> A non-earmarked program that provides grants to a state or
> local govt simply moves the earmark decision down the chain.
Isn't the real problem with earmarks that they aren't discussed in the light of day, and are thus more prone to abuse? I'm all for redistribution of taxes to buy things for the citizenry -- but if you do it in the dead of night, someone is going to make a killing off it.
Getting rid of earmarks is nearly the same as wanting to legalize much of the underground drug market: put it in the open where people can see it, and it'll get abused less.
The only time earmarks get discussed is when one candidate sees a way to gain advantage over another.
/jordan