LINCOLN, Neb. – Vic Covalt, Nebraska Democratic Party Chairman, released the following statement after Republican Chairman Marc Fahleson made comments in reference to Senator Ben Nelson’s position regarding President Obama’s spending bill.

“Republican Party Chairman Marc Fahleson’s errant firing of the gun at Senator Nelson this last week comes as no surprise, but he should have checked the ammo at the door. The hierarchy of the Nebraska Republican Party is openly complaining about the “pork” in a recent budget bill. What he failed to mention is that each of the four members of Nebraska’s Republican delegation had earmarks attached to the spending bill. Trying to have your cake, or should I say “pork”, and it eat it too is a famed way of looking disingenuous.

“Chairman Fahleson is trying to stake a claim on fiscal discipline. The hierarchy of the Republican Party threw this out the window over the previous eight years and squandered the budget surplus left to them. When given the chance to enact pay-as-you-go legislation, the Republican hierarchy turned their head, scoffed and let it expire.

“The hierarchy of the Republican Party has complained about the stimulus bill, but also fails to mention the broad support for getting our economy working again by traditionally Republican support groups. The US Chamber of Commerce, The National Association of Manufacturers and the Omaha Chamber of Commerce amongst others all supported the stimulus package. The hierarchy of the Republican Party took a walk on working in a bi-partisan fashion on that one too and also fails to mention that Governor Dave Heineman is taking full advantage of the spending provisions and gobbling up the so called “pork” faster than feeding time at a trough.

“It is time for the hierarchy of the Nebraska Republican Party to stand up and face the music. Our economy is hurting; people are looking for leadership and an end to politics as usual. They could be part of the solution and not contribute to the problem. My advice is to quit complaining, roll up your sleeves and try to help.”

Vic Covalt, State Chair

NDP

– by Lisa Olivares | Send this to a friend

1. Nebraska’s three House members, all Republicans, opposed the spending bill when it passed in the House.
   
   Two of them, Adrian Smith and Lee Terry, cited the many earmarks in the bill, though each has his name on more than $1 million in earmarks.
   
   Harkin and Nelson took shots at legislators who criticize earmarks, then come asking for their own.
   
   Said Nelson: “It sort of reminds me of the guy walking by the dessert table, bragging about his figure, his weight, knowing he’s got three cookies in his pocket to eat later.”
   
   The spending bill was written mostly over the course of last year, before projected deficits quadrupled and the passage of Obama’s economic stimulus.
   
   And though Obama had campaigned last year on forcing Congress to curb its earmarks, the bill contains 7,991 pet projects totaling $5.5 billion, according to calculations by the GOP staff of the House Appropriations Committee.
   
   U.S. Rep. Steve King, a Republican who represents western Iowa’s 5th District, has criticized the “irresponsible spending” in the bill, which includes $5.6 million of his own earmarks.
   
   King said it’s absurd to suggest that receiving even one dollar of meritorious spending obligates a congressman to support all kinds of other wasteful projects.
   
   “I will be a fighter for responsible spending and keep that budget as low as I can, but once it’s passed, I’m going to fight like crazy to get all the resources I can back to the district,” King said.
   
   Rep. Jeff Fortenberry, R-Neb., voted against the bill. Fortenberry, with about $10 million in earmarks, said he makes a distinction between earmarks and earmark abuse and has offered legislation to increase accountability in the system.
   
   Smith, who represents central and western Nebraska’s 3rd District, said his earmarks were “funding of last resort” for transportation projects. He rejected the idea that it’s hypocritical to oppose the legislation while simultaneously requesting a small number of earmarks.
   
   Terry, who said he has long opposed omnibus spending bills, said the earmark process puts lawmakers in a difficult spot. He said constituents come to town demanding earmarks. Terry said that he submits only a fraction of the many requests he receives and that the ones he supports have some national connection.
   
   For example, Terry requested funding for sewer separation projects in Omaha. He said that was appropriate because the city is seeking to bring its sewers into compliance with unfunded federal mandates.
   — Football Madman    Mar 10, 02:25 PM CST #