Yes, @john65pennington, someone is listening. I doubt anyone will argue that there weren’t some really stupid pet projects funded by the federal government. But if the article is correct, then we’re talking about cutting the very fundamental institutions of government. We’re talking about a road in Kentucky. We’re talking about a children’s shelter in Salt Lake City, not exactly a bastion of liberalism. We’re even talking about replacing a 58-year-old gym on an air force base in South Dakota.
The article states, “Spending for earmarks accounts for less than half of 1 percent of total federal spending, but it can be crucial chunks of change for localities.” Are we to assume the writer is wrong. I’ve heard that figure before, and I’m inclined to agree with it.
I think the point of this article and this question is twofold. One man’s road is another man’s pork, and earmarks are really a much smaller problem than some would lead us to believe. Getting rid of them is not going to balance the federal budget.
I think what’s at stake here is our idea of what America means. Are we a nation who comes together to meet our country’s needs? Or are we a nation of selfish individuals who say “I’ve got mine. Now, you get yours”?
America is more than the sum of its parts. It’s bigger than its individuals.
As the Revolutionary War orator Patrick Henry said, “United we stand. Divided we fall.”