HOW IS THIS SUPPOSED TO STOP THINGS OR HELP???

I guess none of the posters here were listening to his earlier speeches where he said this needs to be done to stop the root cause of the housing crisis again, huh?

So this is nothing new and nothing that needs to be feared.

It is needed so we do not have the same problem again with the greed that happened from deregulation.


Come on folks.

Set the hatred down long enough to see the real picture.

Definition
Typically, "pork" involves funding for government programs whose economic or service benefits are concentrated in a particular area but whose costs are spread among all taxpayers. Public works projects, certain national defense spending projects, and agricultural subsidies are the most commonly cited examples.

Citizens Against Government Waste[6] outlines seven criteria by which spending can be classified as "pork":

Requested by only one chamber of Congress;
Not specifically authorized;
Not competitively awarded;
Not requested by the President;
Greatly exceeds the President’s budget request or the previous year’s funding;
Not the subject of congressional hearings; or
Serves only a local or special interest.


OMB Guidance to Agencies on Definition of Earmarks
OMB defines "earmarks" as "funds provided by the Congress for projects, programs, or grants where the purported congressional direction (whether in statutory text, report language, or other communication) circumvents otherwise applicable merit-based or competitive allocation processes, or specifies the location or recipient, or otherwise curtails the ability of the executive branch to manage its statutory and constitutional responsibilities pertaining to the funds allocation process."

Earmarks vs. Unrequested Funding. At the broadest level, unrequested funding is any additional funding provided by the Congress -- in either bill or report language -- for activities/projects/programs not requested by the Administration. Earmarks are a subset of unrequested funding. The distinction between earmarks and unrequested funding is programmatic control or lack thereof of in the allocation process.
Earmarks and Programmatic "Control." If the congressional direction accompanying a project/program/funding in an appropriations bill or report or other communication purports to affect the ability of the Administration to control critical aspects of the awards process for the project/program/funding, this IS an earmark. Note: The definition of "control critical aspects" includes specification of the location or recipient or otherwise circumventing the merit-based or competitive allocation process and may be program specific. However, if the Congress adds funding and the Administration retains control over the awards process for the project/program/funding, it is NOT an earmark; it is unrequested funding.
Earmarks Include:
Add-ons. If the Administration asks for $100 million for formula grants, for example, and Congress provides $110 million and places restrictions (such as site-specific locations or adds additional project goals) on the additional $10 million, the additional $10 million is counted as an earmark. However, if the additional funding is to speed up the completion of a project with no restrictions this is NOT an earmark.
Carve-outs. If the Administration asks for $100 million and Congress provides $100 million but places restrictions on some portion of the funding, the restricted portion is counted as an earmark.
Funding provisions that do not name a recipient, but are so specific that only one recipient can qualify for funding is counted as an earmark.


What I read on both of these is that the president has almost nothing to do with both earmarks and pork. So why does he catch the blame for them?

Earmarks are provisions appropriated for individual projects and/or districts. Pork is an appropriation brought in for the sole purpose of bringing that money in to fund the district or a project in that district.

They're one and the same. plain and simple. there is that very faint distinction, but if a project has been proposed for a power plant in illinois, i doubt anyone but those in that area are really going to give a s*it about it.

It's pork/earmarks. Face it. He's a politician. Lying is second nature to him. Just like the stimulus bill, just like the appropriations bill. It's never going to stop.

as good as I think this is...what about non-federal couples?

Why do I have to keep bringing this up. Earmarking money is the way they set it up for funds to go to a certain place. Not all earmarks are bad.

Pork on the other hand does seem to be a bad thing and Obama did say something about pork but he cannot say that he will not have earmarks because they are necessary to assign funds to almost all programs.