Sunday, April 27, 2008

Don’t We Kind of Need Earmarks?

Saturday, The Washington Post published a piece by three mayors that defends the use of Congress’s spending on earmarks. They argue that earmarks buy important things that communities need in order to thrive and stay safe.

They do have a point; in order to stay prosperous, communities need Congress to spend money on things like roads, social services and police. Whether we like it or not, we must spend money on these things. Some government at the local, state or federal level would have to spend money on these needs.

But, do we need to take care of this spending at the federal level?

Couldn’t this spending take place at the local level? We could, but don’t you think there would be a disparity between municipalities all across America. Cities with high property values would flourish and cities in urban areas would flounder.

If earmark spending was transferred to the local level, there’d be an even bigger inequality between the rich and poor in America. We pretty much need earmark spending to take place the federal level.

Won’t don’t need to kill earmark spending; we just need to re-think the way in which we spend this money.

No comments: