Earmarks should be banned
Our View - Nov 18, 2010
Suddenly . . . earmarks are claimed to be not such a bad thing. Louisiana’s two U. S. senators have supported them somewhat.
David Vitter is planning to vote for the bill that will ban them entirely though he believes they are necessary to focus agencies such as the Corps of Engineers on what is really needed around the country. Mary Landrieu likewise speaks well of them, saying who knows better what an area needs, an elected representative or a federal bureaucrat?
We can agree with some of that logic but do support the banning of earmarks as such. But doing so would not benefit us much unless it reduces the size of federal government by putting those projects in the hands of state and local authorities who know the lay of the land on local projects.
And as a result reduce our federal taxes.
So many area projects in the United States could and should be handled by local governments instead of going through the expensive bureaucracy that exists in Washington. And banning earmarks should be the start of such a movement.
So, hopefully, earmarks will be banned. And we will follow up by reducing big brother in Washington who knows little about the local scene and should keep its attention geared to the issues confronting our nation as a whole. And at less cost to us, the taxpayers.
By so doing, they will do us a big favor and improve the operation of our governments.
|heraldguide.com is a supplement to St. Charles Herald Guide.
Copyright © 2001 - 2016 St. Charles Herald Guide, Inc. All rights reserved.
Please contact our WebMaster if you experience problems with the website.