Ohio Senator Dewines Reply to Putting Extraneous Language onto Bills

[goat1]

I wrote my Senators as soon as I first heard of Frist trying to attach the IG language to unrelated bills and today I finally received a response from one of them. I love how he spins it to talk about how earmarking is important for funding projects without answering my original question of putting in extraneous language that doesnt have to do with funding.


Thank you for contacting me regarding the earmarking process used in
Congressional appropriations. I appreciate knowing your views.

The process of earmarking currently is used as a form of funding projects
or programs supported by a Member of Congress through the annual federal
appropriations process. I view the earmarking process as an opportunity
for Members of Congress to direct funding to organizations that are
contributing to the ongoing welfare of each state and its citizens. In my
role as the first Ohio Senator to sit on the Senate Appropriations
Committee since 1945, I have worked to secure funding through the
earmarking process for many worthwhile organizations and initiatives
throughout Ohio.

I believe reforms in the earmarking process are needed to ensure that
taxpayer dollars are being used wisely and the potential for corruption is
reduced, but do not believe the complete elimination of earmarks is the
solution. Currently in Congress, several different proposals to reform
the earmark process are being discussed. At this time, all reform
proposals are pending further action by the House and the Senate.

Again, thank you for contacting me. If you need additional assistance,
please feel free to contact me anytime.

Very respectfully yours,
MIKE DeWINE
United States Senator

[JoseGonzlez]

lol formletters

[srjunkacct]

Mmm. Pork.

[Zele]

[ QUOTE ]
Mmm. Pork.

[/ QUOTE ]

He seems shockingly open about this.

[CountingMyOuts]

[ QUOTE ]
He seems shockingly open about this.

[/ QUOTE ]

He may as well be open about it because he has nothing to lose. Ohioans are giving him the boot in 5 weeks and I'll be one of them with my boot on his hindquarters.

[satelliter]

please boot that stooge.

[CountingMyOuts]

[ QUOTE ]
please boot that stooge.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can count on it.

[ffredd]

[ QUOTE ]
I wrote my Senators as soon as I first heard of Frist trying to attach the IG language to unrelated bills and today I finally received a response from one of them. I love how he spins it to talk about how earmarking is important for funding projects without answering my original question of putting in extraneous language that doesnt have to do with funding.

[/ QUOTE ]
Am I missing something here? To me it just seems that they have a bunch of different form letters and sent you the wrong one. Earmarking has nothing to do with what you say you asked.

[stormy455]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I wrote my Senators as soon as I first heard of Frist trying to attach the IG language to unrelated bills and today I finally received a response from one of them. I love how he spins it to talk about how earmarking is important for funding projects without answering my original question of putting in extraneous language that doesnt have to do with funding.

[/ QUOTE ]
Am I missing something here? To me it just seems that they have a bunch of different form letters and sent you the wrong one. Earmarking has nothing to do with what you say you asked.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, it does, depending on the actual wording of OP's letter to the Senator. It is my understanding that earmarking is similar to what happened with the UIGEA. Senators add stuff into spending bills that is not subject to an individual vote.

[Jestocost]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I wrote my Senators as soon as I first heard of Frist trying to attach the IG language to unrelated bills and today I finally received a response from one of them. I love how he spins it to talk about how earmarking is important for funding projects without answering my original question of putting in extraneous language that doesnt have to do with funding.

[/ QUOTE ]
Am I missing something here? To me it just seems that they have a bunch of different form letters and sent you the wrong one. Earmarking has nothing to do with what you say you asked.

[/ QUOTE ]

I assume that the technology behind preparing these letters has improved since my days as a legislative correspondent in the Senate (some 20+ years ago), but this was essentially the case when I did it. We had fully packaged responses to the standard/form letter types of inquiries that we received. In addition, there were pre-written individual paragraphs or letter sections that addressed specific issues, which could be combined as appropriate to form an appropriate response to a given letter. Sometimes you had to actually write a custom letter, but not very often.

It's pretty clear to me that the legislative correspondent here either skimmed the OP's letter too quickly to understand the actual question or just doesn't get the distinction. Earmarks are similar in that they can be random appropriations attached to whatever and they have been at the center of considerable controversy, but they are not close enough to this issue for the letter to serve as an appropriate response.