Skip to main content

View Diary: Coburn Amendment, on the floor (435 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  True, but (none)
    unless the project can claim to benefit the country as a whole, state or local budgets should be able to finance them.  NY isn't exactly the poorest state in the union either (Mississippi is).

    Projects become porky when a local minority tries to siphon off a little moolah from a big enough trough that hardly anyone will notice.  Except for everyone else who's doing the same thing and can't complain.

    Never play leapfrog with a unicorn.

    by Cream Puff on Thu Oct 20, 2005 at 02:54:11 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Exactly (none)
      Thank you. I don't care how worthy a project is; if it's an earmark that benefits a specific region, I'm against it, even if that region is mine. Those things should be, must be, paid for by state and local governments. If the feds are doling out the money, it is a certainty that those funds will be distributed according to political clout rather than according to the merits of the projects involved. Exhibits A and B: Don Young's Way and the Road to Nowhere.

      I would be in favor of the Democratic platform expressing blanket opposition to ALL earmarks.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site