The House Armed Services Committee is committed to transparency and competition. As we enter the early stages of crafting the FY11 defense authorization bill, we will adjust our processes to reflect the earmark changes adopted by this Congress.The question is fairly straight forward. What does Chairman Skelton mean when he says this?
If you are looking for someone to call for a little help, try Ms Lara Battles or Ms Jennifer Kohl, down in DC, at (202) 225-2539. (Initiative is usually rewarded.)
UPDATE:
The HASC has sent out an update to their message, changing from non-profit to for-profit entities. But we still wonder what Chairman Skelton actually meant by his announcement.
The new House intro statement:
Washington, D.C.— Today, House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) released the statement below following the announcement by the House Appropriations Committee that it will not approve requests for earmarks that are directed to for-profit entities:Regards — Cliff
♠ (D-Mo), not that it makes a hill of beans of difference.
1 comment:
Press release from Congressman Paul Hodes(NH-2)
(bold mine)
“Before the Easter recess, I intend to force an up or down vote on whether we should continue the earmark system. I believe that we should end all earmarks -especially with the issue of corruption and pay-to-play hanging over this Congress. And, earmarks are a luxury we can no longer afford. Across this country, middle class families are tightening their belts. Congress should do the same.”
That "cornhusker kickback" may have been the proverbial straw.
Post a Comment