Thank you to those who have taken the time to read my Blog series "The Audacity of Lies." This final installment details the broken promises of the Democrat party to bring bipartisanship, civility and fiscal responsibility to the Congress.

Democrats promised voters "Change We Can Believe In" during the 2006 elections and Obama has promised it during current Presidential campaign, after reading all of the Democrats Broken Promises researched and documented in the last five issues of www.barnhartblog.com I don't buy it. All Americans did in the last Congressional election cycle was exchange one group of ineffective legislators for another.

Keep in mind, I do not hold Republicans blameless, if they had stuck to their guns and never over spent like liberal Democrats have they would still be in control in Washington. Republicans made a key mistake, when they had power, they stopped wielding it responsibly for the benefit of the American people. Republicans failure to reduce spending and corruption resulted in wimpy, liberal, activist, alarmist Democrats taking control again and now we are faced with an even less effective government than before.

Promise: “Democrats offer a New Direction which includes fiscal responsibility.” – Democrat Caucus Chairman James Clyburn, Press Release, October 10, 2006

“We will work together to lead the House of Representatives with a commitment to integrity, to civility, and to fiscal responsibility.” – Speaker-Elect Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Press Release, November 16, 2006 

“It is imperative to the future of our nation that we come together – Democrats and Republicans – and restore fiscal responsibility.” – Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD), Press Release, January 23, 2007

Broken Promise: “[Now-Democratic Whip James Clyburn (D-SC)] also said he loves appearing in the [Citizens Against Government Waste] Pig Book. ‘I want to be there as often as I possibly can for as much money as I possibly can,’ he said.” – “Clyburn Defends Budget Earmarks,” The Post and Courier (Charleston, SC), February 21, 2007

“Democrats resorted to begging, threatening and, worst of all; bribing members for their votes with $21 billion in pork-barrel projects…Loading a bill that’s supposed to keep our soldiers in bullets, boots, and beans with pork-barrel bribes for congressional colleagues must be a low point in the history of the U.S. Congress. This destroys any pretense Democrats have to being a party of fiscal responsibility and good government.” – “Buying Votes; Military Funding Bill a Stain on Congress,” The Gazette Editorial (Colorado Springs, CO), March 27, 2007

“It’s hard to say which is worse: [Democratic] leaders offering peanuts for a vote of this magnitude, or members allowing their votes to be bought for peanuts.” – “Pork Has No Place in ‘Emergency’ War Bill,” USA Today Editorial, March 22, 2007

Barnhart Blog Observation: Barack Obama was able to obtain a $15 million dollar pork barrel earmark for his now former church, Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, Illinois. Not long afterwards his friend, mentor and minister of 20 years was able to purchase a $1.6 million dollar home in a very exclusive neighborhood and also opened a $10 Million dollar line of credit for undisclosed reasons.

Promise: Then-Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) promised, in response to a reporter’s question, that House Democrats would not raise taxes on middle-class families.

Broken Promise: “Democrats also put their stamp on managing the country’s finances with [a budget] effectively resulting in the largest tax increase in history.” – “Report Card; Sound, Fury Outweigh Substance So Far,” The Oklahoman Editorial, April 2, 2007.

Note: The Democrats’ budget includes a tax hike of at least $217 billion by fiscal year 2012, and includes a tax hike “trigger” that would impose the marriage penalty and cut the child tax credit in half, tax hikes that would have a direct impact on middle-class families.

Promise: “In an Oct. 5 speech at Georgetown University, House Minority Leader Pelosi pledged to make the child tax credit more generous for lower-income families…” – “Taxes – Democrats Would Pare the List of Potential Tax Changes,” Congress Daily PM, October 19, 2006

Broken Promise: “The Senate budget resolution (S Con Res 21) included an amendment by Finance Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., that proposes using a $132 billion projected fiscal 2012 surplus to pay for extending the tax cuts, such as those affecting married couples, the child tax credit and estate tax changes. The House version (H Con Res 99) does not make room for those tax provisions which expire in 2010.” – “Tax-Cut Proposal Rides With House-Adopted Fiscal 2008 Budget Resolution,” Congressional Quarterly, May 8, 2007.

The Washington Post also reported earlier this year that “[While House Democrats say they want to preserve key parts of Bush's signature tax cuts, they project a surplus in 2012 only by assuming that all of the cuts expire on schedule in 2010.” – “Budget Plan Wipes Out Deficit But Leaves $50 Billion Dilemma,” Washington Post, March 29, 2007

Promise: “There are no tax increases in this [budget].” – Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD), House Floor Remarks, March 29, 2007 

Broken Promise: “But both the House and Senate [Democratic] budgets implicitly require tax increases in the years ahead. Neither offers any guidance about where the needed extra revenue would come from.” – “House Budget Is Clear on Spending, Vague on Revenue,” New York Times, March 30, 2007

Promise: “The Wyden-Emanuel tax reform plan… eliminates the Alternative Minimum Tax...” –The Plan, Rahm Emanuel & Bruce Reed, Page 138

Broken Promise: “House Ways and Means Chairman Charles Rangel (D., N.Y.) is believed to be considering a permanent exemption for households below a given income level, rather than repealing the AMT altogether, as some lawmakers have proposed.” –“Alternative Minimum Tax; Rein It In,” Philadelphia Inquirer, April 16, 2007.

Barnhart Blog Observation: More than a year after taking power in Congress, Democrats have yet to move legislation of any kind to repeal or reform the Alternative Minimum Tax, a tax Democrats created and Barack Obama has no plans to get rid of it.

