Rep. Hal Rogers (R-KY): On Election Day 2010, voters sent Congress a clear message: No more big spending or corrupt back-room deals! And what did House Republicans decide to do as one of their first moves for the new Tea Party Congress? Appoint Rep. Hal Rogers, also known as the “Prince of Pork,” to chair the powerful House Appropriations Committee.
According to ABC News: “In two years, Rogers pushed through 135 earmarks worth $246 million. He’s brought tens of millions of dollars into his hometown of Somerset, Ky., so much so that the town has been dubbed ‘Mr. Rogers’ neighborhood.’” Among the most egregious earmarks was a $17 million grant Rogers obtained for an “Airport to Nowhere,” a Kentucky airport with “so little traffic that the last commercial airline pulled out in February (2010).”
But the most serious charge against Rogers involves an earmark he obtained that could benefit one of his own family members.
Rogers secured $5 million in the House for conservation groups that work with wild cats, including the Cheetah Conservation Fund, a Namibia-based organization that employs Rogers’ daughter Allison. In fact, Allison Rogers serves as grants administrator. After she joined the organization in 2007, Congressman Rogers began his push for funding. In 2009, with help from Rogers, the bill passed the House by a 2-1 margin. (It has yet to be voted on in the Senate.)
Rep. Hal Rogers (R-KY): On Election Day 2010, voters sent Congress a clear message: No more big spending or corrupt back-room deals! And what did House Republicans decide to do as one of their first moves for the new Tea Party Congress? Appoint Rep. Hal Rogers, also known as the “Prince of Pork,” to chair the powerful House Appropriations Committee.
According to ABC News: “In two years, Rogers pushed through 135 earmarks worth $246 million. He’s brought tens of millions of dollars into his hometown of Somerset, Ky., so much so that the town has been dubbed ‘Mr. Rogers’ neighborhood.’” Among the most egregious earmarks was a $17 million grant Rogers obtained for an “Airport to Nowhere,” a Kentucky airport with “so little traffic that the last commercial airline pulled out in February (2010).”
But the most serious charge against Rogers involves an earmark he obtained that could benefit one of his own family members.
Rogers secured $5 million in the House for conservation groups that work with wild cats, including the Cheetah Conservation Fund, a Namibia-based organization that employs Rogers’ daughter Allison. In fact, Allison Rogers serves as grants administrator. After she joined the organization in 2007, Congressman Rogers began his push for funding. In 2009, with help from Rogers, the bill passed the House by a 2-1 margin. (It has yet to be voted on in the Senate.)
Under the thumb of the 'tea party congress', how much pork has the representative funnelled, since being made chairman of the House Appropriations Committee.
Also, if you would, please let me know how much pork was funnelled into Ma by Teddy Kennedy, and how much pork was shovelled into Harlem by good old CHarlie Rangel...and while we're at it, if we can list ol Charlie's sins that'd be nice too.....
Pretty sensitive about anyone with that good-ole (R) after their name ehh?
The facts of the post speak for themselves. I haven't excused any of those guys you name - corruption is corruption no matter the (R) or (D).
I'd say those guys you named have already taken their licks here from what I've read on this forum. I don't think past actions, left or right, are an excuse for what was consciously done with this appointment.
The issue this conservative group raises is that if the Tea Party is serious about their campaign promises - and they are not simply going to be another round of status-quo big spending - then why did they appoint the "prince of pork" as they call him to CHAIR a key committee on spending?
That's a valid concern that must be addressed. Otherwise, it will be the status-quo and the campaign promises were for naught.
The info. came from this group - and they're not what you'd call a bunch of libs,,,
The issue this conservative group raises is that if the Tea Party is serious about their campaign promises - and they are not simply going to be another round of status-quo big spending - then why did they appoint the "prince of pork" as they call him to CHAIR a key committee on spending?
You realize, don't you, that the "Tea Partiers" are generally republicans, but they are not yet a majority within the membership of the House's Republican Party. The Tea Party Caucus doesn't get to appoint anyone to any seats...
So, why are you calling it the "Tea Party Congress"?
You realize, don't you, that the "Tea Partiers" are generally republicans, but they are not yet a majority within the membership of the House's Republican Party. The Tea Party Caucus doesn't get to appoint anyone to any seats...
So, why are you calling it the "Tea Party Congress"?
I didn't use that phrase.
The republicans that ran made essentially the same promises on spending cuts from what I saw/heard/read, so 6 in one , half-dozen in another.
The reps in power want a "pork prince" to chair the committee then?
Just as incriminating. A problem for whomever appointed him, and his party, why? Cause of course that is exactly what they said the dems were guilty of as a premise for booting them out.
But, of course, I suspect you knew that was the point being made in the post all along ehh,,, or at least you guessed so. If not, I've cleared it up now.
I didn't use that phrase. Duh....2nd sentence in your opening....
The republicans that ran made essentially the same promises on spending cuts from what I saw/heard/read, so 6 in one , half-dozen in another. what the heck does that mean ?
The reps in power want a "pork prince" to chair the committee then? you have the nerve to talk about a pork prince, when the democrat congress attached NINE THOUSAND earmarks to the 1st stumulus bill totalling over 5 billion dollars You have no creditbility here after THAT one...no mojo at all...
Just as incriminating. A problem for whomever appointed him, and his party, why? Cause of course that is exactly what they said the dems were guilty of as a premise for booting them out. again....what does this mean ? What is just as incriminating as what ? What is a problem for who ? The dem congress is guilty of bankrupting the country....that's a fact....I don't know what all else you're attempting to say here....
But, of course, I suspect you knew that was the point being made in the post all along ehh,,, or at least you guessed so. If not, I've cleared it up now.
Mincing the words doesn't really help here.
Mincing words....cripes....you sliced and diced 'em here....I can't understand half of what you are attempting to say here....other than it appears you're attempting to say republicans are disingenuous in appointing someone to a major committee who has been as successful as Kennedy, Reid, Boxer, and a host of other Democrats in bringing home some 'pork' to his constituents. Like it was said before....you can ride in the bus, you just ain't drivin' anymore. What's your point ? That both parties bring home pork projects ? While it may be 'out of fashion' to do so, but it is part of the jobs of our elected representatives to 'bring home' some of the tax dollars their respective states sent to the federal government. Cripes...it's a simple thing....
Pork is pork whether it is done by Republicans or Democrats. It is a fact that Hal Rogers is an avid poker.
Bergall, i would rather take the word of Judicial Watch. That organization has branded Rogers a corrupt porker. Judicial Watch ranks Rogers right down there with Rangel, Maxine Waters and Barney Frank.
Pork is pork whether it is done by Republicans or Democrats. It is a fact that Hal Rogers is an avid poker.
Bergall, i would rather take the word of Judicial Watch. That organization has branded Rogers a corrupt porker. Judicial Watch ranks Rogers right down there with Rangel, Maxine Waters and Barney Frank.
Well that certainly was a rogue's list of names I'll admit. But unlike Rangel, Rogers has not been indicted and as far as I know, he's not even under investigation to determine IF he did anything wrong... I'm not saying we should ignore past track records, I'm just saying he's no worse than the rest of 'em and now that the power is shifting to the 'right', the squawkers are squawking, and that when silence was the only sound coming from them.
Yep, that's the boiler plate answer we get from lefters and righters. No worse than the rest of them is not good for this country.
That may be the 'pat' answer, but it's pretty disingenuous to condemn one and remain silent on the rest. Keel-haul the bunch or leave 'em alone. Let's not 'cherry pick' as political opportunism presents itself.
Wasting your Tax $$$ on "wild" stuff
