"Earmark reform will shine a glaring light on the profligate pork barrel projects and the politicians who sponsor them," said Pat Toomey, president of the Club for Growth. What Toomey forgot to mention is that earmark reform not only shines a light on the politicians who dole out pork but on the recipients of multi-million dollar pork projects--including the ones who serve as officers for the Club for Growth.
In August the Club for Growth began running attack ads in Iowa on Gov. Mike Huckabee. It seemed odd that the CFG would bother to spend so much money on a candidate who was so far down in the polls. But as Salon.com found after checking disclosures through the IRS, the ads had been paid for by "a Little Rock neighbor and political rival of Huckabee's named Jackson T. "Steve" Stephens Jr." Not only did Stephens provide the $125,000 to Club for Growth.net, he serves as the chairman, along with his Arkansas business associate, Gary Faulkner.
When he's not paying for attack ads, Stephens serves as president of a private manufacturing company ExOxEmis Inc. According to OpenSecrets.org, Exoxemis Inc. paid a lobbying firm $600,000 over the past four years to get the company earmarks worth at least $3,342,000.
In 2005, ExOxEmis received $1,342,000 for a research and development project. The same project received even more funding in the latest Defense appropriations bill. Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson even bragged about getting the $2 million earmark in a Sep. 12, 2007 press release (On the CFG's RePORK Card, Nelson gets a rating of 7%. This particular earmark, of course, was not included in the grading.)
No doubt, the project is a worthy venture. But the question is whether federal tax dollars should be used to support the R&D budget of a multi-millionaire's private company. Shouldn't The Club for Growth--which is a part of Porkbusters--be the first to condemn such earmarks? Is Toomey afraid to bite the hand that feeds him--even if that same hand is receiving pork handouts from the government?
While it's an admittedly minor issue, it does raise concerns about the credibility of CFG. It's disgraceful enough that they'd let Stephens use the CFG as his personal vendetta machine. But if Toomey is willing to overlook pork when it goes to his own people, how serious can he be about earmark reform?
(HT: Arkansas Blog for tipping me off to the ExOxEmis earmark.)
http://www.evangelicaloutpost.com/mt/mt-trackback.cgi/4030
1
Joe wrote: "(On the CFG's RePORK Card, Nelson gets a rating of 7%. This particular earmark, of course, was not included in the grading.)"
Joe, the Club for Growth issued its first RePORK card in 2006, based on 19 anti-pork amendments offered by Rep. Jeff Flake; the earmark to which you refer was in 2005. And even if they'd had a RePORK card in 2005, the earmark wouldn't have been on the RePORK card unless someone like Jeff Flake or Tom Coburn had proposed an amendment to bar funding for it, unlikely considering that it was for a "Surgical Wound Disinfection and Biological Agents Decontamination Project" for the DOD.
posted on 11.12.2007 9:36 AM2
I think this is the video that really converted me to Huckabee! This is a must-see for every Huckabee supporter: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DaJW7nXw30A
posted on 11.12.2007 12:15 PM3
Very interesting. I knew there must be some reason that the CFG had targeted Huckabee. Three cheers for the IRS! Do you still want to abolish it?
posted on 11.12.2007 12:55 PM4
Joe,
Thanks for that information! Now that I know the CFG are hypocrites, everything they say about Huckabee must not be true.
Right?
posted on 11.12.2007 8:25 PM5
This is getting gooooood.
Linked to you here....
Club for Growth: Membership has its priveleges
posted on 11.13.2007 1:05 AM6
Baggi, it might be wise not to assume what is not only not implied but actually explicitly denied. Just for future reference.
posted on 11.13.2007 2:47 PM7
Does anyone have information on Jackson Stephens connection with PROMIS software, Hillary Clinton, donations, and CFG????
posted on 01.27.2008 2:34 PM8
Like it or not, reps who apply for and get earmarks are STEALING from WE,THE PEOPLE. I have never had a rep ask me for the money they STEAL, they have never told how much or when they are going to take it or to whom they are going to deliver it to. I don't dispute that some reasons are valid but the underlying and most important point to remember is that they are STEALING if they don't ask each of us for the money. I should be able to steal from a bank if I send the money stolen to Iraq veterans hospital. Nope, I would go to jail-which would be right and proper.
posted on 01.30.2008 6:09 PMReps who take earmark money should be sent to JAIL!!!! Any way you cut it, fellows, you ARE STEALING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
On top of all that it is PREMEDITATED.
9
Like it or not, reps who apply for and get earmarks are STEALING from WE,THE PEOPLE. I have never had a rep ask me for the money they STEAL, they have never told how much or when they are going to take it or to whom they are going to deliver it to. I don't dispute that some reasons are valid but the underlying and most important point to remember is that they are STEALING if they don't ask each of us for the money. I should be able to steal from a bank if I send the money stolen to Iraq veterans hospital. Nope, I would go to jail-which would be right and proper.
posted on 01.30.2008 6:09 PMReps who take earmark money should be sent to JAIL!!!! Any way you cut it, fellows, you ARE STEALING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
On top of all that it is PREMEDITATED.