Promise: “Democratic leaders this week vowed to make the alternative minimum tax a centerpiece of next year’s budget debate...” –“Alternative Minimum Tax Targeted,” Washington Post, November 11, 2006

Broken Promise: “Democratic leaders have made overhauling the AMT a top priority, but they have yet to lay out a plan …” – “Budget Plan Wipes Out Deficit But Leaves $50 Billion Dilemma,” Washington Post, March 29, 2007

Promise: “This summer, Office of Management and Budget Director Rob Portman said the administration would return to entitlements and taxes in earnest following the elections. Senior Democrats on the House & Senate budget committees, Sen. Kent Conrad (N.D.) and Rep. John Spratt (S.C.), responded by saying Congress, not the administration, must drive those efforts.” – “Bush, Democrats Face Legislative Opportunities and Obstacles,” The Hill, November 9, 2006

Broken Promise: “But the [Democratic budget] plan puts off tough and divisive decisions … [Democrats] did not include proposals to control the growth of entitlement programs that are projected to swamp the rest of the budget in coming decades as the baby-boom generation retires.” – “House Democrats Narrowly Pass Budget Test,” Congressional Quarterly, March 29, 2007

“[The Democratic budget] does nothing to curtail runaway entitlement spending.” – “Prepare for Fiscal Irresponsibility,” Tallahassee Democrat Editorial, April 16, 2007 

“Ignoring experts’ repeated warnings about the unsustainable rate of entitlement spending, the [Democrats’ budget] does nothing, and puts off any major reform for at least 5 years. . .The only “savings” under the expedited procedure of budget reconciliation are a meager $750 million – out of a total of roughly $8.5 trillion in mandatory spending over the next 5 years. The ‘savings’ are really just a fig leaf providing filibuster protection to expand big-government spending by as much as $22 billion. This is not reform, and it does nothing to address the massive entitlement problem.” – House Budget Committee Republican staff, Spring 2007

Promise: “We do need to come together on a bipartisan basis on entitlements.” – Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-TX), House Budget Committee Member; House Floor Remarks, March 28, 2007

Broken Promise: House Democratic leaders have been silent on H.R. 473, legislation introduced by Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA) that would establish a bipartisan commission to develop legislation designed to reform tax policy and entitlement benefit programs and ensure a sound fiscal future for the United States.

Promise: “Democrats are committed to fiscal responsibility through pay-as-you-go budgets, so that our children and grandchildren are not saddled with mountains of debt.” – Website of Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA)

Broken Promise: “In Washington … congressional leaders have imposed ‘pay-as-you-go’ budget rules that exclude the existing entitlement programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, which dominate federal spending. So ‘paygo’ is really just political cover for new taxes to support new spending.” – “Killing the Goose,” San Diego Union Tribune Editorial, April 16, 2007

Promise: “The new Democratic-led House takes America in a new direction-a fiscally responsible budget with the right priorities. Budget Committee Chairman John Spratt is a master of the budget, and he and his team have done an outstanding job reflecting the right American priorities and values.” – Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Press Release, March 21, 2007

Broken Promise: American families don’t have the option of using gimmicks to put their family budgets in order. But such rules weren’t applied by House Democrats in crafting their budget, which is loaded with trickery that hardly reflects “American priorities and values.” “The House and Senate versions of the budget depend on ‘reserve funds’ to pay for additional spending…There’s only one catch: The reserve funds are empty.” – “Democrats Banking on Empty Reserves,” Los Angeles Times, March 27, 2007

Promise: “Democrats will produce a budget that makes real progress toward balancing the budget, [and] makes wise choices. . .” – Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) Press Release, February 5, 2007

Broken Promise: “Before leaving town for spring break, [Democrats] passed a budget resolution that stands as a model of fiscal irresponsibility. How bad is the House budget? For starters it would surpass this year’s record-breaking spending level by 9 percent – three times the expected rate of inflation.” – “Prepare for Fiscal Irresponsibility,” Tallahassee Democrat Editorial, April 16, 2007.

Note: The House Democratic budget assumes an increase in the national debt of $850 billion. Democrats voted en masse against a GOP substitute budget that achieves balance by 2012 and ends the raid on Social Security without raising taxes.

Promise: “Democrats are committed to ending years of irresponsible budget policies that have produced historic deficits.” – Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) “A New Direction for America,” Page 25

Broken Promise: In six months time, Democrats have authorized $828,330,870,000.00 in new federal spending. – Source: RSC Money Monitor, June 22, 2007 

Promise: Ways & Means Committee Chairman Charlie Rangel (D-CA): “I’m not contemplating any increase in taxes. I’m not assuming they will expire.” – “Republicans Start New Pastime: Reading Dems’ Tea Leaves,” Congress Daily AM, March 1, 2007

Broken Promise: “House Majority Leader Hoyer told reporters Tuesday that the budget plan would not assume all of President Bush’s policies are extended.” – “Republicans Start New Pastime: Reading Dems’ Tea Leaves,” Congress Daily AM, March 1, 2007

Promise: “The House [will] have all 12 annual spending bills passed by the July fourth recess, in order to give the Senate enough time to take them on. . . Given the House Democrats’ goal of having all 12 bills passed by July Fourth, it appears that the Defense appropriations bill will be the last train out of the station.” – “Forget About the Ongoing, Hostile Partisanship Over the $125 Billion Supplemental Iraq War Spending Bill,” Roll Call, May 1, 2007 

Broken Promise: “. . .Democrats [have] scaled back their ambitious goal of passing 11 of the 12 fiscal 2008 spending bills by the July Fourth recess.” – “Earmark Dispute Puts a Dent in Democrats’ Calendar on Spending Bill Work,” Congressional Quarterly, June 15, 2007 

Promise: “Eliminating the capital gains tax on the middle class … will help make sure America is a country where work leads to wealth.” – The Plan, Rahm Emanuel & Bruce Reed, Page 113

Broken Promise: As of June 27, 2007, neither Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) nor any other House Democrat has introduced legislation to eliminate the capital gains tax for middle-class families.

