04.23
I know right now some of you read the title to this post and said,”Wait Voter_X, we thought you were a Conservative”. And you would be correct, I am a “Fiscal Conservative” by definition. I am also equally suspicous of both parties and any group, movement or organization. By no means does Conservative equal GOP in my book. If anything I am angrier with the GOP than the Dems these days. The Dems are doing what we would expect them to do, the GOP keeps letting Conservatives down. But anyway, guess that makes me some sort of “Paranoid Conservative”.
So be it…
Ok, on to my original topic: Thursday the House GOP proposed a one year ban on all earmarks. Read that again, a ONE YEAR BAN. Sorry Mr. Boehner, it will take more than that to get my vote. Are you saying that you want to see how it goes for a year and then re-evaluate next year? That is something I would expect to hear from say…… a crak addict, alcoholic or Tiger Woods. “Oh I’ll just try going without for a year and see if I can do it. No promises after that though!”
yeay…
Here is my idea for a real proposal: Permanently change House procedures so that all earmarks must be voted on seperatly and cannot be thrown into other bills.
Afterall, we send you to Washington to vote on things right? Maybe if all earmarks were aired on CSpan, politicians would be embarrased to ask for $200k to study the mating rituals of the east-south-north-upper-westside dung beatle to benefit a friend’s pet ta write-off (i.e. institute). Want money for a bridge, look into your own state’s means. Bonds? Privatized roads? Actually SAVE for it?
Now to be fair, most states can not afford a 2 million dollar bridge anytime they want. This leads us into the bigger picture: Maybe if the Federal Govt didnt consume so much money, the states would have money for their own infrastructure. Maybe if the Federal Govt found long-term ways to lower their operating cost, they could lower taxes and stop unconstitutionally stealing ours.
