Obama weighs 'name and shame' strategy

[alp227]

It’s extremely common for members of Congress, from both parties, to send letters to executive-branch agencies, seeking funding for one project or another. It’s generally considered a shortcut around earmarks — lawmakers don’t put the requests in the bill, but they press the administration afterwards.

These letters from the Hill are hardly ever seen by the public; they’re generally just considered bureaucratic, behind-the-scenes correspondence. The White House, however, is reportedly weighing a new “name and shame” strategy.

In a move that could escalate hostilities with Congress, President Obama may be planning to use his executive authority to publicize special funding requests that lawmakers make for pet projects.

A memo that the White House has floated on Capitol Hill would require executive branch agencies to make public any letter from a member of Congress seeking special consideration for any project or organization vying for government funding. National Journal obtained a draft copy of the executive memo.

full: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_11/obama_weighs_name_and_shame_st033321.php

and: http://www.nationaljournal.com/whitehouse/name-and-shame-obama-may-go-public-with-lawmakers-funding-requests-20111105

[FSogol]

1. Go for it. Start with Eric Cantor (R-Scum-VA) n/t

[catbyte]

6. Followed close behind by Paul Ryan & Yertle the Turtle McConnell

[meow2u3]

10. With John "Agent Orange" Boehner not so far behind

[CoffeeCat]

19. LOL!

Agent Orange!

That made my day.

Very clever!

And you're a cat person too. You rock!

[liberal N proud]

2. GObama

Call out those hypocrites who while calling for cutting the budget, want special favors.

<snip>
For all the Republican rhetoric about public spending failing to create jobs, these letters from GOP offices invariably argue that money for their preferred projects would boost the economy in their state and/or district. Publicizing the special funding requests would help prove that Republican lawmakers don’t believe their own talking points when it comes to the connection between government investments and jobs.

<snip>

[tblue]

3. Let 'er rip!

I'm game.

[vi5]

4. He should. He won't.

He won't do anything that would have David Brooks or Joe Scarborough "tsk tsk"ing his incivility.

[AtomicKitten]

7. Well, you don't know Obama. In his first campaign in 1996,

he effectively used election rules to knocked his Dem opponents off the ballot and ran unopposed.

Boom.

[vi5]

8. That was against Democrats...

He has no problem attacking or dismissing or playing hardball with Democrats.

He won't do that with Republicans. He's too "bipartisan" for that, and he's too obsessed with the approval of DC's "Miss Manners" gate keepers to do anything so hardball with Republicans.

[AtomicKitten]

9. Pfft. Wait and see, grasshopper.

[Lorien]

16. We've already seen enough

he fights against anyone left of center, and plays softball with anyone on the hard right.

[AtomicKitten]

20. Hyperbole Poetry for the Broadbrush

Appetite

In a house the size of a postage stamp
lived a man as big as a barge.
His mouth could drink the entire river
You could say it was rather large
For dinner he would eat a trillion beans
And a silo full of grain,
Washed it down with a tanker of milk
As if he were a drain.

[Itchinjim]

12. Number nine...number nine...number nine....

[Amonester]

5. Better late than never.

I just hope this is not going to be caved in.

Do-it. Do-it. Do-it.

'bout Time!

k&r

[lunatica]

11. Well that'll be a good way to start government transparency

A good start.

[TheKentuckian]

13. One can only hope

[Rosa Luxemburg]

14. This should be fun!

[Scuba]

15. What's to weigh? Calling out the bad guys is good for democracy....

...don't forget the hedge fund gamblers and health insurance CEO's.

[WI_DEM]

17. Do it! Expose these hypocrites.

[Sheepshank]

18. They are simply getting the transparency they are screaming about n/t