's opinion was asked whether any state allows were being violated by constellations compensation packages. the o'malley administration's latest letter to constellations repeats earlier demands and wants disclosure on the nuclear power fat silt, and impact on lower term electric rates. the e.d.f. deal will provide the state with a one time amount of corporate income taxes, plus generate money in income and property taxes. if the deal falls through, electric rates will go up. >> that cost to borrow will go up. obviously, we won't be eating those costs. they would be passed on over time. >> the o'malley administration wants a one time pen% break for customers and hikes capped at 2.5%. >> during an investors meeting this morning wit