Promise: “We need tax reform that puts a cap on middle-class taxes …” –The Plan, Rahm Emanuel & Bruce Reed, Page 113

Broken Promise: “The [Democrats’ budget], set for a vote today, requires either that millions of middle-class families be hit with higher taxes next spring or that somebody else pay an extra $50 billion.” – “Budget Plan Wipes Out Deficit But Leaves $50 Billion Dilemma,” Washington Post, March 29, 2007.

Note: Democratic leaders have not introduced or passed any type of tax reform legislation.

Promise: “Breaking with many Democrats, Ms. Pelosi also spoke out against earmarking billions of dollars for home-state projects, a practice she calls a ‘monster’ that hurts Congress. ‘I’d get rid of all of them,’ she says. ‘None of them is worth the skepticism, the cynicism the public has . . . and the fiscal irresponsibility of it.’” – “Pelosi Promises Fiscal Restraint If Democrats Win,” Wall Street Journal, July 13, 2006

Broken Promise: “Ranking Democrats vowed in December to put a moratorium on earmarks; instead, a record number infect legislation pending in Congress, with 32,000 requests this year, compared with about 13,000 in 2006 …. Ideally, congressional Democrats would keep their pledge to ban earmarks altogether.” – “Earmark Chicanery,” Press-Enterprise (Riverside, CA) Editorial, June 20, 2007

Broken Promise: “House Speaker Nancy Pelosi slipped in a $25 million provision for San Francisco's waterfront on a $15 billion federal water bill at the last minute. Its pork barrel spending, yes, but more than that, Republicans are crying foul because the federal cash for port improvements and the bill's provision for Pier 35 cruise ship dockage all benefit one area of San Francisco -- one where Pelosi's husband just happens to own real estate about a mile away.” – Investor's Business Daily, May 9, 2007

“In the bill funding EPA and Forest Service projects, Speaker Pelosi obtained $700,000 for a grant for San Francisco for use in the Lower Mission District. . .” – “House panel approves ‘earmarks’ for lawmakers’ home districts, Associated Press, June 22, 2007

“This year, the House approved a $504 billion defense authorization bill. Among the requesters, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has one earmark in the bill, for $10 million for Hunters Point Naval Shipyard, as part of the military construction portion of the defense budget.” – “$8B of Pork: Dems Take 60 Percent,” The Hill, May 22, 2007

Barnhart Blog Observation: Democrats Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and even former Speaker Dennis Hastert were some of the worst offenders in regards to getting hundreds of millions of dollars in earmarked pork passed…by contrast…John McCain requested NONE!

Promise: “Put an end to secret earmarks...” – Letter to Majority Leader Boehner (R-OH) from Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD), Democratic Caucus Chairman James Clyburn (D-SC), and Democratic Caucus Vice-Chairman John Larson (D-CT), February 9, 2006

“Pelosi and Reid are making the loudest calls for an end to basically anonymous earmarks that, late in the process, are quietly attached to legitimate legislation and then approved by legislators who are unaware of the earmarks and their intent.” – “Democrats Must Make Good on their Vows to Ensure Transparency in Earmarks,” Columbus Dispatch Editorial, November 20, 2006

“We will bring transparency and openness to the budget process and to the use of earmarks, and we will give the American people the leadership they deserve.” – Speaker-Elect Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Press Release, December 12, 2006

Broken Promise: “When Democrats took control of Congress four months back, incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., bragged it would take her party less than 100 hours to curb wasteful pork spending by requiring members to attach their names to their ‘earmarks,’ exposing such waste to the harsh light of public scrutiny. She failed to mention this ‘reform’ would remain in effect for little more than 100 days.” – “Democratic Earmark Reforms Lasted 100 Days,” Las Vegas Review Journal Editorial, June 5, 2007

“The new game that House Appropriations Chairman David Obey intends to play with budget earmarks this year is worse than the usual hide-and-seek. He is taking the whole thing underground, as though he is to be trusted as a one-man auditor for congressional pork. If this is to be the new ethic that Democrats promised, voters might want their ballots back.” – “Pet Projects Pushed Out of Public Eye,” St. Petersburg Times Editorial, June 5, 2007

Barnhart Blog Observation: John McCain has promised that as President he will indeed identify every congressional leader who requests pork barrel spending projects be inserted in to legislation and he will not sign it. If McCain wins, the voter MUST hold him to that promise.

Promise: “Another key Democratic reform requires House members seeking earmarks to certify that neither they nor their spouses have any financial interest in the project.” – “In the Democratic Congress, Pork Still Gets Served,” Washington Post, May 24, 2007

Broken Promise: “[Pelosi] requested $25 million for a project to improve the waterfront in her home district of San Francisco. Her request did not note that her family owns interests in four buildings near the proposed Pier 35 project.” – “In the Democratic Congress, Pork Still Gets Served,” Washington Post, May 24, 2007

Promise: “I think, first of all, with any bill, any provision, whether it is an earmark or not, there should be transparency. So that’s what we have said – and I hope you would agree – that before Members vote on a bill there should be appropriate time for people to be able to read it, that it would be a matter of public record, and if there is an earmark that can stand the scrutiny, then that transparency will give the opportunity for it to be there.” – Then-Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Press Conference, March 16, 2006

Broken Promise: “Rather than including specific pet projects, grants and contract in legislation as it is being written, Democrats are following an order by House Appropriations Committee Chairman to keep the bills free of such earmarks until it is too late for critics to effectively challenge them. – “House Democrats Sidestep Their Own Rule to Shield Lawmakers’ Pet Projects from Scrutiny,” Associated Press, June 3, 2007

