Abate likely to Announce Tonight

As reported last month by PoliticsNJ, and commented on by yours truly, tonight's the night for Camille Abate to announce she's throwing her hat in the ring for the Democratic nomination to challenge Representative Scott Garrett. She is hosting an event through her CAJA Institute, at the Ridgewood Public Library, promising a special announcement.

Aronsohn fundraising for Richardson

Having worked for the Clinton administration, I wasn't sure if 2006 Democratic challenger Paul Aronsohn would go with Senator Clinton; or if he would go with his old boss in the administration, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson. Turns out, Aronsohn hosted a fundraiser for Richardson this evening. I'll post any coverage of the event tomorrow.

Lest We Forget

Following the House debate over how to handle the 30,000 earmark requests for the Homeland Security appropriations Bill, Representative Scott Garrett has been getting a lot of praise from his fellow Republicans. Whether for leadership or bringing candy to those on the floor, people have singled him out as one of the leaders on the Republican side.

However, old habits die hard and I suppose Garrett couldn't avoid misrepresenting the truth. This from today's Garrett Gazette:

Earlier this year, I was pleased that the House adopted many of the earmark reforms that I had pressed for in the previous year. The entire process of spending should be open and transparent - all spending should be subject to full public scrutiny and debate, but that is especially true of earmarks, which have far too often been used by Members to curry favor with special interests or voters.

Sounds good, yet once again Garrett makes it sound like he voted for the earmark reforms he actually voted against. Votes speak louder than words, they always have. Garrett says in his Gazette that the Democrats talked a good game, which should be seen as nothing less than a compliment from someone who is an expert at it.

30,000 Strips of Bacon, Please.

When reading about the debate raging on the House floor this week about the Department of Homeland Security authorization bill, a few thoughts popped into my head. The foremost is that it served as an example of why the average taxpayer has given up on Washington. Here we have the new Congress getting ready to pass their first appropriations bill, containing many programs people support (border agents, air cargo screening, etc.), and a brawl broke out between the Republicans and Democrats over earmarks.

The fight between the parties erupted when Rep. David Obey, Chair of the Appropriations Committee, said there were too many requests for earmarks to process and they'd deal with them later. The mind numbing number of requests: 30,000. That works out to roughly 69 earmark requests per member of Congress. If that were to be what we can expect going forward, that would translate to 360,000 requests for pet projects over this year.

Whether the 30,000 requests represent Democrats trying to make up for years in the minority (the majority gets 60% of requests) or Republicans trying to sabotage the process, or some combination of the two, is unclear. Both sides are blaming the other. Whatever the cause, 30,000 is simply a ridiculous number. After reading some of what was causing the fight, part of me wishes Rep. Obey had made good on his threat to completely strip the bill of earmarks. This from the Washington Post:

Debate on the $36 billion homeland security bill, which would fund the Federal Emergency Management Agency, border security and counterterrorism measures, bogged down last night as Republicans pushed scores of amendments aimed at banning the use of counterterrorism money for designer handbags, puppet shows and other programs included in the legislation.

PUPPET SHOWS??????????????

I've talked before about funding to combat the spread of crystal meth being carved up like a Thanksgiving turkey by the folks on Capitol Hill. It's a perfect example of why earmarking is detrimental to the health of our nation, even though members of Congress see it as healthy for their careers. While the Republican Congress earmarked 84% of the funding to combat the issue, meth use among young people rose much faster and across a larger geographic area than estimated. Had the funds gone toward prevention education and actual law enforcement, instead of the couches and ping pong tables an audit found, maybe twice as many young people as originally thought wouldn't be using the stuff.

There are very real consequences to using Federal dollars for ridiculous pork projects. Spending money for a Coach purse instead of working walkie-talkies for a first responders could cost lives. Puppet shows instead of respirators? These types of actions tend to bring out the cynic in me and the majority of the voting public. Even though most of the earmarks were stripped, the fact Representatives would put that garbage in a bill to begin with is an example of just how far out of touch some in Washington really are.

Garrett the Candyman

This from The Politico:

The night before: “With the Republican Study Committee leading the charge on the endless appropriations debate, Members down on the house floor for hours from 4 PM to 2AM can get tired and cranky. But, leave it to Rep. Scott Garrett (N.J.) to save the day, by bringing everyone a little sweetness. Word is Garrett brought loads of M&M's to his fellow RSC members on the floor, making him the hero of the night,” says a Shenanigans tipster.

For those that don't know, every M&M you've ever eaten is made here in the Fifth District by Masterfoods USA in Hackettstown.

I'm Back

So, now I'm home again. Here's what I missed:

Representative Scott Garrett took the opportunity to follow the news that the GDP grew at the slowest pace in five years to send out a Garrett Gazette saying how great things are with the economy thanks to the tax cuts. Not mentioned in the Gazette were the facts of the unfair competitive advantage the cuts provide foreign companies, or the fact that there is growing concern within economist circles that phantom GDP may be artificially inflating the strength of the economy. Also, Garrett neglected to mention his vote against 10 years of tax cuts for small business owners.

On a positive, it seems the hotly debated Homeland Security funding bill will have an amendment to allocate funds based on risk, a primary recommendation of the 9/11 Commission, and Garrett sponsored the amendment to get it in there.

Both Kevin O'Toole and Steve Oroho won their primaries. O'Toole's victory was the straw that broke the camel's back as far as Guy Talarico's time as Chairman of the Bergen County Republican Organization. Oroho notched his second victory against Garrett's preferred candidate, and has built a strong coalition of moderates and classic conservatives that is reshaping the power balance in Sussex. Assuming O'Toole and Oroho both win, they have very big shoes to fill in the State Senate for their respective parties and constituents.

And on a final note, Garrett's press secretary Will Holley has been hired to handle media for Mitt Romney in South Carolina. One of the biggest gripes since I first started following Garrett was that you could almost never find quotes or statements or anything regarding his thinking when voting on our behalf. Basically, before Holley came on board Garrett's website was about as useless to constituents as ice cubes are to Eskimos. I'm not sure when Holley will be leaving Garrett's office, but Holley's work was light years beyond what we had before (even when he was spinning) and he will be missed.

Offline for a While

I'm going to have limited internet access for the next week and a half. Look for an in case you missed it piece Wednesday, June 13.