congressman tiahrt differ in some respects.e is a member of the appropriations, the spending committee. i have also voted for lowering taxes over to hundred times. >> a number of these issues we will get into in detail throughout the debate. question to the bill comes from the staff and has been in many of the of your e-mails. there are seven negative connotation. however, earmarked can provide much-needed funding for

congressman tiahrt has voted to keep the earmark process in place. i think that change over time, our country is bankrupt and earmarks to do to that. -- contribute to that. i think we have to do something different than business as usual. there may be a reason for an earmark . members of congress are often told to go find a way to spend money. that is a terrible mistake. it originates with the appropriations committee, which talk has been a longtime member. we have clear differences with regard to this question of earmarked. >> congressman tiahrt? >> when you look at congressman jerry moran, you would think that i am the only one that requests earmarks. just last year, congressman mor an requested more than $250 million in earmarked through the that is according to his website. i just take that for what it is worth. i have stood with senator roberts and senator brown back to make sure we support our communities. when the levies were failing in our area, and they cried out for 20 years for someone to build them, it was an earmark that started that pro

congressman tiahrt have voted differently. todd voted for the san here areo- peloisi related to the bridge and for $400,000 for an indoor tennis court in wichita. >> the airport that congressman moran is talking about has an army guard unit for apache helicopters there. he has a weak record on that national-security. that is why he supports constitutional rights for terrorists. it is part of this week record on national-security. earmarks is something that we should -- i think should go through the reform process. it has transparency. it includes your marks from the senate, house and white house. we voted to eliminate in earmarked and it would reduce the debt. i think it is important. >> only would say that congressman tiahrt is a sponsor of a bill for earmarked reform but the congressional dale reports his efforts it -- he led the effort to prevent a moratorium by republicans the year before were successful in bringing it about. he is coming to this conclusion but it happens to be an election year. >> as i recall, you were in

congressman tiahrt, you have 45 seconds. -- congressman hayworth, you have 45 seconds. >> he quoted ronald reagan last night. we both agree that facts are stubborn things. john, when you look at your record, that bailout fund -- one vote -- $150 billion in earmarked. a little math lesson. you attacked me, sending out mail that i suppose -- supported that $70 billion in earmarked. it is not true. even if it were. with 10 -- even if it were, with one vote, you more than doubled that year mark. -- earmark. >> or tax provisions, not earmarks -- they were tax provisions, not your marks, which i have fought against the time after time. this is why former members of congress reside in federal prison. this is why the american people rejected us out of the majority in both houses. a broad congressman hayworth in in 1994 -- they brought congressman hayworth in in 1994 and they kicked him out in 1996. we went from surpluses at the beginning of our republican majority to deficits because we let spending it out of control. i'm proud to have fought every day against that. >> i think it is great to see t

ineffective and embarrassingly in the promises where they have established a foothold, the taliban runs a tiahrt ship than dozen the afghan government, doing a competent job of making the trains run on time. this cannot go on, madam speaker. our continued support for the regime is eroding our national correct. the american people fighting -- credibility. the american people fighting off a recession and batting -- badly in need of the money right here at home resent sending that money to afghanistan. and they can't be expected to keep on doing this. they can't be expected to keep giving their bravest young people and their hard-earned tax dollars to prop up leads that are have no ability to govern responsibly. . they could be going wobbly on the commitment to get out of afghanistan one year from now. secretary of state clinton said that the july, 2011 date represented the start of a new phase, not the end of our involvement. she added that the united states has no intention of abandonning our long-term mission of achieving a stable, secure, peaceful afghanistan. well, madam secretary if we can ac