Promise: “‘This is an earmark-free bill,’ says Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D) of Illinois, who chairs the Democratic Caucus.” – “The House and Senate Struck a Deal on Spending Bills Wednesday in a First Test of Reining in Deficits,” The Christian Science Monitor, February 2, 2007 

Broken Promise: Emanuel and other Democratic leaders brought a massive spending bill (“continuing resolution”) to the floor during the opening weeks of the 110th Congress, and claimed it was earmark-free -- but the bill actually contained hundreds of millions of dollars worth of hidden earmarks. “. . . [The Democrats’] claim of ‘earmark’ purity doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. …The ‘no earmarks’ loophole was big enough to allow a convoy of earmarks into the final bill, including $185 million for agriculture research projects and $50 million to build an experimental rain forest in Iowa.” – “Democrats’ No Earmark Pledge ‘Doesn’t Stand Up to Scrutiny,’” Opinion Journal’s Political Diary, February 2, 2007

Barnhart Blog Observation: Please explain to me why we needed $50 million dollars spent to make a replica rain forest in Iowa when we could simply pay to send researches to Brazil? Absolutely Stupid!

Promise: “You can’t just have earmarks viewed on the appropriations bill unless you take up earmarks in tax bills and earmarks in authorization bills… But if you are going to have earmarks and you are going to have transparency, you have to do it in the appropriations bill and in the tax bill and in the authorization bill. I would put it in writing.” – Then-Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Press Conference, September 7, 2006

Broken Promise: “Republican leaders noted the deal only covers appropriations bills and pledged to continue to fight for more transparency in the authorization process. Minority Whip Blunt said there was absolutely no reason not to extend the proposal to authorization and tax bills.” – “House Dems, GOP Still Struggling to Cement Earmark Deal,” Congress Daily PM, June 14, 2007

Promise: “[W]e will help bring back fiscal responsibility by holding members accountable for their earmarks …” – Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD), Press Release, January 3, 2007

Broken Promise: “[We were unable to vet properly and certify properly the 32,000 requests. But we had to move ahead with the appropriations bill.” – Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD), Interview on CNN’s American Morning, June 13, 2007.

Note: Instead of holding members accountable for their earmarks, House Democratic leaders attempted to move appropriations bills that included slush funds for secret earmarks – earmarks that would be “airdropped” into House-Senate appropriations conference reports at the last minute, eliminating virtually all member accountability for those earmarks.

Barnhart Blog Observation: This kind of bull crap coming out of congress no matter which party it comes from makes me sick. When the public is either never told about it by the news media or they prefer to ignore it while they report on how many times Lindsey Lohan went to rehab or Britney Spears  was seen not wearing panties, I just want to beat most reporters with a lead pipe.  They should be fired and run out of town on a rail while being tarred and feathered.

Promise: “A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner who requests a congressional earmark, a limited tax benefit, or a limited tariff benefit in any bill or joint resolution (or an accompanying report) or in any conference report on a bill or joint resolution (or an accompanying joint statement of managers) shall provide a written statement to the chairman and ranking minority member of the committee of jurisdiction...” – Democrats’ House Rules Package, Clause 17 of Rule 23 

Broken Promise: “Murtha addressed the letter only to Intelligence Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes (D-TX), not Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-MI), the panel’s ranking member. Hoekstra has said he was not given a copy – an apparent violation of House rules. All earmarks must be disclosed in writing to both the chairman and ranking member.” – “Murtha Sent Earmark Letter Five Weeks After Deadline,” The Hill, May 22, 2007

Barnhart Blog Observation:  John Murtha was obviously trying to avoid having his earmark requests detected at a time when the news media was focused on him because he was constantly bad mouthing the President for the war in Iraq.  John Murtha like Dennis Hastert is just another slimy politician.

Promise: “The package produced by Obey, Barney Frank (D-MA), David Price (D-NC), and Tom Allen (D-ME)…is designed to…outlaw the use of earmarks to buy votes...” – Press Release from the Kansas Democratic Party, January 10, 2006

Broken Promise: On NBC’s “Meet the Press”, host Tim Russert asked several questions of Ways & Means Committee Chairman Charlie Rangel (D-NY) on Democratic leaders buying votes to win passage of their “slow-bleed” scheme:

RUSSERT: “But in that bill was $20 billion of so-called pork, money for cricket infestation, tours of the Capitol, security at the National Convention, peanut crops. Why would the Democrats put that kind of money in such a serious bill?”

RANGEL: “Because they needed the votes. That bill, we lost so many Democrats, one, because people thought we went too far and others because we didn’t go far enough. And so a lot of things had to go into a bill that certainly those of us who respect great legislation did not want in there.” – NBC’s Meet the Press, April 1, 2007

Barnhart Blog Observation: Sorry Charlie…NO they didn’t, the slimiest of Washington Democrats used the bill to sneak in earmarks so they could pork Americans one last time before they had to disclose all manner of pork barrel spending. Ever wonder why your pucker factor starts to increase when Democrats like Charlie Rangel start to speak…now you know.

