[lbo-talk] earmarks, Alaska style

[Max B. Sawicky]

In the first respect earmarks are not so different from 'regular' 
legislation.
Any big tax bill, for instance, is a christmas tree of goodies for assorted
characters.  If Congress decides to fund high speed rail, in general a good
thing, they won't be distributing money according to righteous cost-benefit
calculations.

The second respect is more salient, though there as well lobbying dollars
are aimed at all sorts of legislation, not just earmarks.

Public (non-defense) provision has warts, as does private provision.  On 
balance I would
say the former, including earmarks, is justifiable more often than not. 

  But we can't say
that now because we're in this dumb contest with Gabby Hayes as to who 
is more
agin earmarks.

Michael Perelman wrote:
> The problem with earmarks are twofold.  First, that way that earmarks get 
> slopping into legislation is not very commendable.  Second, earmarks are 
> expensive to obtain.  Universities, for example, spend quite a bit of money 
> for the dollar's worth of earmarks.
> 
> 
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 08:45:00PM -0400, Max B. Sawicky wrote:
>> As Toshiro Mifune said once, "What should peasants do?!?"
>