09 March 2009

Quote of the Day

An earmark simply is a congressional decision to allocate part of appropriation for a particular purpose. Eliminating the allocation doesn't reduce the appropriation, it simply leaves the allocation decision to a federal department or agency rather than to Congress.
Stan Collender, talking about the bloviating about earmark "reform".

In other words, if earmarks were totally banned, it would not result in one dollar less being spent.


Jennifer said...

Funny, that. This phrase "decision to allocate" is...pretty much the definition of the word "earmark" - at last as I understand and use it.

Silly Congress. Using actual words that mean what they're actually doing.

GR said...

Hmmm. The "decision to allocate" $$$ in directions unrelated to the original bill still seems underhanded. An honest bill would allocate only the amount needed for the intended purpose. I seem to remember a promise to curtail the practice and watch the worst offenders. "You will know their names." Not to argue for arguement, Bob, but we need to be careful not to stoop to defend necessary spending against baseless attacks. Favor trading and earmark politics-as-usual are part of what I voted against, and part of why the GOP is newly irrelevant. Gotta use the system in place to face the eco-emergency, but here's hoping there's resolve to make the process transparent. Wish us luck!!