Promise: “[Democrats] are committed to auditing the books and subjecting every facet of federal spending to tough budget discipline and accountability, forcing the new Congress to choose a new direction and the right priorities for all Americans.” – Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) “A New Direction for America,” Page 25

Broken Promise: Instead of spending time during the opening months of the 110th Congress subjecting appropriations bills to unprecedented scrutiny, Democratic appropriators spent four months attempting to pass a supplemental appropriations bill they knew would be vetoed. Then when it came time to move forward with the 12 standard appropriations bills, Democrats created slush funds for secret earmarks, claiming they didn’t have the time to review every earmark request. “Obey has defended his policy as a practical necessity. He said his staff cannot address each of the more than 30,000 earmark requests members have already filed in time to finish work by the Fourth of July recess.” – “Dems, GOP Near Deal to End Spending Fight,” The Politico, June 13, 2007

Promise: “Upon taking control of Congress in November’s midterm elections, Democrats vowed…to require lawmakers to disclose their requests and to certify that money they are requesting does not benefit them.” – “In the Democratic Congress, Pork Still Gets Served,” Washington Post, May 24, 2007

Broken Promise: The new majority has made no move to require their members to disclose their earmark requests. And while Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) called on some members to make public all their requests, he pointedly refused to call on Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) to do so, and she has not. As the Washington Post reported: “The new majority is already skirting its own reforms.” – “In the Democratic Congress, Pork Still Gets Served,” Washington Post, May 24, 2007

Promise: “This leadership team will create the most honest, most open, and most ethical Congress in history” – Speaker-Elect Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Press Release, November 16, 2006 

Broken Promise: “Pelosi and other Democrats were on shaky ground with their continuing claims that they are running the House with what she termed ‘great openness and transparency.’ …Before Democrats stake their claims for charting a ‘new direction,’ they should deliver on some of their earlier rhetorical boasts.” – “Majority Ruling,” Congress Daily PM, March 30, 2007

“It’s a familiar backpedaling pattern emerging early in the new Democratic-controlled Congress. From lobbying reforms to anti-corruption proposals to curbing earmarks, Democratic lawmakers who railed against Republican corruption a year ago have flinched from imposing the harshest standards on themselves.” – “Congress’ Reform Promises Fizzle,” The Politico, May 21, 2007

Barnhart Blog Observation: Lately the only thing transparent about the Democrat lead congress is that they are doing everything they can to delay exploration and drilling for oil, nuclear power plant certification, the vetting of non-controversial district judges, tax reform, etc. Last week Harry Reid argued with Pete Sessions for over an hour about when they could vote on judicial nominees because earlier in the morning Senator Sessions had insinuated that Senator Reid “seemed to be clueless.” I would say that Senator Sessions had it correct, Harry Reid is indeed a clueless waste of space. 

Promise: “A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may not condition the inclusion of language to provide funding for a congressional earmark, a limited tax benefit, or a limited tariff benefit in any bill or joint resolution (or an accompanying report) or in any conference report on a bill or joint resolution (including an accompanying joining explanatory statement of managers) on any vote cast by another Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner.” – Democrats’ House Rules Package, Clause 16 of Rule 23 

“These strong rules are significant steps toward honest leadership; enforcing these rules is critical to ensuring every Member of Congress lives up to the highest ethical standard.” – Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Press Release, January 31, 2007

Broken Promise: “But Murtha went over to the Republican side of the aisle and told Rogers that he would never, ever get another earmark in the Defense Appropriations bill. This was a direct violation of rules Democrats sponsored and promoted.” – “Names in the News Can Be Divided Into Heroes and Villains,” Roll Call Column by Norman Ornstein, May 22, 2007.

218 Democrats voted to excuse Rep. Murtha’s ethics violation and shield him from an official House reprimand. – Roll Call Vote #402, House Res. 428

Promise: “In an election in which exit polls identified corruption as the No. 1 voting issue and Washington’s biggest corruption scandal involved lobbying, Democrats won in part by promising to curtail K Street’s excesses. Pelosi has said her first act as Speaker of the House in January will be to pass new rules limiting contact between lobbyists and lawmakers.” – “When the Democrats Take Back K Street,” Time, December 4, 2006

Broken Promise: “Now that they are running things, many Democrats want to keep the big campaign donations and lavish parties that lobbyists put together for them. They’re also having second thoughts about having to wait an extra year before they can become high-paid lobbyists themselves should they retire or be defeated at the polls.” – “Lobbying Reform Losing Steam in House,” Associated Press, May 11, 2007

Promise: “Democrats will exercise better leadership in the new Congress and work to raise the standard of ethics in this body.” – Majority Whip-Elect James Clyburn (D-SC), Press Release, December 8, 2006 

Broken Promise: Majority Whip Clyburn voted “NO” on H.Res. 452, a resolution to force ethics committee action on Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA) after his indictment on charges that include racketeering, money laundering, and obstruction of justice. – Roll call Vote #430 on H.Res. 452, June 5, 2007

Promise: On naming Rep. Michael Doyle (D-PA) to the House Ethics Committee: “With [his] commitment to the highest ethical standard, [Rep. Doyle] will serve with integrity, building on our bipartisan efforts to restore accountability, honesty, and openness to the House of Representatives.” – Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Press Release, February 8, 2007

Broken Promise: A short time after being named by Speaker Pelosi to serve on the House Ethics Committee, Rep. Doyle voted to shield Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) from an official House reprimand after Murtha violated House rules. Other Ethics Committee members voted “present” to ensure their impartiality should the Committee officially investigate the matter. – Roll Call Vote #402 on H.Res. 428.

Speaker Pelosi also appointed Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) to the House “ethics pool” concerning the Ethics Committee’s investigation into alleged crimes by Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA), despite the fact that Rep. Ellison voted against allowing the Ethics Committee’s investigation of Rep. Jefferson to resume. – Roll call Vote #430 on H.Res. 452, June 5, 2007

Barnhart Blog Observation: Wow, maybe I need to accept bribes from FBI agents, put the money in my freezer and then call Democrat congressional leaders so they can help get me off too when my employer starts to investigate if I deserve to be reprimanded or fired…yep that will work…what a crock!

