To: Olog-hai; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; stephenjohnbanker; DoughtyOne; calcowgirl; Gilbo_3; NFHale; ..
There are some reasons why Earmarks are good but this is great evidence why banning them slows down spending.
They cant get this popular pork bill passed without them.
16 posted on
03/31/2012 8:44:55 PM PDT by
sickoflibs
(Obama : "I will just make insurance companies give you health care for 'free, What Mandates??' ")
To: sickoflibs
They tax us and then dole the money back out to the states in earmarks.
What garbage! Why should I pay for an earmark that goes to Nebraska and doesn’t benefit me and those in my state?
Who does my representative represent? Me, or Nebraskans?
Whose money is it? It’s MINE!
17 posted on
03/31/2012 8:54:39 PM PDT by
Pan_Yans Wife
("For the sake of our party we must stand united, whoever our nominee is."-Sarah Palin)
To: sickoflibs; Olog-hai; stephenjohnbanker; DoughtyOne; calcowgirl; Gilbo_3; NFHale
Both sides in the debate agree that before earmarks resurface, reforms are essential.The problem is that the porkers stay 2 steps ahead of "reforms."
18 posted on
03/31/2012 9:29:10 PM PDT by
ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas
(Fool me once, shame on you -- twice, shame on me -- 100 times, it's U. S. immigration policy.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson