Earmarks Prove Popular, Dangerous

[Terri]

By CHARLES BABINGTON
Associated Press
August 2, 2007

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Given the recent headlines, lawmakers might seem eager to do away with earmarks, the narrowly drawn legislative provisions that pay for pet projects.

A former congressman and lobbyist are in prison because of earmark abuses, the Senate's senior Republican is under federal investigation regarding earmarks, and President Bush has called for their end.

Yet they are more popular than ever. Their resilience and controversy are central to this week's Senate debate over an ethics bill, which some call groundbreaking and others call weak.

More

[Think About It]

"While many Americans criticize earmarks in general, they seem to love them when they result in a new bridge, senior center or employer in their home town."
Evidently I'm one of the rare minority who doesn't love earmarks even when they result "in a new bridge, senior center or employer in their home town." But then again, I'm also one of those who don't believe government should be building stadiums, etc. for millionarie ballplayers to play in. Since I'm a minority, maybe the "progressives" should give me special consideration.

[jack virtus]

Think About it, Make that two of us that don't like earmarks. As far as i'm concerned "EARMARKS" are meant for one thing and that's the re-election of the incumbent. Unfortunately the Republicans are nearly as guilty of earmarking as the socialists, whoops, the democrats. That's why it's so unfortunate that the president does not have the "line item veto" Earmarks also promote corruption and cronyism. If we are going to have Earmarks and i'm sure we will, there should be full disclosure as to which "HACK" (i meant politician) requested which earmark. I think the Founding Fathers would be aghast at what the goverment does now.

[cdhogan]

Earmarks can be problematic. There are also areas where they are useful, (please if you find a useful one, let me know, I've been unsuccessful at that). The reality is that they are here to stay. The only way I see to deal with the problem is a constitutional amendment that limits the total amount of earmarks based on a percentage of the previous years budget, after earmarks have been deducted from that amount, and full public disclosure of all earmarks to be introduced into bills in currently accepted mass media publications. Today the current mass media would be internet, cspan, possibly also a government produced mass mail circular. Legislation will not work, as the legislatures are the ones proposing the earmarks. "House Rules" obviously don't work, as there is no one to watch the watchers.

[JonJacobs]

don't believe government should be building stadiums, etc. for millionarie ballplayers

Wow, I thought I was the only one on earth who believed that way!

The only way I see to deal with the problem is a constitutional amendment that limits the total amount of earmarks based on a percentage of

As long as we are talking about a constitutional amendment, why not just ban earmarks altogether?

Jon

[ConcernedOhio]

JonJacobs, I agree with your entire statement!

If these so called representatives won't give up this dispicable, deceiptful practice then:

I, as a taxpaing American, should be allowed to vote for or against any earmark, which my tax dollars are supporting! They should NOT BE included in other bills but stand alone on their own merit for the American public to vote to support - period!

What these arrogant soon forget after getting their positions is, it is OUR MONEY they are spending, therefore it should be up to US to decide whether or not funding is accepted, not those that have been bought off!

[Terri]

I, as a taxpaing American, should be allowed to vote for or against any earmark, which my tax dollars are supporting!

I think that might keep you a little busy and it's not the system the Founders set up. We have a representative republic.

If you don't like what they do then vote them out and replace them with someone better. That has to happen in the primary because you aren't going to find any Democrats that don't want lots more socialist programs.

What should happen is that unconstitutional programs should be ended. That alone would solve the problem.

[WhyNotWin]

AS AN ECONOMIC SYSTEM, Fascism was very similar to the earmark system:
1. The government grants to me, an economic operator, a contract that involved no competitive bidding. It's larded with money that I could never earn in a free market.
2. I use and abuse the opportunity offered and then pay a hefty sum back to the politician who granted it to me.
The Nazis worked that system for their advantage and it made them very rich!
We are fools if we let the Democrats use it to make incumbency permanent. And we are fools if RNC congressmen participate in this scheme.

[Terri]

The people have the remedy.

At least they have it right now. I'm not sure how much longer they will have it if they don't turn off American Idol and get involved.

[Genea]

Congress makes me SICK!!!