Promise: “Close the revolving door between the Congress and lobbying firms by doubling (from one year to two) the cooling-off period during which lawmakers, senior Congressional staff, and Executive Branch officials are prohibited from lobbying their former offices.” – Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) “A New Direction for America,” Page 22

Broken Promise: “The House Judiciary Committee yesterday stripped from the lobbying reform bill a proposal to limit the lobbying activity of congressional officials once they enter the private sector and soundly defeated two other top priorities of government watchdog groups. Several of the reforms Democrats voted to kill were part of the 2006 Honest Leadership and Open Government Act that Democrats made a centerpiece of their campaign message last year.” – “Panel Softens Lobbying Bill Provisions,” The Hill, May 17, 2007

Promise: “That’s why we need a new direction here. That’s why we must sever the link between lobbyists and legislation so that we’re here for the people’s interests, not the special interests.” – Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Press Conference, September 29, 2006

“We are committed to immediate change to lead this country in a new direction, to put an end to business as usual, and to make certain this nation’s leaders serve the people’s interests, not special interests.” – Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) “A New Direction for America,” Page 21 

Broken Promise: “The minimum wage bill at the top of the Democrats’ agenda was, in the words of Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, simply ‘a matter of doing what’s right, what’s just and what’s fair’ – what’s right, just and fair, that is, as long as employees affected don't work for a company in Pelosi’s congressional district. The minimum wage bill passed by the House last week curiously exempts American Samoa, where thousands of people are employed in a packing plant owned by Del Monte Corp., parent of StarKist Tuna. Del Monte just happens to be headquartered in Pelosi’s San Francisco.” – “Blundered Hours,” Investor’s Business Daily Editorial, January 16, 2007

Barnhart Blog Observation: Am I the only one that is starting to see a pattern here….? Nancy Pelosi is one of the most disingenuous and hypocritical Speakers of the House we have had and I put her right up there with that snake oil salesman Republican Dennis Hastert. They both disgust me. She is an idiot and he is a corrupt, self-serving, fat-cat.

Promise: On the introduction of then-Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s “Minority Bill of Rights” in June 2004: “Pelosi's document, which she vows to honor if Democrats regain the majority, says: ‘Too often, incivility and the heavy hand of the majority’ have silenced Democrats and choked off ‘thoughtful debate.’ She called on the majority to let the minority offer meaningful amendments and substitutes to important bills.” – “Pelosi Seeks House Minority 'Bill of Rights,’” Washington Post, June 24, 2004

Broken Promise: “As the decision to dump the promise of an open process to muscle through the first 100 hours agenda shows, it’s a lot easier to vow fairness to the oppressed minority when you are it.” – “Hard Work Begins Now for Democrats,” Washington Post Column by Ruth Marcus, January 20, 2007

Promise: “Bills should generally come to the floor under a procedure that allows open, full, and fair debate consisting of a full amendment process that grants the Minority the right to offer its alternatives, including a substitute.” – Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) “A New Direction for America,” Page 24

Broken Promise: “Democrats are wielding a heavy hand on the House Rules Committee, committing many of the procedural sins for which they condemned Republicans during their 12 years in power. So far this year, Democrats have frequently prevented Republicans from offering amendments, limited debate in the committee and, just last week, maneuvered around chamber rules to protect a $23 million project for Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.).” – “Dems Bend Rules, Break Pledge,” The Politico, May 17, 2007

“But instead of allowing Republicans to fully participate in deliberations, as promised after the Democratic victory in the Nov. 7 midterm elections, Democrats now say they will use House rules to prevent the opposition from offering alternative measures, assuring speedy passage of the bills and allowing their party to trumpet early victories.” – “Democrats to Start Without GOP Input,” Washington Post, January 2, 2007

Promise: “‘We intend to have a Rules Committee … that gives opposition voices and alternative proposals the ability to be heard and considered on the floor of the House,’ he said.” – “Hoyer Says Dems’ Plans Unruffled by Approps Logjam…,” Congress Daily PM, December 5, 2006 

Broken Promise: “And this is one where we just don’t want 1,000 amendments being offered on the floor no matter how good the ideas may be without careful consideration and scrutiny of every single one that gets proposed. And so I would very much ask that we have a very structured process in this.” – Rep. Dennis Cardoza (D-CA), Rules Committee Hearing on H.R. 65, June 6, 2007

Promise: Rules Committee Chairwoman Louise Slaughter (D-NY): “I want us to work together.” – “Bent Over the Rules,” National Journal, June 16, 2007

Broken Promise: Rules Committee Chairwoman Louise Slaughter (D-NY): “Republicans are very unhappy in the minority. But sometimes there is a grade school mentality. I wish they would grow up. We are trying to address national problems. If they want to hang across my apron strings, I will drag them across.” – “Bent Over the Rules,” National Journal, June 16, 2007

Promise: “My fellow Democrats and I have long felt that the Rules Committee was failing in its major obligations. We publicly argued that it was being used to shut down the legislative process for partisan purposes and was refusing to promote serious ethical standards in the House. But now that Democrats will control the committee, we have a chance to change all that.” – “NY Will Be Standing Higher on Hill,” Democrat & Chronicle (Rochester, NY) Op-Ed by Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY), November 12, 2006

Broken Promise: “…Democrats this year have brought a greater percentage of bills to the floor under a totally closed rule that prevents members of the minority from offering amendments…” – “Dems Bend Rules, Break Pledge,” The Politico, May 17, 2007

Promise: “‘Next year, members of the House will be expected in the Capitol for votes each week by 6:30p.m. Monday and will finish their business about 2pm Friday,’ Hoyer said.” – “Culture Shock on Capitol Hill: House to Work Five Days a Week,” Washington Post, December 6, 2006

