There's no way we're going to get rid of earmarks. Some earmarks are valuable. And all earmarks are about political power.
Seems to me the important thing is that an intelligent, informed citizenry can tell the difference between a member of Congress feathering his own nest (see Hastert's road deal) and a member of Congress guaranteeing the future of (say) an indispensable local clinic.
What this morning's New York Times lament about the persistence of earmarks doesn't cover is the duty of the media to expose all earmarks and connect those earmarks with specific members of Congress.
There's no way we're able to take on corruption unless the media do their job.
Comments