RSample.com

Are we just at the point where “politician” and “corrupt” go hand in hand?

Look at the following examples:

• Chris Dodd – In trouble again over a gift of a house in Ireland that came suspiciously after securing a Presidential pardon. (The Associated Press)
• Senator Burris is not as clean as he made himself out to be. (The Sun Times)
• Speaker Pelosi continues to lie about what she knew about water boarding (Judicial Watch)
• Republican Senators and Congressmen who still do not get it about earmarks (RealClear Politics)

Clearly, these are not men and women who are morally competent to be elected. Yet, statistics show that House members have above a 90% re-election rate since 1974. Senators have a 80-90% chance of retaking their office. (Center for Responsive Politics).

The question then becomes – why do we keep reelecting them? The country clamored for a change in November, yet sent the same people back to Washington. No wonder we are still in a mess, still in gridlock, and still hearing about corruption scandals and unsubstantiated claims of falsehood. These people were corrupt before the elections – by sending them back we have in fact affirmed them in their dishonesty.

The mess that we see in Washington is OUR fault – we keep giving power to those whose irresponsibility has led us to this point. Imagine if we the people decided to always vote against the incumbent for the next 6 elections – that the time of the career politician is over? Imagine the fear that would be struck into the hearts and minds of our representatives. I think a little fear would do them good.

This letter is sent to Congressman John Murtha in response to a news article posted on CBS news.

The Honorable John Murtha
Member, United States House of Representatives
District Office
647 Main Street
Suite 401
Johnstown, PA 15901

Dear Mr. Murtha:

I am writing in response to a news article posted on CBS.com dated April 20, 2009 entitled “Murtha’s Defense Earmarks Draw Questions “( http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/04/20/eveningnews/main4958071.shtml). The article states: “In all, 10 recent Murtha donors are slated to receive $31 million in Murtha earmarks for 2010.” You also stated that you are willing to be called corrupt if you are “taking care of your district.”

On your website, you defend the policy of using earmarks: “Earmarks do not increase the federal budget, they direct funds within the budget for certain community projects or programs. If these funds are not directed by members of Congress, decisions would be left for Washington bureaucrats in various federal agencies to decide what is best for our local communities. ”

Although I now live in Tennessee, I grew up in Erie, and will always consider Western Pennsylvania my home. Sir, I strongly urge you to reconsider your position on these, and any, earmarks. You have stated: “Earmarks do not increase the federal budget, they direct funds within the budget for certain community projects or programs.” While they do not increase the federal budget, they are still coming out of tax payer dollars – my dollars. As a ranking member of Congress, and one who is well known on the national scale, you should take the lead in ending the practice of earmarks. Western Pennsylvanians, and I know them well, want to keep more of their hard earned money rather than pay an increasing tax margin to have you and others “direct” those funds.

Your statements on earmarks would carry more weight if 31 million dollars of your “directed funds” were not going to 10 donors to your campaign. While you are not doing anything illegal, Western Pennsylvanians and the rest of the country will no longer tolerate the slight appearance of wrong doing. Again, as a respected member of Congress you have the ability and influence to stop the use of earmarks. I urge you to do so.
Sincerely yours,

Reuel K. Sample