President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) J. Sonnenberg

(R) Ted Harvey

20%↑

15%↑

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

(R) Doug Bruce

20%

20%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

40%↑

20%↑

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
December 06, 2010 09:49 PM UTC

Lamborn Hates Earmarks (Except When He Doesn't)

  • 14 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

As The Colorado Independent reports, Republican Rep. Doug Lamborn is claiming to have seen the light on earmarks:

Colorado Republican Congressman Doug Lamborn has come out strong this year against earmarks. He joined the Tea Party caucus dedicated to fighting government waste and he enthusiastically signed onto the GOP House pledge against earmarking, or the practice of tacking on projects to legislation in order to deliver tax money to favored constituencies and causes. Lamborn wrote an editorial for his hometown Colorado Springs Gazette against earmarks last Saturday, a feel good Thanksgiving treat for the Gazette’s conservative readers.

He left out the fact that he has been earmark crazy since he arrived in Washington in 2007.

According to records posted at Citizens for Government Waste’s “Pig Book” website, Lamborn has been a major dealer in pork. He voted for more than tens of millions in earmarks, mostly for defense projects, one of which has become infamous in anti-big government crowds as a particularly egregious waste of taxpayer money.[Pols emphasis]

Whether it’s happening locally or with Republican members of Congress, this “Tea Party” rhetoric is increasingly at odds with, well, reality when it comes to the actions of Republicans who espouse “Tea Party” beliefs. We’ve said it before, and we’ll keep saying it: This isn’t going to turn out well for Republicans in 2012 and beyond as it becomes more and more obvious to the “Tea Party” supporters that Republicans aren’t actually paying attention to them.  

Comments

14 thoughts on “Lamborn Hates Earmarks (Except When He Doesn’t)

  1. The republicans have had a spend but don’t tax philosophy for years.  Maybe the Tea Party can change that.  For the first time in awhile, there is some real conversation around spending. However, until the GOP begins to realize that spending cuts are only part of the solution, and that the last thing we need now is tax cuts, we will have more and more of the same.  

    I hope Doug sees the light on this.  My guess is his earmarking will lie-low for a few months, and then return with a vengance.  

    1. Just like with FASTER, and on a federal scale, repeal of health care reform. Republicans made a lot of promises to the “Tea Party” that are going to be tough to hold onto post-election.

  2. If the Republicans end up being more of the same, and they still have the Tea Partiers’ support, then we’ll know what the Tea Party was about all along:

    Starts with “R.” Ends with “ACISM.”

    1. is something other than than a manufactured echo chamber for Republican talking heads . . .

      (There is no way that the Republicans could do anything that would cause general tea party dissatisfaction.  To presume so gives the ‘baggers far, far too much credit for independent thinking.)

      Next, let’s pretend that a new technology for burning unicorn farts will meet all of our future energy needs . . .

      The Bronco’s are undefeated? . . .  

  3. That beings said, however, he has been (with the exception of Defense projects – more on that in a second) consistent on NOT supporting Earmarks for his Congressional District.  Just ask Colorado Springs Utilities, The Colorado Springs City Council, or the El Paso County Commissioners how frustrating it has been to get him to support some Federal dollars in the Pikes Peak region, only to have him turn a deaf ear.

    He is, to his credit, a staunch supporter of the Nation’s military and he has been supportive of the Senior military leadership in Colorado Springs as they request additional dollars.

    I’m curious: which project is being referred to as “particularly egregious waste of taxpayer money”?

    1. and we want small government, we want the federal government to quit spending money and balance the budget. But, by God, better give us those military dollars right here in El Paso County because…….well, just because we want to do our part for our country, you see…yeah, that’s it. It’s our sacrifice for our country…

      How we have Hickenlooper wanting to help with that “sacrifice” by pushing for increasing military spending in Colorado. As I commented when his transition team held a meeting in Colorado Springs, it seems to me that making Colorado more dependent on the military at a time of pushes for federal budget cuts has a downside.

      1. Every one tut tuts about the deficit continuing to grow – except jpsandcl – but no one means to really cut spending that impacts them.

        Two years ago when the CPI formula said there was no COLA for OASI and other federal beneficiaries people went nuts about no COLA.  It happened again last year.  It will happen again next year.

        Let’s get serious about our debt means let’s have someone not me get serious about our debt.  Raise taxes? Ok, but for the other guy.  Cut spending? Sure, but not in my neighborhood.

        These aren’t new problems. I’m not for one second thinking they are original observations on my part.  Hence my campaign platform.

          1. We can cut taxes to pay off our future debt. Well not “we” as in us, “we” as i our kids and grand kids.

            Never put off until tomorrow what you can put off until the day after tomorrow. ~ M. Twain

              1. It never makes sense to put off until tomorrow what can be put off until the day after that. Or next year. Or next generation. Or the one after that.

  4. .

    Congressman Doug Lamborn talked the talk when it came to stopping earmarks.

    But he made himself a protege of Jack Murtha, rather than actually walking the walk.

    Lamborn sponsored or supported earmarks for a couple of Murtha’s bogus “Intelligence” contractors in Johnstown, PA.  He rationalized them as being for “defense.”  In fact, those companies were shell corporations that didn’t do any real work for the Government, Intel or otherwise, which was not unheard of for companies that Murtha took under his wing.    

    I don’t recall any of the names of who got Doug’s earmarks, but MZM’s story involving Duke Cunningham is typical: http://www.sourcewatch.org/ind

    Admittedly, a couple of his earmarks were for El Paso County firms that do real Defense-related work.

    .

     

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

150 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!