You can vote against a bill and still be responsible for specific portions of it or how it gets distributed. You fight for your state and district to get their pork even if you disagree with slaughtering the pig.
Which is how Florida gets the second largest share of FEMA support (after Texas), despite its leaders voting against expanding FEMA’s funding. It’s as if they want to deprive others of the same kind of help they themselves benefit from.
That’s silly. They don’t want anyone to get it. It’s their money as much as it is ours, so of course the reps should be fighting for their districts even if they hope the bill fails.
My issue isn’t that people are dolling out the money they got. The problem is that they are telling anyone who will listen that they alone did this when in reality they are ideologically opposed to the money and the tiniest bit of investigation reveals that not only do they hate the money, they also voted against it. You can’t claim a policy as your own accomplishment if you tried to tank it.
It’s weird, but kind of accurate a lot of times. If they negotiate for an earmark or project, they did technically bring the money in - even if it’s something they would prefer not to have passed.
I’ve certainly been in similar situations at work where we all agree something is stupid, but make sure to get something out of it.
You can vote against a bill and still be responsible for specific portions of it or how it gets distributed. You fight for your state and district to get their pork even if you disagree with slaughtering the pig.
Which is how Florida gets the second largest share of FEMA support (after Texas), despite its leaders voting against expanding FEMA’s funding. It’s as if they want to deprive others of the same kind of help they themselves benefit from.
That’s silly. They don’t want anyone to get it. It’s their money as much as it is ours, so of course the reps should be fighting for their districts even if they hope the bill fails.
My issue isn’t that people are dolling out the money they got. The problem is that they are telling anyone who will listen that they alone did this when in reality they are ideologically opposed to the money and the tiniest bit of investigation reveals that not only do they hate the money, they also voted against it. You can’t claim a policy as your own accomplishment if you tried to tank it.
It’s weird, but kind of accurate a lot of times. If they negotiate for an earmark or project, they did technically bring the money in - even if it’s something they would prefer not to have passed.
I’ve certainly been in similar situations at work where we all agree something is stupid, but make sure to get something out of it.