Broken Promise: Of the 21 weeks in session through June 22, 2007, only six have included full five-day work weeks. – Office of the Clerk Web Site

Promise: “…the rule that we are considering today is open, and that means that any germane amendment offered by any Member, Democrat or Republican, can be debated and voted on by this body. It is the way a deliberative body should act. Now let me assure my friends on the other side of the aisle that this is not the only open rule that you will see in this Congress. This is the return of the House of Representatives as a deliberative body.” – James P. McGovern, Congressional Record, Feb. 8, 2007, Page 1354 

Broken Promise: As of June 22, 2007 the Rules Committee has yet to report another open rule, except for general appropriations bills. – Rules Committee Web Site

Promise: “Floor votes should be completed within 15 minutes. No vote shall be held open to manipulate the outcome.” – Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) “A New Direction for America,” Page 24

Broken Promise: “Asked Wednesday night whether Democrats would keep the time limit [on the Iraq supplemental vote], Hoyer paused, then pointed out that many votes can run a few minutes longer for various reasons. ‘I won’t guarantee it,’ Hoyer replied.” – “Hoyer Won’t Rule Out Extending War Vote,” The Politico, March 22, 2007. But in fact Democrats have held open votes to change the outcome. On June 26, House Democratic leaders held open the vote on an amendment by Rep. Mark Udall (D-CO) to allow a Democrat to change his vote and secure the necessary votes for passage. – Roll Call Vote #574, June 26, 2007

Promise: “Bills should be developed following full hearings and open subcommittee markups, with appropriate referrals to other committees.” – Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) “A New Direction for America,” Page 24

Broken Promise: The following bills moved to the floor without ANY committee consideration at all:

• H.R. 1 – Implementing 9/11 recommendations [Rules Package]
• H.R. 2 – Fair Minimum Wage Act [Rules Package]
• H.R. 3 – Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act [Rules Package]
• H.R. 4 – Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act [Rules Package]
• H.Res. 35 – Intelligence Oversight Authority [Rules Package]
• H.Con.Res. 63 – Disapproving of the President’s decision to deploy more troops to Iraq
• H.R. 1905 – D.C. House Voting Rights Act
• H.R. 1906 – Estimated Tax Safe Harbor Act
• H.R. 2237 – Redeployment of Troops from Iraq
• H.R. 2206 – U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans’ Care, Katrina Recovery, & Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act
• H.R. 2207 – Agriculture Disaster Assistance & Western States Emergency Unfinished Business Appropriations Act
• S. Amendment to H.R. 2206 – U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans’ Care, Katrina Recovery, & Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act

Promise: “Members should have at least 24 hours to examine bill and conference report text prior to floor consideration.” – Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) “A New Direction for America,” Page 24 

Broken Promise: The following bills moved to the floor with less than 24 hours notice:

• H.R 1 – Implementing 9/11 recommendations [Rules Package]
• H.R. 2 – Fair Minimum Wage Act [Rules Package]
• H.R. 3 – Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act [Rules Package]
• H.R. 4 – Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act [Rules Package]
• H.Res. 35 – Intelligence Oversight Authority [Rules Package]
• H Res. 296 – Supporting the goals and ideal of National Eosiniophil Awareness Week
• H.Con.Res. 63 – Disapproving of the President’s decision to deploy more troops to Iraq
• H.R. 1905 – D.C. House Voting Rights Act
• H.R. 1906 – Estimated Tax Safe Harbor Act
• H.R. 2237 – Redeployment of troops from Iraq
• H.R. 2206 – U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans’ Care, Katrina Recovery, & Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act
• H.R. 2207 – Agriculture Disaster Assistance & Western States Emergency Unfinished Business Appropriations Act
• H.R. 2560 – Human Cloning Prohibition Act

Promise: “Rules governing floor debate must be reported before 10p.m. for a bill to be considered the following day.” – Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) “A New Direction for America,” Page 24 

Broken Promise: Rules for the following bills were reported AFTER 10p.m. and considered on the floor the following day:

• H.Con.Res. 63 – Disapproving of President’s decision to deploy more troops to Iraq– rule reported February 12, 2007, at 10:40p.m.
• H.R. 1591 – U.S. Troops Readiness, Veterans’ Health and Iraq Accountability Act - rule reported Thursday, March 22, 2007, at 12:30a.m.
• H.R. 1433 – District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2007 – rule reported Thursday, March 22, 2007, at 12:30a.m.
• H.R. 2082 – Intelligence Authorization Act for FY 2008 – rule reported Wednesday, May 9, 2007, at 10:50p.m.
• H.R. 2237 – Redeployment of troops from Iraq – rule reported May 9, 2007, at 10:50p.m.
• H.R. 2206 – Troop Readiness, Iraq Appropriations – rule reported May 9, 2007, at 10:50p.m.
• H.R. 2207 – Agricultural Disaster Assistance Appropriations 2007 – rule reported Wednesday, May 9, 2007, at 10:50p.m.
• H.R. 2206 – Iraq Supplemental – rule reported on legislative day of May 23, 2007, Thursday, May 24, 2007, at 7:45a.m.

