earmarks aren't just a wash dc problem

[Texas_Curl]

www.lvrj.com/opinion/14022997.html

In reply to:

---

---

---

 

[Horn6721]

You are probably right.
This is the problem of the legislative branch of our gov't but it doesn't appear to have any incentive to put it right

 

[kgp]

The problem originates from the false perception that the federal government is a source of riches. Uncle Sam can only spend what he first takes (or borrows and has to take more later) from his nieces and nephews. We are caught in a cycle of sending almost unimaginably large sums to Washington and then begging for handouts out of the collection plate.

The less money that leaves home, the more is available for worthwhile local projects. The accountability for projects is highest when each taxpayer's share of the expense and benefit is highest-- i.e. with local ones. I highly doubt that the citizens of Boston would ever have volunteered to pay for the full final cost of the Big Dig out of their city budget (but if so, fine: let them). A museum dedicated to Buddy Holly might appeal to folks in Lubbock, and they are free to build one if they choose. Leave the taxpayers of Nebraska out of the equation for both.

 

[austintexas]

The voters have to share some of the blame. Don't bring home the pork? You aren't doing anything for your district and you get voted out. Bring home the pork? You get buildings named after you.

 

[Texas_Curl]

i think the point of the piece was that voters really don't participate in the earmark process - it's the local politicians who drive the process.

hook'em

 

[austintexas]

who elects the poiliticans who bring home the pork?

 

[Texas_Curl]

you know, that's a nice high school civics, theoretical response. it's also about as helpful as blaming the parents for the failings of our k-12 schools.

there's evidence that most voters don't appreciate the earmarked money being dropped into their districts. there's evidence that they won't punish the congressmen who don't bring home the pork.

95% of voters ponder this stuff maybe 1 month out of 24. 5% of us, the politicians and their hangers on spend 24/7 of their lives grubbing around for this money, and about 1 month out of 24 promising to stop the other guys from doing anymore. so, how would assign culpability for this problem? i submit that 95% of the problem can be hung on the 5% of us who are everyday politicians and their groupies.

hook'em

 

[austintexas]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[Texas Wahoo]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[45th St.]

Check out the case of former one term Republican Senator Peter Fitzgerald from this opinion piece from Fox News,

In reply to:

---

---

 

[Texas_Curl]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[DCLonghorn8]

I can attest that local governments, cities and counties, are the worst culprits of demanding federal funding. Many have a real sense of entitlement and some get down right nasty when you don't fund their museum of silliness or repaving or just paving of main street.

Every small town thinks a museum of some sort is a savior of eco devo and will be an engine of huge tourism.

The only contiguous group that is worst are universities. Usually the bigger, the more attitude.

 

[DigglerontheHoof]

Is it the voters' fault, pols, local government? All the above.

Here's a ******* idea. Let's take the responsibility off all them and institute term limits. That way some of these douchebags in congress might start thinking of the greater good than keeping their congressional spot. Hell, we might even be able to cut down on the douchebag personality factor that runs for these offices if they know they'll only be there 4 years or so.

 

[Texas Wahoo]

In reply to:

---

---