'Prince Of Pork' Funneled $236M To His Nonprofit Groups
The new chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, Rep. Hal Rogers (R-KY), has funneled more than $236 million in federal funds to nonprofit groups he created since 2000, according to a new report by an ethics watchdog group.
Another $227 million in federal loans, grants and contracts went to a group of private firms linked to Rogers and the nonprofit companies, the report by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) found.
"During the past few months, there have been many glowing stories about Rep. Rogers, and how he has supposedly sworn off his porkish ways," CREW Executive Director Melanie Sloan said in a statement.
"CREW's research shows, however, this is not an accurate portrayal of the true Hal Rogers," Sloan said. "In reality, Rep. Rogers has built a fiefdom, where millions in federal funding can continue to be funneled to home state projects each year."
A spokeswoman for Rogers did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Politico received an early copy of the report.
The report finds that Rogers' family members, donors, business associates and former and current aides benefited personally from their relationship with the congressman. One example: his son John worked for a Kentucky company that received a $4 million contract from the Department of Homeland Security in 2004.
CREW's report also included a chart of Rogers' various relationships with the various companies and nonprofits mentioned in the report:
The numbers shocked me, I think because they were coupled with the words " NONPROFIT GROUPS".
This is only 2010. This was since 2000. That's 10 years. Average it out, it's 23.6 MILLION /YEAR.
I know a lot of non-profits that I could help with 23.6 MILLION/YEAR.
But, he's one of these GOP Hypocrites talking about Government Spending....all the while funneling money by the truckload to his cronies back home.
Look at his vote. Oh, I bet he's a devotee of all the right-wing bull on the ' evil' of government spending. He's taken 236 million of Government Monies, but voted to END MEDICARE AND MEDICAID.
The GOP is chock full of nothing but frauds and hypocrites.
START (for Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) was a bilateral treaty between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on the Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms. The treaty was signed on 31 July 1991 and entered into force on 5 December 1994 . The treaty was signed by the United States and the USSR, that barred its signatories from deploying more than 6,000 nuclear warheads atop a total of 1,600 ICBMs, submarine-launched ballistic missiles, and bombers. START negotiated the largest and most complex arms control treaty in history, and its final implementation in late 2001 resulted in the removal of about 80 percent of all strategic nuclear weapons then in existence. Proposed by United States President Ronald Reagan, it was renamed START I after negotiations began on the second START treaty, which became START II.
The START I treaty expired 5 December 2009. On 8 April 2010, the new START treaty was signed in Prague by U.S. President Obama and Russian President Medvedev. It will enter into force after its ratification through the parliaments of both countries.
PROPOSAL The first START proposal was presented by United States President Ronald Reagan in Geneva on 29 June 1982. Reagan proposed a dramatic reduction in strategic forces in two phases, which he referred to as SALT III at the time.[2] The first phase would reduce overall warhead counts on any missile type to 5,000, with an additional limit of 2,500 on ICBMs. Additionally, a total of 850 ICBMs would be allowed, with a limit of 110 "heavy throw" missiles like the SS-18, with additional limits on the total "throw weight" of the missiles as well. The second phase introduced similar limits on heavy bombers and their warheads, and other strategic systems as well.
So, the original START Treaty was presented by GOP Hero Ronald Reagan. Ronald ' He defeated the Commies' Reagan.
The President has negotiated START II, and now it needs ratification by the Senate. The problem with is that all treaties need 2/3 majority in the Senate to be ratified.
Of course, the problem is the GOP. They suddenly have a problem with START II.
WHY?
Because President Obama negotiated it.
If this had been George Bush, and he had negotiated anything with our international allies, the first thing that would have been said about any Democrat who opposed it was how the Democrats were once again ENDANGERING OUR NATIONAL SECURITY. And, how dare they oppose the President. Aren't they REAL Americans?
You know it. I know it.
START II IS about the national security of the United States of America, and these mofos could care less. It's quite obvious that they could care less. How bad is it?
LUGAR: Please do your duty for your country. We do not have verification of the Russian nuclear posture right now. We’re not going to have it until we sign the START treaty. We’re not going to be able to get rid of further missiles and warheads aimed at us. I state it candidly to my colleagues, one of those warheads…could demolish my city of Indianapolis — obliterate it! Now Americans may have forgotten that. I’ve not forgotten it and I think that most people who are concentrating on the START treaty want to move ahead to move down the ladder of the number of weapons aimed at us.
Appearing on Meet The Press, Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-AZ) said that the Senate would not be able to ratify the START treaty during the lame-duck session: "If the leader of the Senate, Senator Reid, were to allow a couple of weeks for full debate and amendment of the resolution of ratification, then theoretically there would be time. But he has made it clear that he has a different agenda in mind. And I, I think clearly they've got to set some priorities here. Are they going to deal with the funding of the government for the remainder of the fiscal year? They've got to do that. Are they going to deal with the issue which is on everybody's mind, that you mentioned earlier, and that is to ensure that we don't have a big tax increase, the largest tax increase in the history of the country. These are higher priority items."
Higher priority than the national security of the United States?
G-T-F-O-H
You have other Republicans calling the Senate out for their insanity.
Former Republican Sen. Warns GOP May ‘Have Gone So Far Overboard That We Are Beyond Redemption’
In an age when far-right tea party activists have taken over the Republican Party and demanded lockstep allegiance, Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN) has been one of the few GOP lawmakers to step out of line. In particular, Lugar, the ranking GOP member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, has blasted his own party for relentlessly blocking ratification of the New START nuclear arms treaty with Russia, calling on his fellow GOP senators to “do your duty for your country” and complete the pact.
Not surprisingly, this insubordination has earned Lugar significant scorn within the Republican base, which now seems to value blind obedience over principled independent decision-making. In a New York Times profile of Lugar published today, former GOP Sen. John Danforth feared that the backlash against Lugar from his own party signals that the GOP has gone “far overboard” with no hope of turning back:
“If Dick Lugar,” said John C. Danforth, a former Republican senator from Missouri, “having served five terms in the U.S. Senate and being the most respected person in the Senate and the leading authority on foreign policy, is seriously challenged by anybody in the Republican Party, we have gone so far overboard that we are beyond redemption.”
Mr. Danforth, who was first elected the same year as Mr. Lugar, added, “I’m glad Lugar’s there and I’m not.”
THIS from the man who brought us Unca Clarence.
Richard Lugar, could in no way, be considered a liberal anything. Hell, he couldn't even be considered a moderate anything. He is a conservative, but the man actually thinks about the national security of this country over getting a defeat of the President.
Imagine that - National Security of America and what's in America's international best interests - EVEN IF IT GIVES PRESIDENT OBAMA A WIN - over being a loyal GOP slop.
A REAL American, would want our country to be safe internationally. Would want this country to be in good standing - around the world.
These people are not Real Americans. They are not Good Americans. And, the left has to stop believing that they have any redeeming qualities. That they are nothing but powerhungry animals who could give a rat's ass if this country goes down the tubes, as long as they are in power and can loot the treasury for their friends. They have had MONTHS to look over this treaty. The only reason why they are objecting is because they don't want the President to get any credit for an International Foreign Policy Success.
PERIOD.
A sum up of the GOP Obstructionists with START II on Olbermann:
