Mike Castle kindler, gentler, earmark politician
Castle’s reasons include confidentiality for the beneficiaries. It may hurt the constituents’ chances for getting funding elsewhere if the federal government publicly shoots them down, he said. It also may hurt their feelings if Castle is the one to shoot them down during his own vetting process.
“Some of these requests, in my opinion, are off the wall,” he said. “They don’t fall into a good public purpose whatsoever, and I don’t want to embarrass anyone in that circumstance by announcing what we accept or don’t accept.”
um, ok…
Tags: Mike Castle
Or maybe, just maybe embarrassing people who submit absurd earmarks will discourage them from making them.
you are thinking logically…shame on you
comments off above?
WTF? Donviti
The point should be this-there should not be any earmarks at all.
What is the point. This is good for delaware! Get a grip.
I see now that my comments were for the post above where the comments were turned off. Sa Long!
Everyone likes to yell “pork.” Everyone likes to point their fingers at others. But often, it is this very bringing home of the bacon that
1.) cements our political allegiance,
2.) makes our lives better, not worse. and
3.) it is the getting something back int the form of tangible goods and services, that helps us swallow having to give our taxes up in the first place.
So….
How is the best way for government to divvy up the spoils?
If Delaware did NOT receive the said amount of Federal money, that amount would go to another state. Does Ohio deserve it more?
Much comment has been spoken on the openness of figuring out where and how the money is going to be spent. Naturally what scares most elected officials, is the quandary of pleasing one group, and pissing off another three at the same time. Imagine having to effectively defend your choice of 387 points of the 4072 Bond Bill possibilities in just three days? Imagine the controversy, bitterness, hatred, that would be spawned by the basic human instincts of jealousy, disillusionment and animosity, just because every party on the bacon line thought they deserved more?
Translated, it would be as having to divvy up a wealthy sum to the blogging world of Delaware? How would one divide 58 million dollars between
# The Colossus of Rhodey
# Delaware Grapevine
# Delawareliberal
# Delaware Watch
# The Delaware Way
# Down with Absolutes!
# First State Politics
# Gazizza.net
# karmically speaking
# Kilroy’s Delaware
# Liberal Delight
# Meet Bob Archer
# Merit Bound Alley
# Mike’s Musings
# Sneaking Suspicions
# The Soapbox
# Tommywonk
Just to name a few? (I stole Tommy’s Delaware Political blog-list: some editing involved) Do anyone of these great persons deserve slightly more or less, than any of the other great persons. Perhaps yes. So what criteria is to be used to determine the difference?
Bottom line, not matter how much rational thought is applied toward this very determination, the result, in the end, will be a subjective mix of rationality, emotional thought, and leadership necessity, the classic Star Trek blend of Spock, McCoy, and Kirk.
Fait accompli is easier to stomach than water torture. drip, drip, drip…..
However, distasteful as an open bond session is, with earmarks no longer secret, due to the Public’s perception that MISUSE of their monies is propagated by this current system, it is now time for a change. Perhaps later, after we grow tired of the novelty, the natural forces of evolution will return it back to the way is now. But in the meantime, the Public will regain the confidence, missing today, that those decisions are again being based on their own best interests, not on the interests of the politicians themselves.
I don’t know what happened with the comments. I didn’t do it…
“How is the best way for government to divvy up the spoils?”
I think that the first step is to assess whether you have any spoils to divvy up.
With the amount of money being poured into the Iraq debacle, you’d think that it would be pretty easy work for a politician to explain how we all sacrifice for the war effort (or as others may call it, the Oil Subsidy) by giving up earmarks for the duration.
Even generally, through state governments too, as pols are cryin’ the blues about not having enough money (speaking for myself, I certainly send them plenty) for obligated services, it seems awfully arrogant of them to not want to at least be more open about where they are sending the so-called extra funds….