Maryland’s Representatives: Pork Over All.

| August 10, 2007 | Comments (1)

The Club for Growth decided to take a quick look at our Representatives to see which ones were actually interested in cutting the pork from the Federal budget and which ones were just flapping their jowls as they welded themselves to the trough. The study looks at 50 recent anti-pork amendments offered before the House on the most recent appropriations bills.

You’ll not be shocked to find that the Democrats occupy the prime feeding positions in the study, averaging a whopping 2% “voting against pork” rate. That means that the average Democrat voted for exactly one of the 50 amendments. Only one Democrat scored above 20% – Jim Cooper of Tennessee. The average Republican scored 43% and that included 15 who scored 100 percent. That’s still far too low a percentage, but it’s an acceptable beginning, given the lashing over corruption the Republicans took in the last election.

Check out how we fared in Maryland after the jump.

How’d we do in Maryland? Well, we have eight House members and here’s how they stacked up.

Roscoe Bartlett: 27% (13/49)
Elijah Cummings: 2% (1/50)
Steny Hoyer: 2% (1/45)
Albert Wynn: 2% (1/50)
Wayne Gilchrest: 0% (0/50)
Dutch Ruppersberger: 0% (0/49)
Paul Sarbanes: 0% (0/49)
Chris van Hollen: 0% (0/50)

Maryland’s total: 4% (13 16/392)

My fellow Marylanders, these folks are spending your money on frivolous garbage that we could get far more cheaply and with better service if we did it any other way but through Congress. What could you do for yourself or your family with that money? What could our state, which is going through yet another budget crisis, do with that money? Do you think it could find a better way to spend the 33.5 million that has ol’ Dutch so puffed up? How about the $250 million going to the “farmers” in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed (which includes pretty much the entire state) that Chris Van Hollen is so proud of? Perhaps those state agencies that will be losing essential personnel or won’t be able to fill critical positions (take a look at your state police agencies sometime, why don’t you?) could use some of those millions.

But maybe we’re all happy with that money being doled our by the folks who promised they’d curb their spendhappy wasteful ways and lied to us yet again.

(via Don Surber)

No related posts.

Category: The Economy and Your Money

About Jimmie: View author profile.

Comments (1)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Mr. Science Guy says:

    Math error–total ought to be 16/392. The percentage is correct, though.

Leave a Reply




If you want a picture to show with your comment, go get a Gravatar.

Performance Optimization WordPress Plugins by W3 EDGE