|
The bitten says he will bite back |
|
By Jackie Kucinich
|
|
Posted: 07/19/07 07:58 PM [ET] |
The debate over appropriations spending is pitting Republican against Republican, as Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska) yesterday declared, “Those who bite me will be bitten back,” issuing an unsubtle threat to Rep. Scott Garrett (R-N.J.) for attempting to cut programs in Alaska.
Young’s outburst came in response to an amendment offered by Garrett that would cut millions in approprations for “Strengthening Alaskan Native and Native Hawaiian-Serving Institutions.” The Garrett amendment, which failed by a
large margin, only cut funds to Alaska.
The Alaska lawmaker took to the floor and began a fiery rebuke of Garrett’s provision.
“This is supposed to be a house of honor; you didn’t tell me you were going to offer this amendment,” Young said. “We are a new state. I have poverties that you don’t even think of and yet you say you want my money — my money, for my students that need to be educated — to go to New Jersey. This is a sad day for this House.”
Young called New Jersey “a state that doesn’t have the greatest reputation” and accused Garrett of trying to take funding from needy children, yet stopped short of referring to him by name.
“I have been able to represent my state better than New Jersey. I suggest New Jersey ought to elect themselves some new congressmen. I suggest [that constituents elect members] that can do the job,” Young said, as laughter echoed through the chamber. “I truly believe that if they can’t do the job, they should elect somebody new.”
Garrett retorted that part of the problem with Congress is that some members view appropriations as personal bank accounts. He also took a shot at the “Bridge to Nowhere,” a $200 million earmark that Young introduced in the House last year that would have benefited 80 people on a remote island.
“When the gentleman from Alaska comes forward and says, ‘It’s my money,’ well, maybe that’s why in some respects when there are projects that are appropriated, such as bridges to nowhere and the like, the American public says, ‘That’s our dollars going to Washington,’” Garrett said.
After Garrett failed to convince the House’s presiding member to advise Young to abide by the rules of decorum, Young suggested he had not been implicitly referring to Garrett in his remarks about New Jersey.
“I’m going to fight for my state and I’m going to fight for my state every time,” Young said. “I don’t know what the gentleman is talking about, I just said that they [New Jersey citizens] weren’t well represented.”
Speaking to The Hill following the spat, Garrett said the funds he wished to cut would not have gravely affected the programs in Alaska since they are accounted for elsewhere in the budget.
When asked whether he thought Young should apologize for his remarks, Garrett said it was the Alaskan’s decision.
“He has been here long enough to know the right thing to do,” Garrett said.
On the floor, Republican Study Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas) and member Virginia Foxx (N.C.) sprang to Garrett’s defense, praising him for attempting to cut spending.
“Rarely have I seen a member embody the principle, courage and caring for the people of his state as admirably as Scott Garrett,” Hensarling said in an e-mail. “There is no more obvious indicator of a weak argument than one member personally denouncing another — or the people of his state — during a substantive policy discussion on the floor of the House of Representatives.
“In addition, any member of Congress who confuses taxpayer money with their own has clearly spent too much time in Washington,” he added.
In statement, Young criticized Garrett’s amendment, calling it “a biased, uninformed and senseless amendment” to the Labor, Health and Human Services and Education appropriations bill.” A spokeswoman for Young indicated it was unlikely he would apologize to Garrett for the statements on the floor.
Young has come under fire following reports that he requested questionable earmarks in another member’s Florida district and that he took illegal campaign donations from the Pacific Seafood Processing Association. He spent nearly $300,000 on legal fees in the second quarter of 2007.
Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz), who frequently introduces amendments to cut earmarks, described the exchange between Young and Garrett as “entertaining.”
“It says a lot about how some members have begun to think of [appropriations] as an entitlement,” he said. “It shows how out of control this process is.”
A GOP aide quipped, “I’m no boy-genius, but I’m pretty sure that Don Young’s non-endorsement will do far more for Congressman Garrett’s reelection than his endorsement.”
|
