There was a lot of channel surfing during the mid-term election coverage last night in an attempt to stay on top of the results.
One particular comment caught my attention.
Unfortunately, I do not recall which Democrat was chastizing which Republican saying, basically, that the Republican candidate was "not for the people" as that person was dead-set against earmarks, defined right then and there as those funds that "bring money to states."
Two years ago candidate Obama promised Main Street USA he would not pass legislation with earmarks attached. Taxpayers very much liked that idea, but that particular promise was not kept.
To the thought...
How much money has been spent by Capitol Hill, even just during the last several years, on earmarks to buy votes for a larger piece of legislation?
If that amount of money, which surely is a rather large number, had not been attached to buy votes then would it not be safe to say that big government would not be quite as big?
In order to pay for earmarks that the Senate and House tack on to bills the federal government requires more money in order to fund those pieces of pork. The same money that, if Main Streeters did not have to send vast sums to Washington DC to cover vote-buying, would be spent bolstering the economy.
Individuals would spend that money not sent to DC on consumable goods and for services that they might need or want. Companies, large and small, would spend it on expansion of their business, which, in turn, generally means more jobs. And a healthier economy.
When firms and people spend more money states receive greater revenues through all manner of taxes and fees.
Any politician who says that not backing earmarks means that a person is not "for the people" is spouting wasteful hot air and that particular elected representative should look for other means of employment.
Earmarks are NOT for the people.
Earmarks are a means for Congress to buy votes for legislation that, quite obviously, cannot stand on its own merits.
Earmarks are wasteful spending and a continued expansion of excessive government requiring more and more funds with which to operate.
Over For Now.
Main Street One
No comments:
Post a Comment