Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Emanuel Cleaver: People get ‘saved’ through government spending (video)
Emanuel Cleaver: People get ‘saved’ through government spending (video)
Jan 11, 2026 1:27 AM

The Bible says that eth by hearing, but some believe eth by earmarks. One congressman pared government spending with eternal salvation in our Lord Jesus Christ.

Earmarks are dedicated spending amendments that congressmen often attached to larger, “must-pass” legislation. They fund projects in thee congressman’s home district, typically awarding the contract to a specific vendor. Since most earmarks support indefensible projects that could never garner enough votes to pass on their own, congressmen often trade votes or use them to cow straying members into supporting bills favored by the leadership. For most, the potential for abuse and bribery holds the whiff of corruption; for one congressman, earmarks pave the way to the New Jerusalem.

Democratic Congressman Emanuel Cleaver of Missouri – who earned national media coverage by closing a prayer with the phrase “amen and awoman” – told NPR that bipartisan meetings to haggle over pork-barrel vote-swapping “used to be time where everybody was, ‘Hallelujah,’ I mean Republicans, Democrats, dancing, kissing. This is the time to be saved.”

Not only is that blasphemous, but anyone who has watched the congressional appropriations process knows that it produces no savings of any kind. Congressional Republicans and President Barack Obama joined forces to do away with earmarks in 2011.

Cleaver, an ordained United Methodist pastor, undoubtedly spoke allegorically. However, it’s worth finely parsing the words of Rep. Rev. Cleaver, as leaders in Congress plan to bring earmarks out of retirement.

The chairs of the mittees – Pat Leahy in the Senate and Rosa DeLauro in the House – want to make a pact. They must bring salvation back. When Congress legislates, earmarks will be there.

Instead of “earmarks,” congressional leaders now call them a “Community-Focused Grant Program.” However, the massaging of therapeutic language does nothing to improve the substance. Over the years, congressional earmarks have funded such programs as:

A $3.4 million tunnel underneath Highway 27 in Tallahassee for turtles to avoid traffic;Alaska’s infamous “Bridge to Nowhere”; andA $15,000 study of the effects of alcohol on the motor functions of rodents.

The move to bring back earmarks, even in an amended form, has triggered backlash from both sides of the aisle.

“Earmarks are the ‘broken windows’ of government overspending, the currency of Congressional corruption, and the price of bad votes for more spending,” said Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform. He led numerous pro-taxpayer organizations in drafting a letter warning congressional leaders against reviving the now-dormant practice.

While these wasteful programs may sometimes seem humorous, earmarks pose far more serious risks to our body politic. They bring with them the possibility – and all-too-often, the reality – of bribery. Former California Republican Randy “Duke” Cunningham was sentenced to eight years in prison for taking $2.4 million in kickbacks for steering federal funds to defense contractors. The late Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., faced two bribery probes: one for Abscam and another “to funnel earmarks to panies and nonprofits to benefit the lawmaker’s friends and former staffer,” which the FBI was investigating upon his death. In 2010, the media exposed how then-Rep. Kendrick Meek tried to procure federal funding for a bio-pharmaceutical park in Liberty City, Florida, on behalf of a man who paid Meek’s mother $90,000 and leased her a Cadillac Escalade. Meek lost his Senate bid; now he works for the lobbying firm Kirk & Spalding “as a senior advisor to a diverse group panies in the healthcare, homeland security, agriculture, and financial services sectors.”

Obviously, government spending projects have been a snare and stumbling block to many people in public service. The potential for earmarks to distort the legislative process should concern anyone who thinks biblically about the public square.

Bribery is one of the few political sins condemned consistently by the Old and New Testaments alike. In Psalm 26 (the lavabo), the Psalmist declares, “I will wash my hands in innocence” and not be like wicked men, “whose hands are full of iniquities, and their right hands are full of bribes.”

If federal spending could guarantee salvation, it would be a program well worth funding. In reality, big, unconstitutional government has led too many souls astray and has the potential to pervert justice. The evidence shows that big government itself represents a “near occasion of sin.”

Scripture tells us to look elsewhere for our redemption: “Ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot” (I Peter 1:18-19).

