Skip to main content

View Diary: Alaska Mythbusters--DNC telecon with Gov. Tony Knowles and Ketchikan Mayor Bob Weinstein (26 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  There must be more to it than that -- (0+ / 0-)

    don't mean about earmarks being designated for a specific purpose - but that it doesn't change the dollars sent to state or district in a state.

    What FDR giveth; GWB taketh away.

    by Marie on Wed Sep 10, 2008 at 06:55:31 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  They are done in conjuction... (0+ / 0-)

      The congressperson in question fights for money for their pet project.  When they get the money allocated, they put in an earmark to make sure that they get personal credit for the funding...sometimes they even require that the project carry a certain name, or incorporate features friendly to their patrons.

      If the public gets wind of a specific instance of largess...they may pull the earmark, but not the funding.  Because if they take back the funding, then the budget for the entire bill has to be reallocated....and that is not necessarily an easy job.  Often, they still get to take some credit for the funding, but they may have to fight further to ensure that the funding goes exactly where and for what they intend.

      "Reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature can not be fooled." -Richard Feynman

      by Tin hat mafia on Wed Sep 10, 2008 at 07:30:33 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Then it all looks like much ado about nothing, (0+ / 0-)

        I care that AK gets more than its share of federal funds, but doesn't make any difference to me if the $450 million is designated for a bridge to nowhere and they can choose how to spend it.

        What FDR giveth; GWB taketh away.

        by Marie on Wed Sep 10, 2008 at 07:36:57 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site