Tuesday, November 23, 2010


The hot topic of the current lame duck session of Congress is the possible elimination of Earmarks, and the New York Times gave a weak-kneed endorsement with a liberal caveat. Take a look-see at their opinion and draw your own conclusion.


I will accept the fact that elimination of Earmarks will only reduce the deficit by $15.9 billion, but it is a good starting point against a government that is running a $1.5 trillion deficit. Just because this action will only represent 1 percent of the federal budget does not mean it is not worthy.

The elimination of Earmarks is an excellent starting point, and it is up to the next Congress to fulfill the desires of the electorate to cut spending, waste, and corruption. Obviously some past Earmarks were for worthy projects, but let them be stand alone pieces of legislation that are debated and voted upon openly in the floor of Congress.

Isn’t transparency one of the original pledges lingering from Barack Obama’s campaign? It is about time that we see some transparency coming from the Halls of Congress as well as the Administration.


No comments: