Earmarks banned in senate

[gekaap]

They are unequal treatment.

But you claimed he stated that he wanted the government to favor him. That is incorrect.

If I understand him correctly, and he can correct me if I'm wrong, he wants the government to favor nobody.

How are they unequal treatment? The government enacts policies for the overall good, at least theoretically. Nobody is singled out, policies are apply to all people, based on consistent criteria.

Of course, if you are thinking along the lines of a Utopian world, where all people's circumstances are equal, and thus government can provide for the common good with policies where each and every one all touch each and every single person to the exact same degree, then you're just being naive and fanciful.

 

[gekaap]

Earmarks are 1-2% of the total budget

Well, you need to understand that it's not about total dollars. Earmarks are about influence, and this will severely curtail lobbyist influence.

No, its about the first dollar to the last. Please explain how money flowing into Congressperson's campaigns isn't a stronger form of influence. Perhaps you just misspoke.

Actually, thinking about it, I can see his point. Politicians are able to use earmarks to do favors for campaign contributors, which in turn earns the reciprocal influence you mention.

 

[uscitizen]

The pill bill was essientially earmarks for the pharma industry.

Earmarks do not only favor a location but a particular industry or business.

 

[DiamondDave]

You also assume wrong.... still no business having government acting as charity with contributors footing the bill for non contributors... the unequal treatment by government which the extreme lefties like wrongwinger love

In other words, you want the government to favor you, and then things would be fair.

No, idiot... try wanting the government to have equal treatment regardless of income or personal situation.... equality, not favoritism on ANY side....


There is good and bad, positive and negative that can come with true equal treatment... but I would sooner have that than this bullshit subjective guilt trip based activity we have in government now

 

[DiamondDave]

They are unequal treatment.

But you claimed he stated that he wanted the government to favor him. That is incorrect.

If I understand him correctly, and he can correct me if I'm wrong, he wants the government to favor nobody.

How are they unequal treatment? The government enacts policies for the overall good, at least theoretically. Nobody is singled out, policies are apply to all people, based on consistent criteria.

Of course, if you are thinking along the lines of a Utopian world, where all people's circumstances are equal, and thus government can provide for the common good with policies where each and every one all touch each and every single person to the exact same degree, then you're just being naive and fanciful.

Your "common good" is subjective.... and brings about unequal treatment by government... as evidenced in everything from the tax code to governmental handouts to people who don't contribute shit, at the expense of others