Promise: “Pelosi and Hoyer pledged they will allow committees to do their work and be more open about allowing Republicans to offer amendments on the floor.” – “Pelosi Leads Dems to Early Victories,” San Francisco Chronicle, January 19, 2007

Broken Promise: “The contrast between old and new is less evident in the way Congress goes about its lawmaking. In the first three months of the new Congress, the House frequently circumvented committees and adopted closed rules preventing floor amendments. Procedural shortcuts often limited the minority party's participation in the deliberative process.” – “Is Congress on the Mend?” New York Times, April 28, 2007 

Promise: “‘The principle of civility and respect for minority participation in this House is something we promised the American people,’ [Speaker-Elect Nancy Pelosi] said. ‘It’s the right thing to do.’ Pelosi pledged to restore ‘minority rights’ – including the right of Republicans to offer amendments to bills on the floor…” – “Pelosi’s All Smiles Through a Rough House Transition,” San Francisco Chronicle, November 21, 2007

Broken Promise: “It would be laughable if it weren’t so sad. House Democrats, having chafed and screamed for years about being frozen out of decision making by Republicans, are starting out their rule by … freezing out Republicans.” – “The Wrong Start,” Roll Call Editorial, January 4, 2007

“Now that Republicans have shown they can use new House rules against the new Democratic majority that wrote them, the Democrats want new rules. Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer said Tuesday that during the upcoming two-week recess he will craft changes in the pay-as-you-go spending rules adopted in January (H.Res. 6) so that the GOP can no longer blindside the majority … ‘We don’t think that is appropriate,’ Hoyer said. ‘We don’t think that serves the legislative process, and we’re going to address that.’” – “House Democrats Will Move to Curb GOP’s Use of Motions to Recommit,” Congressional Quarterly, April 10, 2007

Promise: “… things are different now, and under the Democratic administration here in the Congress, we are trying to make sure that all points of view have an opportunity to be heard on the floor.” – Congressman Jim McGovern (D-MA), Congressional Record, June 6, 2007

Broken Promise: “Democrats in the House of Representatives lost a chink in their good-government armor Friday, pressuring a fellow Democrat to drop an eco-friendly effort to restrict taxpayer-funded congressional car leases. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, a Missouri Democrat, had hoped to require House members to lease hybrids and other alternative-fuel vehicles if they wanted taxpayers to foot the bill. But other Democrats told Cleaver on Wednesday to withdraw his amendment, minutes before he was to present it to the Rules Committee — the first step in sending it to the House floor. ‘We set ourselves up for looking ugly on this,’ Cleaver said. ‘Those are the things that happen when you rush on legislation and fail to have a dialogue.’” – “Cleaver’s Green Initiative Falls into Gray Area for Democrats,” Kansas City Star, June 22, 2007

Promise: “It is long past time that this House started living up to those ideas and practices; that they started putting honesty and integrity … ahead of everything else.” – Rules Committee Chairwoman Louise Slaughter (D-NY), Congressional Record, January 4, 2007

Broken Promise: Rules Committee Democrats, led by chairwomen Louise Slaughter (D-NY), refused to comply with the Committee’s customary and longstanding practices in refusing to withdraw a proposed amendment from Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL) on the delegate voting bill at his request and then refusing to provide a copy of Kirk’s letter – a committee record – to the minority. As The Hill reports: “When the issue of the withdrawal of the amendment was being debated by the committee, the ranking member (David Dreier, R-Calif.) attempted to obtain a copy of the letter [asking to withdraw the amendment] ... and the majority willfully refused to produce a copy of the letter after repeated requests.” – “Dust Up Over Delegate Voting,” The Hill, January 25, 2007. House Democrats condoned these practices in voting against a privileged resolution calling on the Rules Committee to prevent future occurrences. – Roll Call Vote #54, January 24, 2007

Promise: “Every person in America has a right to have his or her voice heard…Respectful of both the wishes of the Founders, and the expectations of the American people, we offer the following principles for restoring democracy in the “People’s House,” guaranteeing that the voices of all the people are heard.” - Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) “A New Direction for America,” Page 23 

Broken Promise: “The new Democratic House majority has an ambitious plan for its first 100 hours in power, from increasing the minimum wage to strengthening ethics rules to having the federal government negotiate prescription drug prices. Unfortunately, its plans don’t include getting those provisions passed in the democratic fashion that the Democrats promised to adhere to once in the majority.” – “A Fairer House; But Not Quite Yet,” Washington Post Editorial, January 3, 2007

Promise: After President Bush gave his 2007 State of the Union Address outlining an ambitious new health care proposal, Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid called on the two parties to work together in a bipartisan fashion: “Tonight, we welcomed President Bush’s overtures of bipartisanship and we hope to begin working with him to move our country in a new direction.” – Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), Press Release, January 23, 2007

Broken Promise: On the morning after President Bush’s State of the Union Address, the Washington Post reports on the reaction to his health care proposal among Democrats: “But the most surprising and encouraging development is that a President who for six years has only nibbled around the edges of health-care issues has weighed in with some bold ideas to expand coverage, rein in costs and bring some fairness to the tax code. Given that, you’d think Democrats would have welcomed a politically courageous proposal …. But instead, they’ve shifted reflexively into partisan attack mode, mischaracterizing the impacts of the proposal and shamelessly parroting the propaganda from the labor dinosaurs at the AFL-CIO.” – “Bipartisan Cooperation on Health Care is Dead on Arrival,” Washington Post Column from Steven Pearlstein, January 24, 2007

Barnhart Blog Observation: The first 100 Days of the Democrat Congress are an utter failure, not because Republicans stopped every bill that was proposed but because Democrats themselves did virtually nothing to keep their own campaign promises. The liberal and crooked members of congress on both sides of the isle are damned fortunate the American people are not storming the capital building and physically kicking their lousy butts out of our halls of government.

They represent the lowest common denominator in America, their behavior is an insult and it reflects poorly on the honest members of congress that work hard every day. They are a cancer on the body of our nation they deserve to be cut out and tossed aside. To call them swine is offensive to pigs!

Conservatives in both parties need to work together to correct the mistakes of the past and reduce the size and scope of government in the future before it gets out of hand. Government has a role to play but it needs to be sensible, responsible and limited.