To congressmen, I’d humbly offer the advice: Put not your trust in earmarks, in which there are no salvation. Wash your hands in innocence; wash your hands of this scheme. And trust in the One and only means of our salvation.

I recently discussed this topic during my weekly, Thursday morning segment on Faith Radio Network’s “Mornings with Carmen LaBerge.” You may listen below:

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
CAFTA/Culture of Life: enemies?
John Paul II gave us all a tremendous gift by endorsing the terms Culture of Life and Culture of Death. But as with all great gifts, we must guard these terms carefully so as not to wear them out with misuse, robbing them of their relevance. Unfortunately, this is precisely what is happening in the current debate over CAFTA. A group called Catholics for Faithful Citizenship (PDF) claims the following: “Clearly, supporting CAFTA is inconsistent with upholding a culture of...
ExTORTion
S. T. Karnick over at The Reform ments on a recent suit filed against DuPont over Teflon, claiming that “DuPont lied in a massive attempt to continue selling their product.” Karnick observes that abuse of the tort system is rampant, in part because “it has been perverted into a proxy for the criminal justice system: a means of punishing supposed wrongdoers through the use of a weaker standard of proof—preponderance of the evidence instead of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.”...
Great debate
Foreign Policy hosts this exchange on environmental issues and economics. Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club, gets the first word and Bjørn Lomborg, adjunct professor at the Copenhagen Business School, gets the last word. ...
The school of fish
The recent blogpost by my colleague Jordan Ballor discusses an op-ed written by law professor Stanley Fish. I am more familiar with Stanley Fish from his days as a literary theorist, and perhaps a quick review of a younger Fish will contribute to the conversation. Fish is known for, among other things, an idea of literary interpretation he called munities’ that suggests meaning is not found in the author, nor in the reader, but in munity in which the text...
Close call on CAFTA
Close at Home The House of Representatives voted early this morning (12:03 am) to approve the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) after weeks of intense lobbying on both sides. The final vote was a close 217-215. My predictions: somehow, any dip in employment (if there is one) in the next six months will somehow be linked to CAFTA by its detractors. Detractors will attempt to take the moral high ground in American politics in ’06 and ’08, and even...
Labor unions and free association
The Service Employees International Union and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters have broken away from the plaining that the federation has focused too much on political activism in the face of declining union membership and influence. Dr. Charles Baird was a featured guest on yesterday’s edition of Kresta in the Afternoon on Ave Maria Radio, discussing Catholic perspectives on unionism and whether the modern American labor union movement patible with church teachings. Dr. Baird is Chair of the Department of...
Seeing the trees, missing the forest
The United Nations has released a report on the ongoing upheavals in Zimbabwe, where tyrant Robert Mugabe has been punishing his political opponents under the guise of “cleaning up” the country’s cities. The effect of Operation Murambatsvina (meaning either “Operation Restore Order” or “Operation Drive Out Trash,” depending on who’s translation you believe) has been to leave some 700,000 people homeless, jobless, or both. A downloadable copy of the UN report is available here. While the report does illuminate the...
The hermeneutical spiral
Mr. Phelps takes issue with my characterization of Stanley Fish’s position as amounting “to a philosophical denial of realism.” Let me first digress a bit and place ment within the larger context of my post. My identification of a position that “words and texts have no meaning in themselves” is really just an aside within the larger and more important question about what measure of authority authorial intent has in the interpretation of documents, specifically public documents like the Constitution....
Animal cruelty?
I’m not quite sure what to make of this local story: “Four people are charged for their alleged involvement in killing two bald eagles.” The details of the alleged crimes are as follows: “Prosecutors say two teenagers shot the eagles in the Muskegon State Game Area with a .22 caliber rifle in April 2004 and then chopped them up with a hatchet.” Since the bald eagle, one of the nation’s revered symbols, is an endangered animal, it is protected by...
Textual interpretation
A week ago Stanley Fish, a law professor at Florida International University, wrote an op-ed in The New York Times about the principles of constitutional interpretation, especially as represented by Justice Antonin Scalia. Fish takes issue especially with the notion that the text can have meaning “as it exists apart from anyone’s intention.” Fish essentially denies that texts are things that can have meanings in themselves, and it amounts to a philosophical denial of realism. Part of Fish’s problem is...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved