You're watching...
Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX) on why he believes Congress members need to cut back on vanity projects.
Also in this playlist...
Auto-advance: ON
Auto-advance
This transcript is automatically generated
Projects representative Michael -- he joins us from Austin, Texas so good to be into tonight represented in Reno do you think pushing this since 2008.
How come -- -- You've been saying this is this should stop since 2008 -- that's been so.
-- slow going.
Well it did -- on the appropriations.
Bills and it became.
The rule the house that we cannot pass.
Or spend money to name projects -- buildings after sitting members of congress.
-- destroy the height of arrogance and what's wrong with the culture in Washington that I think needs to change ivory and reduce the bill because as you point out in the senate.
As -- -- more than really big abuses have to stay in West Virginia is named after.
Senator -- saw one I want us to pass the house again and then go to -- senate.
We're can be signed in the -- -- that members can never do this bill banned this practice forever.
You know congressman there's a -- the West Virginia that people get loss of West Virginia driving around in circles they take that Robert Byrd wrote to Robert Byrd highway to -- -- purchase.
But really really did could put -- at this and that is is that you know.
Part number one reader of the Wall Street Journal wrote in the letter and he said look at ebitda should be a sign that these projects are funded by taxpayers and everyday at 111 of these buildings have -- -- -- the says.
-- by the US taxpayer know.
There is so self serving and I think so they should say that it's very self serving at the taxpayers' expense.
And of course a number that's something named after the themselves are gonna week.
When re appropriate taxpayer dollars to continue the program more -- on -- the building or whatever it is -- abuse of power.
In my judgment if we can't do the small things like this in the congress -- -- -- take on the bigger ticket items.
-- you make a good point you have said that these kind of vanity projects that are paid for by US taxpayers -- provide.
For Gateway spending -- even more appropriations.
And more pork spending is that true.
That's -- demand and you know -- -- -- these in the earmarks would still take place in the senate.
Or -- example I could earmark money name highway after myself for a program and I'm gonna continue to fund through the appropriations process.
Outside of us in appropriators don't like this bill.
And you don't take him head on on this and it's not -- to its at both sides of the aisle to participate in this practice.
And I think the American people's exactly what they're sick and tired.
In terms of the culture of the abuse of power and we need to reform Washington this is as a small measure that I think would send a bold statement.
You know and you make a good point to these are basically taxpayer funded billboards for these incumbent.
Elected officials right to say okay here and I honestly pretty free advertising free advertise free advertiser about Helmand and.
-- Wall Street Journal wrote a great editorial.
-- my bill now by William appearances that's right.
All right thank you congressman -- -- that's right it's a terrific piece congressman thank you so much for your time good luck with a -- really appreciate it.
Thanks for him -- right next up on day.
