Mark Udall's Pro-Pork Votes

Club for Growth.Net Releases Ad in Colorado
Urges Mark Udall to Reject Wasteful Spending

Washington -- Today, Club for Growth.Net began running a television ad on broadcast television and cable systems throughout Colorado. The $400,000 ad buy will run for two weeks.

Entitled "Waste," the ad details all the wasteful pork projects Rep. Mark Udall has voted for and urges taxpayers in Colorado to call Rep. Udall and tell him to stop sending their tax dollars on such outlandish projects. These projects include a ballet theatre in New York City (RC #668), a park in San Francisco (RC #839), and a lobster institute in Maine (RC #735). In fact, out of 50 separate amendments to remove pork projects from the FY 2008 appropriations bills, Mark Udall voted against 49 of them. In other words, Rep. Udall voted in favor of wasteful earmark spending 98 percent of the time.

"Mark Udall needs to change his wasteful spending policies," said Club for Growth.Net President Pat Toomey. "If Mark Udall wants to spend his own money on a ballet theatre in New York and a lobster institute in Maine, that's his prerogative, but Colorado taxpayers shouldn't be expected to foot the bill. This ad seeks to educate people in Colorado about how Rep. Udall is voting. We encourage them to call Mark Udall and tell him to stop wasting taxpayer dollars on pork projects."

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• colorado
• schaffer
• udall
• ballet
• pork
• earmarks
• lobster
• congress
• senate

[TravelingPantsuits]

Funny how this EXACT SAME AD is playing in Missouri, Pennsylvania and Arizona - all that's different is the Democrat the fatcats are funding so they can get their hands back into the till.

[nunurox]

i would rather "waste" our money on arts and things that entertain people from blowing up twin towers...... instead of money on troops and killing my family members in iraq

[donnegri]

Putting aside that this is from The Club For Growth, people should check the voting results in the House when any individual earmarks are challenged (they rarely are)....2/3 of Republicans at least vote for them. Also, this Ad is disingenuous because these earmarks are contained in large appropriation Bills and not "individual" votes. And Republican earmarks, by the way, are far more expensive than Democratic earmarks. It's true. So, ho hum here....