Right now, the House is debating a series of amendments to HR5672 offered by Jeff Flake. It's an appropriations bill, and the amendments offered target earmarks.
So far, he is metaphorically getting his teeth kicked in, but that could change if he takes up Rep. Jose Serrano on his invitation to visit the beneficiary of one of the targeted earmarks, the Arthur Avenue Retail Market in the Bronx.
Change to "literally." The area of the Bronx that contains Arthur Avenue, is, umm....'colorful'.
Jeff, you said you just might take up Rep. Serrano on his invite; if you do, wear a boxer's mouthguard. Your dentist will thank you.
Watching the debate on C-SPAN, I observed a couple of things:
One, many of the Reps who spoke against his amendments noted Rep. Flake's support for bigger ticket items, such as spending in Iraq and questioned his motives in attacking these *much* smaller proposals. They also noted how much federal funding that Arizona receives (and has received through the years - CAP was singled out) in the appropriations process.
The other thing I observed: most of his amendments attacked earmarks targeted for poorer districts, where a small (by federal standards, anyway) appropriation will make a BIG difference.
Jeff, many people, including me, have expressed some admiration for your crusade to curb irresponsible Federal spending. However, you seem to have lost any sense of proportion.
I have to ask: do you really expect to balance the budget on the backs of poor people while supporting unfettered access to the Treasury for Big Business?
No comments:
Post a Comment