http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/05/...ex.html?hpt=T2
So much for the earmark ban.
|
|
|
|
|
http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/05/...ex.html?hpt=T2
So much for the earmark ban.
Jordan Mills on choosing Tech:
“It’s a great experience seeing them play. It was a good atmosphere. The fans stood up the whole game and never sat down. They have a great fan base.”
When I read that yesterday, I couldn't see anything wrong with it based on the examples provided. I could only really complain that they did an underhand deal when it wasn't necessary. I'm sure there are some true wasteful earmarks in the fund, but finding better wYs to fight corrosion or to make better ships for our Navy isn't wasteful.
If it's not wasteful, they should be able to make it a normal part of the budget rather than hiding it in a backdoor fund. Looks pretty clearly like earmarks by another name to me.
That is my complaint. They are legit expenses that could be spent throughtypcial means, so there isn't a reason to use the "backdoor" for them.Originally Posted by TechDawgMc
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote